Announcement

**Soren Johnson** · February 20, 2002, 17:39

Re: v1.17 and A.I vs A.I tech "trading"

The AI's do not give techs away for free. They deal with each other in good faith and always try to meet the _full_ value of the tech. When necessary, a AI might be willing to sell a tech for down to half-value, but only if the other AI has nothing else to give for it (a tactic you used yourself when trading communications...)

The main difference with 1.17 is that the AI's contact each other more often and (perhaps most importantly) that they are now doing per-turn gold offers for techs. So I suspect that the Greeks traded their world map, whatever gold they did have in reserve, a newly discovered tech, and their per-turn supply of gold for most of those techs, which of course are devalued anyway since it sounds like the Greeks were technologically backwards. (There are other possibilities... goody huts?) Thus, the Greeks may have caught up tech-wise, but they are probably shovelling all of their gold to the Aztecs, which means that next time around, they might not have the cash/income/trade goods to pull of a trade and will fall behind again. In other words, I suspect that this will be less of a problem by the mid-game.

**Gramphos** · February 20, 2002, 18:08

What happens if the AI can't pa a per turn deal they have signed to pay?

**Soren Johnson** · February 20, 2002, 18:12

Originally posted by Gramphos
What happens if the AI can't pa a per turn deal they have signed to pay?

They aren't allowed to sign per-turn deals they can't pay.

**Saurus** · February 20, 2002, 18:47

Thanks for your comment, Soren.
I think it cleared things out a bit.

Well, I guess I am fine with this.
The reason I was so suspicious was that I was
not able to get any reasonable trades with the
Aztecs. Not even my map was worth anything to them
(say 10 gold) (btw my map was an exact copy of that the Greek one)

Against this background I find it a bit hard to believe that
the Greeks somehow managed to get 6 techs
+ the world map from the Aztecs - whitout any money at all.
Even if at half-prize.

Yes, both Me and the Greeks
where techonlogically backwards, somewhat, but this was only because
the Greeks had compleatly unreasonable demands in tech-trading.. (e.g they wanted writing and masonry
and 40 gold in exhange for just pottery(!) ) so we newer made
any trades.

But Ok - so here we have an A.I - A.I tarde.
They try to make 100% of a techs value during a trade but
may be willing to drop the prize to half if needed
- sounds reasonable and fair.
However, If we have an A.I - Human trade -
Then how much is the A.I trying to get out of the human player?
e.g Writing, masonry + 40gold for just pottery seems
much more than just the full value of pottery.

-Saurus

**Saurus** · February 20, 2002, 18:55

Originally posted by Gramphos
What happens if the AI can't pa a per turn deal they have signed to pay?

I think it is the same rule for A.I that for the human player here.
You can try this out for yourself.
If you are earning +5 gold/turn then you can´t make offers
that requires you to pay more than 5 gold/turn.
Try it and your advisor will tell you that "They will newer
accept such a deal"
So if you are earning > 0/gold a turn you cannot make a deal
where you are allowed to trade gold/turn

(set your tax rate to 100% BEFORE you negotiate and you
will be able to offer much more gold/turn)

-saurus

**Aeson** · February 20, 2002, 18:56

Re: Re: v1.17 and A.I vs A.I tech "trading"

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
The AI's do not give techs away for free. They deal with each other in good faith and always try to meet the _full_ value of the tech. When necessary, a AI might be willing to sell a tech for down to half-value, but only if the other AI has nothing else to give for it (a tactic you used yourself when trading communications...)

Is the _full_ value what the AI will accept in trade from the player? Or is it some lower value? Because in my current game (Deity) the Egyptians wanted 700 Gold and my world map for Construction. I passed on the offer, but sold my map to the Egyptians for 400 gold and their world map. The only other Civ on the continent was the Persians, who had just researched Code of Laws the turn before. I traded contact with the Egyptians to the Persians for Code of Laws and their world map, and then traded Code of Laws to the Egyptians for their remaining gold. The next turn, somehow the Persians had bought Construction from the Egyptians, even though they had no per turn income, 5 gold, and no way to trade any luxuries or resources. I hadn't been able to trade Polytheism, Republic, Currency, and/or my world map to the Persians for any per turn gold. The Persian map couldn't have been worth much as I had sold my map which included the entire continent to the Egyptians, I doubt the Persians had much of anything to add. I also know that the Persians didn't get Construction from a hut as my Scouts had mapped out the whole continent well before. They couldn't have researched it as they had just researched Code of Laws the turn before. Is it just that the AI will trade per turn gold with each other and not to me in some cases? Or are the Persians getting Construction for 5 gold and a worthless map as compensation? Either way it's an AI vs Player trading mentality.

It's not that I really mind having disadvantages, thats why I play on Deity. It does make peaceful building much less viable though. Maybe you could tell the AI if they plan on keeping me out of the trading loop that my Impi will confiscate all the resources while my Horsemen raze their empire. There doesn't seem to be an option for that in the diplomacy screen, and the AI never seems to learn.

**m_m_x** · February 20, 2002, 19:04

what was wrong with AI diplomacy in the previous patch?
why making it harder and unfair???
soren dont forget that the game should be fun.
there isn't a clear pattern for what the AI trade(or not trade) things for.
im a usual civ gamer not fanatic one, and if the AI doesn't trade with me tech the whole game, its not fun anymore.
beside that the patch is great...

**Gramphos** · February 20, 2002, 19:04

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
They aren't allowed to sign per-turn deals they can't pay.

Well, with 1.16f, when you asked the AI to make a suggestion they sometimes suggested to give more gold per turn then they generated, and then their cash would be able to pay. However, if you set it it never seems to allow more then they make.
I haven't tested this with 1.17f yet.

**Soren Johnson** · February 20, 2002, 20:01

Originally posted by Gramphos

Well, with 1.16f, when you asked the AI to make a suggestion they sometimes suggested to give more gold per turn then they generated, and then their cash would be able to pay. However, if you set it it never seems to allow more then they make.
I haven't tested this with 1.17f yet.

This was fixed although I am not sure if it was before or after 1.17.

at any rate, the AI will only trade gold per-turn directly from their income to other civs, there isn't any funny business going on in that area.

**Soren Johnson** · February 20, 2002, 20:16

Originally posted by Saurus
Thanks for your comment, Soren.
I think it cleared things out a bit.

Well, I guess I am fine with this.
The reason I was so suspicious was that I was
not able to get any reasonable trades with the
Aztecs. Not even my map was worth anything to them
(say 10 gold) (btw my map was an exact copy of that the Greek one)

Against this background I find it a bit hard to believe that
the Greeks somehow managed to get 6 techs
+ the world map from the Aztecs - whitout any money at all.
Even if at half-prize.

Yes, both Me and the Greeks
where techonlogically backwards, somewhat, but this was only because
the Greeks had compleatly unreasonable demands in tech-trading.. (e.g they wanted writing and masonry
and 40 gold in exhange for just pottery(!) ) so we newer made
any trades.

But Ok - so here we have an A.I - A.I tarde.
They try to make 100% of a techs value during a trade but
may be willing to drop the prize to half if needed
- sounds reasonable and fair.
However, If we have an A.I - Human trade -
Then how much is the A.I trying to get out of the human player?
e.g Writing, masonry + 40gold for just pottery seems
much more than just the full value of pottery.

-Saurus

There might be a number of factors here:

- the AI might be close to discovering writing or masonry, which means it is not worth very much via trade...
- writing and masonry might have been discoved by more civs than pottery, which means their relative value has dropped...
- if you are playing at a level above Regent, techs are worth less to the AI than the human because they get research bonuses...

**Analyst Redux** · February 21, 2002, 12:25

Soren, in evaluating the situations in this thread on a case by case basis, I think you are missing the forest for the trees. Explaining away each individual tree doesn't make the forest go away.

A very typical scenario post-patch: you uncover a civ that, for whatever reason (typically, because it started on an island, by itself, with lousy land), lacks contact with other civs and is technologically backwards. You sell it as much as you can, but at a certain point, that civ has no gold, no techs, no g/p/t, nothing left to trade with. You sell it contact with some civs, but not all. You see by the lists that you still have several techs and contacts that the poor civ hasn't even a single gold left to purchase.

If you go back to that civ just a 2-3 turns later, it's got everything you didn't deal to it: all the contacts, all the techs, and probably one or two that you've never been able to pry from other civs because they were demanding an outrageous price.

Posit all the hypotheticals you like (presumably, this horribly backward civ didn't wait for me to come calling to pop all of its huts), but this backward civ didn't suddenly come up with all the valuables it needed to aquire everything in a few turns. This doesn't happen so consistently and constantly without a severely stacked deck. If the other civs aren't giving it away, then the price is so nominal, compared to what they expect to charge me, that the difference between that price and free can't be much. Explaining it away won't make me feel better about seeing it happen every game.

Much as I hate this, I can't bring myself to uninstall the patch. The improvements made to the worker automation, i.e. no more chasing around after pollution, are worth their weight in gold, platinum, mithril, dilitium crystals (insert your fictional item of infinite value here). I can't bear to give those up and go back to end of game tedium in micromanaging 100+ workers because they can't be trusted. But this radical change (make no mistake, it is a radical alteration to the flow of the game) in AI-to-AI trading behavior is a heavy price to take in exchange.

To all (including Soren): My observation is that this problem is dramatically alleviated once the Republic tech advance gets passed around and AIs start adopting it. AIs that are Republics generate a lot more cash, giving you a lot more overhead to work with in gold-per-turn deals. For whatever reason, the AI also values g/p/t strangely. I can't count the number of times an AI with a healthy gold reserve refused to pay 40 gold for something, but happily paid 2gpt for it. Lots of players post that they wheel and deal their way out of a backward tech position during the midieval era. I submit that this is because the widespread adoption of the Republic, and the ability to milk the AI civs for gpt, is what levels the playing field for humans in trading with the AI.

Until you cross that threshold, however, there is just no such thing as a peaceful strategy on the upper difficulty levels. The ancient era is the era of the horseman. The peer-to-peer AI tech trading makes ancient era research a one-against-seven proposition. Actually, it's much worse, as the AI research bonuses, combined with their skewed value of a tech when trading it to you vs trading it to each other (which, of course, is based on the reasearch bonus) pretty much gurantees that trying to peacefully trade/research your way to victory on Emporer/Deity level is aking to trying to crawl out of an ant lion pit. The harder you try, the faster you slide.

The odds of getting what you want at the point of a horseman's lance are a great deal more sporting than that. It's just that a strategy game seems like it ought to have more, well, strategy. Until this patch, it did.

**Arrian** · February 21, 2002, 12:36

I have noticed that once 3 civs have a tech (out of 8... or 6, actually, two were dead), it's nearly worthless to the AI.

Example:

I sell Fission (this, in and of itself is a huge strategic change for me... I SOLD the tech for nukes to the AI, I must be going crazy) to the French and Germans, who offered the most for it. They both paid nicely. I contact the next civ, the English, and ask what they would give me for Fission. They told me that no deal could be done. The last civ offered me 1 gold, and "would be insulted" by 2 gold. Considering the first civ I sold it to (French, I think) paid something like 80 gold/turn for it... WOW, that's devaluation.

So, once a tech is commonly known, even a dead broke AI can get it (for 5 gold and a useless world map). In the above game, much earlier, I was behind by a few techs, and a single luxury trade got me two of them. So, even though I agree it seems that the AI has a old boy's network going, I think it may just be that the computer can instantly calculate exactly how much a tech is "worth" and do a deal, whereas if you're like me, and don't make diplomatic contact every single turn, you can miss out occasionally.

Speaking of making diplo contact every turn... I know I should, but it's tedious. I really wish there was a screen that showed (with an embassy) what each civ has for tech, money, luxuries, resources, and pacts. That, and a screen showing all of your active deals (e.g. dyes to greeks for 10g/turn, 7 turns left). Basically, the F2 screen on steroids.

-Arrian

**reefer addict** · February 21, 2002, 13:29

in my games with yhe new patch trading with the ai is a joke. it gets to the point where i dont even bother trying to trade with the ai because they want 100 g/p/t + all my cash on hand + my map + any resource i have available for a tech that everyone else has. i must admit its not alot of fun to find even the 3 city civs with no money can stay ahead in the tech race because the ai is a racist. any way to keep the worker upgrads without the trading bug?, its killing my fun!

**Rimpy** · February 21, 2002, 13:59

Bravo, AnalystRedux -- your post was very well-written. It expressed my sentiments exactly. I don't like the aggressive AI tech trading because it makes the game less competitive. That is, there's not as much distinction between the different civilizations when knowledge is shared so freely. It ruins the science race element to the game.

But I could probably tolerate it if at least I could be "in the loop". However, I feel that the game has regressed to a "Me vs. The World" competition that I was so happy to leave behind in Civ1 and Civ2. That was my favorite improvement to the AI in Civ3, and I feel like this latest patch has ruined it.

In the three games that I have played since the patch came out, there has always been at least one backwards isolated civ that managed to make improbable leaps in science once another AI contacted them. It's extremely frustrating.

This comment by Soren really caught my attention:

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
- if you are playing at a level above Regent, techs are worth less to the AI than the human because they get research bonuses...

I'm curious if this effect is from the buyer's point of view or from the seller's point of view? That is, is the price of the tech determined by how much its worth to the seller or how much its worth to the buyer?

If the price is determined by the value of the tech to the buyer, then that might explain the origin of the "Me vs. The World" problem at the higher difficulty levels. (I usually play on Monarch or higher.) Because the AI gets a research bonus, the seller would demand a lower price when selling to an AI, whereas it would demand a higher price when selling to the human (who has no research bonus.) It doesn't seem fair that AI's can purchase techs from other AI's more cheaply than I can.

I don't mind the AI getting a research bonus at higher difficulty levels. But I wish that the research bonus wasn't factored into the price equation when it comes to trading techs. Let the AI get its research and production bonuses at higher difficulty levels. But when it comes to trading, all civizations should be treated equally (ceteris paribus, such as diplomatic standing.)

It seems to me that if you could remove the research bonus from the price equation, it would go a long to alleviating the "Me vs. The World" feeling at higher difficulty levels.

Rimpy

Announcement

v1.17 and A.I vs A.I tech "trading"

v1.17 and A.I vs A.I tech "trading"

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment