Trading Absurdity

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I must disagree with cyclotron7.

Well, somebody had to do it.

The AI isn't that smart. I just had a game, where I saw an American sneak attack force approach, at the end of the ancient age. It was too late to block them, and I knew that it would be useless to ask him to leave. So I contacted Abe and bought Monarchy for 25 gold per turn. He attacked the next turn anyway, and I had the tech practically for free.

Sir Ralph, often the AI in games are "smart" in one way in one feature and not in another. I fully expect the AI of any game I play to do some clever, correct things, and some stupid mistakes... because in reality, I play the same way. I agree that your American scenario is an example of poor AI judgement, but that doesn't make my point any less valid.

My point is simply that the AI was hardcoded quite well for dealing with that trade; it would ahve been stupid for anybody to trade away a significant advantage (a tech) and only bargaining chip for an impermanent resource deal.

[Arrian]

Theseus,

Did you try offering them an alliance vs. Egypt? THAT would be worth something to them. The luxuries are nealry worthless to them, b/c they've got two cities and are probably communist. Most of the resources too.

On the other hand, I've had many examples of trade offers/rejections that look flat-out ridiculous. I have stopped even trying to trade tech with the AI (except in very rare circumstances) and generally only sell luxuries. If I want or need more, I will take them by force. The trades will only be "fair" if I'm an average civ, which is unacceptable to me - therefore a failure.

I understand the logic behind the trading rules. The truth is that 1 luxury which would be my 7th is much more important to my 40 -city empire full of size 12 cities than my 4 luxuries are to the 5 to 10 city AI empire which already has the other 4 luxuries (because, in case you've never noticed, the AI's ALWAYS manage trades amongst themselves for each others' luxuries unless they are at war, so they never really need yours).

But just because I understand the logic doesn't mean I have to like it. Actually, I doubt the AI likes the logic that I use when I decide that it is easier to destroy a puny empire with luxuries that I don't have than it is to attempt to negotiate a trade deal.

-Arrian

[ahenobarb]

I don't want to Troll this thread with my game, so thanks Dominea. Not fighting does get a little dull, but then again fighting all the time get pretty dull too if your coordinating 3-400 units a turn. Gotta mix it up a litte.


On topic: with 1.21 you can now add more resources than just 2, if you had say 12 luxury resources, would the AI value 1 of the new 12 as much as it would 1 of the original 8?

Also, would this make your cities super-duper happy (meaning each new individual luxury gives equivalent happiness as the original eight individual luxuries) or would the total happiness (of the original 8 luxuries) be spread out over the twelve so that their indiviudal effect is less, but the total is the same?

Does that make any sense?

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ahenobarb
Not fighting does get a little dull, but then again fighting all the time get pretty dull too if your coordinating 3-400 units a turn. Gotta mix it up a litte.

Point taken. I subconsciously downsize my military as I ease out into the Modern age; usually I'll fight one big war with Tanks, and that's pretty much it for my warmongering. I also never seem to have the need to have over 100 military units at a time. With no experience whatsoever, I can imagine that moving 200 Cavalry is just like moving 40, just five times more boring!


Dominae

[Grrr]

ahenobarb, I think having 12 resources will just make 12 happiness. I am quite sure this is the case.

[Coracle]

THAT STUPID AI

I am being blamed for something that happened three millennia ago. That civ trades with me as follows:

It agrees to trade maps. Deal.

When I ADD ON three more resources as a free bonus it REFUSES the deal and insults me.

That's how stupid the AI is.

[notyoueither]

Build Marketplaces Grrr!!

[Hurricane]

The AI will only make gpt deals for gpt deals if you have broken any treaties during the game. This makes it extremely important to never break any treaties.

This means:

* They will not sell techs for gpt or luxuries.
* They will not buy luxuries for lump sum.

However,
* They will buy techs and luxuries for gold/turn
* They will sell techs for lump sum or techs

Sir Ralphs note that the AI values lux and resources according to their size can clearly be seen in the few screenshots I attach. Also, a bigger map (huge in my example) makes techs more expensive to research, and the price of techs thus increase, too.

Here, Russia buys Computers (3rd civ price) for a total price of about 4000 gold.

[Hurricane]

Here is an example that the AI indeed will pay nice amounts of cash for other resources than Iron. In this case, 5200 gold for oil.

[hugoz]

just another silly trading absurdity
(screenshot attached)

[Grrr]

I think I'll trade with you in MP hugoz.

[ahenobarb]

Thanks for the info Grr.

BTW: I was going to post the same stupidity about trading gold this morning. I asked the Indians for 19 gold in exchange for 3000 gold. "There is no way they would accept such an offer" That's just lame.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ahenobarb
I asked the Indians for 19 gold in exchange for 3000 gold. "There is no way they would accept such an offer".

Maybe they're afraid of what you can accomplish with 19 Gold.




Dominae

[Arrian]

Last night I (Japan) offered Germany 5 luxuries in exchange for 1. "I doubt they would accept such a deal."

Granted, I'm well over 4x the size of Germany, have a large tech lead and already have 5 luxuries, which of course means that attaining another will give me 3 happy faces per city w/marketplace. When asked what he would take? The luxuries, two techs and my world map.

Why in the world would I make that trade? I would be fine with 2 for 1, even 3 for 1, I'd accept 4 for 1... or even the 5 for 1. But more is just absurd. And so, due to Bismarck's refusal to make a decent offer... Rome will die. I'd take down Bismarck but I can gain two luxuries if I hit Rome, and they're weaker. Trade? Hah! Let's just say I practice gunboat diplomacy.

-Arrian

p.s. So instead, I sold him the map and four luxuries for 50 gold per turn.

[Panag]

Re: Trading Absurdity

Originally posted by 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!!

hi ,

what did ya do to that "poor" civ before , care to tell us , ...


have a nice day