Trading Absurdity

[Theseus]

Sublimely ridiculous:

I am totally dominant, and Greece is getting blow to smithereens by Egypt (all of 2 cities left).

Somehow, they got Rocketry before me (imagine that).

I asked what Alexander would want, and he said not possible.

For the hell of it, I offered:
Iron
Saltpeter
Coal
Oil
Rubber
Wines
Furs
Dyes
Incense

He still said no!!

[Tuberski]

That kind of stuff happens to me a LOT, and it always seems like it's the Japanese that do it to me.

[Theseus]

I think their might now be a general "pissed off" quotient for each AI civ.

[Tuberski]

I think if they are furious, it is really hard to do trades, sometimes you just have to "grease the wheels" to relax them.

[Coracle]

That kind of crap happens because the braindead AI holds stupid grudges for millennia over even minor stuff, and sometimes things you never did!

If it doesn't like you it is so spiteful it would refuse fabulous deals that could really help it.

Duh.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Tuberski
I think if they are furious, it is really hard to do trades, sometimes you just have to "grease the wheels" to relax them.

i ONCE tried to appease an AI. then they used the saltpeter i gave them to build cavalry and attack.

sure, my infantry put them in their place, but it's the principle of the thing. i never appease anymore. you're mad at me? f*ck you you're dead.

[Tuberski]

About all I'll ever do to appease them, is luxuries or money. I only give resources if they are on another continent and losing a war.

[Cyclotron]

Keep in mind that those trade deals you offered it would close as soon as war started, while you would keep the tech forever. Only an idiot would give a tech to a bigger, more powerful opponent that it was at odds with for some goods that could easily be taken away next turn if you decide to invade. The offer was obviously bad, no human player would have taken it and it just goes to show that the AI has some merit in the fact that it didn't take the deal.

[cracker]

I would have to say that the AI trading calculations are still some of the weakest examples of the coding in the entire game.

Example in point: I am located on a continent shaped like a figure eight and control one end (or one lobe of the figure eight). The AI controls the other end of the figure eight. The AI civ has one town founded on the tip of my end of the figure eight and I have two towns that I just captured from a third civ and these towns are on the AIs end of the figure eight. The AI is polite to me and I offer to trade the two cities on his end for the one city on my end. He is in AWE of my culture and yet refuses the trade. I added 200 gold lump sum to the deal and still got refused.

The next turn the lone city that the AI had on my end of the continent flipped to me and I was stuck with two corrupt towns on his end of the world. So basically he got nothing.

In other cases, I have tried to trade an AI for a remote town that was about to be attacked by SoD of 20 or 30 attackers from a third or fourth CIV only to have the AI tell me a deal was not possible.

Sometimes I have to go on the warpath and kill them off just to prevent the remnants of their civ from falling into the wrong hands.

[Random Passerby]

Due to exploits that cropped up in the game, the Firaxis team made it so that the AI will only even consider giving cities in exchange for peace treaties. While I do feel that it's a good thing to close the loopholes they did (sell a city, re-take it, sell it again was one of the general tricks they were trying to stop, I think), I really wish they hadn't done so at the expense of legitimate city trades. It's clear that the city-valuation code is still there, because if you're trying to get an AI civ to cede some territory for a peace deal you'll often see different cities being valued different amounts (resources, distance from capital, and size seem to be major factors), and if you give a city as a gift it will still register as a gift of a certain value.

[Primus40]

Thanks Random Passerby... interesting info. I, too, have suffered from city trade refusal when offering mutually beneficial exchange with other civs. Case in point: risking all out civ war (thanks to MPP's) to take three cities from the French (who just took them 2 turns ago from the Germans). I then offered these three cities to the Romans - which were located one turn away from the Roman coast - in exchange for one city that they had captured from the Aztecs on my cultural borders - five turns away from their empire! No dice and no amount of money, tech or resource thrown in could sweeten the deal. Now, I know why. Next time I will attack the sorry Roman empire and if the peace treaty doesn't do the trick - So what! I'll just take the damn thing from them.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

It would seem to me that the simple fix to this problem, which would close that loophole whilst still allowing legitimate trade, would be either:

a) have the A.I give proper consideration to a city-city trade 1st time, but have it almost ALWAYS reject a second trade of that same city (except for a peace deal).

b) once you have traded a city, have a lag of about 10 turns before you can re-trade that same city.

Possibly a combination of the 2 might be even better!!

Anyway, just my $0.02c worth.

The_Aussie_Lurker.

[notyoueither]

I think the city trading was one of the interesting aspects of the game. Then they completely killed it to stop an exploit. I'd have prefered if they had left it for the players capable of self control.

Close one loophole, another opens up. Some have discovered how to periodically shake down the AI through renegotiation of peace.

[notyoueither]

A better way to fix it would be that the AI should never agree to any trade involving a city with any power who it had been in a war with within the last 100 or 200 turns. Except for peace terms that is.

The refusal to trade territory with peaceful builders, or with allies is not necessarily a step in the right direction.

Another thing. The AI should refuse to renegotiate peace after once. I can see once. Repeatedly? If you want us, come and get us!

[player1]

As far as I know.

Iron lacking AI pays a lot of money for it.

But I've never seen AI bothered with lack of Oil or Rubber.

These prices should be SCALED with cicrumstances.

Like:
-in war == I realy need that Oil
-Having 30% luxury == I realty need that Luxury resource