AI diplomacy is not logical

[Flash70]

Re: Re: So damn retarded!!!

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


Actually, most AIs already have the maximum number of 8 luxuries. Having more will not help them...

Not always. In several games I played, the AI did not have many luxuries and accepting my trade offer would have benefited him at least as much it would benefit me.
But still he made absurd demands like asking for two techs, large sum of money and another luxury in return for a single luxury I requested !

This behavior really annoyed me. So eventually what I did was trading my luxuries for money, then spending the money to increase the entertainment.

[WyattMax]

You, my Hero

@Avenger

... first game (can't help it, I kick ass on a big map and a$$

Maybe it is time to move up from chiftain level to a real level ?



Sorry, couldn't resist

[Ulfang]

Nahhhh It's us typically stubborn English!! You forgot to say PLEASE!!!

[adaMada]

lol

I think this is a bug (deep thoughts )... should be fixed in a patch. Lol, Soren, if you're reading this, any clue how this manages to happen (I'd think the AI would assign 100 gold a higher value than 10 gold so would accept the offer, based purely on what you've said so far...)? Just out of curiosity, of course...

-- adaMada

[Rust]

Patch Readme v1.08
- AI now accepts 100 dollars in trade for 10
-sorry, due to time limitations.....

[Adagio]

Haven't tried to make such a trade yet, but what bothers me more (when talking diplomacy) is the AI always want more than they want to give me.

How many times haven't I seen this: They want to talk to me, they propose the "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" deal, but the table says this: "They offer World map; They want World map AND one or two techs".

If I want to make a deal, let's say a map for a map, they just get annoyed even if I have the most knowledge about the world. In some Firaxis chat short time ago (never remember names ) it was mentioned the AI doesn't see who is AI and who is human, but I just can't make this fit right in, because the AI always want more than the other one, if that is so, the AI can never make a deal with an other AI, but I still see AI making deals...how can this be if they both want more than they will give

[Grim Legacy]

Seems your culture rating is in the picture too. Check the histograph score. I've noticed that keeping up with the enemies greatly facilitates trade.

Also: betrayal on your part makes them very wary, betrayal on their part makes them very humble.

[Adagio]

It's getting stranger now. I just tried to make a deal. The deal was a tech from them for a tech + 50 gold, the adviser said "We're getting close to a deal here", now I added 50 gold (Just to test it...) and now the adviser said: "They will never accept such a deal"...

If this aint strange (ok, it doesn't beat the 100 gold for 10 gold, but it's close )

[Grim Legacy]

Originally posted by ADG
It's getting stranger now. I just tried to make a deal. The deal was a tech from them for a tech + 50 gold, the adviser said "We're getting close to a deal here", now I added 50 gold (Just to test it...) and now the adviser said: "They will never accept such a deal"...

If this aint strange (ok, it doesn't beat the 100 gold for 10 gold, but it's close )

Changed the techs on the table?

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Grim Legacy


Changed the techs on the table?

Nope, the only thing I changed was adding those 50 gold. And I'm sure because there where only one tech possible each place

[Venger]

Treaty? I don't need no stinking treaty!

Originally posted by Grim Legacy
Seems your culture rating is in the picture too. Check the histograph score. I've noticed that keeping up with the enemies greatly facilitates trade.

Also: betrayal on your part makes them very wary, betrayal on their part makes them very humble.

As to power affecting trade, so far that's nonsense. I'm the most powerful nation on the map and the AI STILL doesn't accept fair trading. Want to trade a luxury? They want THREE in exchange at this point. Trade a tech? No, they want two techs AND gold. Apparently the AI routine that determines what a AI Civ needs simply takes what you offer and multiplies it...

Now, as to "betrayal" - that may make some sense. However, what constitutes betrayal? Bulding cities on my continent that I decide I cannot leave intact? Sorry, that's not betrayal. Betrayal should be breaking a treaty mutual advantage, not simply peace.

In Civ3, you get two options - war or peace. What if I don't want a stinking peace treaty with you but don't want war either? Doesn't seem possible. Again, still playing my LONG first game, so there may be something I am missing on this particular point.

However, the Aztecs, who have on many occassions demanded something or threatened war, and never had the nuts to do it, shouldn't get any "indignation points" when I finally open an old fashioned Can O Whoopas$ on him...

Venger

[Grim Legacy]

Re: Treaty? I don't need no stinking treaty!

Originally posted by Venger

As to power affecting trade, so far that's nonsense. I'm the most powerful nation on the map and the AI STILL doesn't accept fair trading. Want to trade a luxury? They want THREE in exchange at this point. Trade a tech? No, they want two techs AND gold. Apparently the AI routine that determines what a AI Civ needs simply takes what you offer and multiplies it...

"power"? I said culture. Read more carefully next time, eh.

In fact, I think military/population/production power strikes negatively on the bargaining: you get too strong for the opponents taste, and they become reluctant to make you richer.

Now, as to "betrayal" - that may make some sense. However, what constitutes betrayal? Bulding cities on my continent that I decide I cannot leave intact? Sorry, that's not betrayal. Betrayal should be breaking a treaty mutual advantage, not simply peace.

In Civ3, you get two options - war or peace. What if I don't want a stinking peace treaty with you but don't want war either? Doesn't seem possible. Again, still playing my LONG first game, so there may be something I am missing on this particular point.

However, the Aztecs, who have on many occassions demanded something or threatened war, and never had the nuts to do it, shouldn't get any "indignation points" when I finally open an old fashioned Can O Whoopas$ on him...

Ya ya, too bad for you. Betrayal is simply going to war or breaking an alliance or any of such pre-defined actions. Territorial harassment, threats and such do not fall into this category. Such is life in Civ. Instead of complaining about it, you could try to harness these means by yourself and know you're not losing any 'trust points'.

[Venger]

Re: Treaty? I don't need no stinking treaty!

Originally posted by Grim Legacy


"power"? I said culture. Read more carefully next time, eh.

Same diff. I have the most culture too. Why would that encourage them to trade with me anyways? Trading should be done on the parties own best interest, not because they think your culture is cool. Either you need Dye and Horses, or you don't. Either the deal if fair, or it isn't. That's that. [/quote]

In fact, I think military/population/production power strikes negatively on the bargaining: you get too strong for the opponents taste, and they become reluctant to make you richer.

Which makes SOME sense, but it's not a zero sum gain either. It's complete and utter stupidity is shown in the post at the top of the thread - 100 gold is rejected for 10. This is SIMPLY RIDICULOUS. No amount of "culture" or "you're too strong" makes 100 for 10 a bad deal. What the deal shows is that the trading algorithm needs major work - this is what we get for not playtesting the game...

Ya ya, too bad for you. Betrayal is simply going to war or breaking an alliance or any of such pre-defined actions.

Breaking an alliance is not the same as going to war. That the game is designed to reflect that means the defect is in the game, not in the fact.

Territorial harassment, threats and such do not fall into this category. Such is life in Civ.

Same as above. It should fall into the category. The failure to is a gameplay flaw.

Instead of complaining about it, you could try to harness these means by yourself and know you're not losing any 'trust points'.

Not sure what you mean here...

Venger

[mathgoulet]

I wonder if you could do the opposite, giving 10 golds and asking for 100!

[Aiya]

I was playing last night as japanese and my ally, persians, was at war against the babylonians. I was just making sure that my ally was happy with the way the war was going and asked to extend the war (not really needed). But I thought, what the heck.

To my surprise, when I asked them to sign a military alliance, they requested 1000+ gold per turn, 1500 gold lump, and 3 techs!!!! I was like WTF!

It didn't matter, they were still at war. But I got pissed, and revolked all my trades with my ally (saltpeter and rubber). Then proceeded to clean out the map. Stupid Ally, now you die with the rest for being so stupid!