Cold war and better alliances

[Otso Vuorio]

Yeah! It's very common that a computer ally sends its troops to your territory, builds fortresses near your cities and decides to remain there doing nothing.
Once I tried to play a Deity-level game (nearly impossible!), where my only ally Mongols had so much troops around my cities, that there was actually no free squares around my cities (excluding water areas)!

[Otso Vuorio]

DamN your right DanM !
And BeeBee, you are right when you say that the other civs should keep good reletions with you because of self-interest. This is realistic.

But SOMETIMES it's normal that some other civs get jealous, but it shouldn't be so common (especialy not if you have same goverment with the smaller civ, the smaller ones should worship you and wriggle under your feet , when you are the most powerful civ).

[DanM]

Exactly.
All I would like to see is for it not to happen the SAME WAY EVERY GAME.
Those who wish to "wriggle under my feet",
as Otso Vuorio puts it,can do so.
The rest I will "crush under my feet"



[This message has been edited by DanM (edited April 25, 2000).]

[Az]

Otso Vuorio: all of this happens because the AI plays this game not as a leader of a country but as a gamer . you know . all the AI 's try to win this game . of cource ,also , so do you , but you , as a human, are much more realstic , and understand that as an ally of Civilization Alpha ( that means the leader ) you'll get much more perks and , in the long run much more chances to WIN this game , when the hour strikes, and the maraphone is almost over you can make a move to win , and btw not striking that civ alpha with nukes coz there are much more Civs to be captured . and BeeBee and DanM I guess you look at this situation the same way I do.

[Adm.Naismith]

Dalgetti, you are right!

The main problem is that: keep the game interesting when a human player is so stronger to other (AI) Civ that there's no more challenge.

Because computer know better (well, in a relative meaning ) how to fight a war then how to grow a better developed Civ, it rush a hopeless war against you, joining forces with every available Civ. How silly!

In Italy we have a motto that sounds like "If you only have a hammer, you will treat every problem like a nail"

Modern leaders have different tools available, and different problem to cope with: limited conflicts, eco global damage, weapons of mass destruction widely available, global market and its wide economic effects, etc.

No realistic way to military conquer the whole globe, no hope to live long as an isolationistic Civ.

I really hope Firaxis will try to expand the AI approach to keep game interesting till the end. SMAC made some step into the right direction with its wider winning path available and some more diplomatic options, still it's not enough to satisfy us, the harder Civers.

------------------
Adm.Naismith AKA mcostant

[Otso Vuorio]

All right Dalgeti & Adm.Naismith.
The main idea of all this conversation under my topic is about better alliances and cold war of course. The biggest problems I see in civ2 is unworking alliances and the lack of cooperation between the civs with same goverment.
I think there should absolutely be a new way to win the game in civ3:
I think that a whole alliance of civs could win the game as a team. Not just lone rivals but more cooperation (as I early wrote).

What do you think ?

ps.
Dalgetti, I know that AI tries to win the game, there's nothing new in that comment.But the queston is: "How to make AI a better ally and smarter?"


[This message has been edited by Otso Vuorio (edited May 02, 2000).]

[DanM]

Thats right.Why shouldn't good allies be able to win as a team?I think if you have an ally(s),and you both go to war with an enemy(s),then you should be secure in knowing that your ally won't make a dumb peace treaty "behind your back".You should be allies for the duration,and at least be able to consult with each other before making any rash decisions.
As far as being able to win the game as allies,I think alot of factors need to be taken into consideration;like how long you had this alliance(becoming allies with the strongest of 2 civs left in the game in order to wipe out a weak civ with 2 cities just doesn't seem like an honorable way to win a game to me).

[Otso Vuorio]

...And neither to me DanM. The lack of cooperation as well as loyalty was a very bad problem in Civ2's alliances, and I hope this will be fixed in Civ3.

ps. I really happen to hate those "dump peace" treaties (as DanM puts it) too.