AI & Diplomacy stuff...

[Nordicus]

Thanks, Wes. That does help--I had one crash also when I attempted to exchange maps with the French...now I think it's because I tried to 'in-comment' (the line of potential dialogue had a # before it for some reason, so I thought I was a smarty pants and just included it, since it also added more possibles of what the AI civs could say...I get so bored with the repetitive drone they spew at me... ). But I shall feex it!
Anyway, if you could recall what the error messages said initially, the first one(s) got after it crashed--roughly--that would also help. But what you have here may be enough--I think, I think , that it's the same one I got, and now I can compare.

Oh, if you're not too busy, take a peek in the dip_str file and see what you think. I'd like to hear your opinions on the changes.

Also, I took everything out this morning and reinstalled, but I don't know what happened to my copy of the 1.2 patch. And Apolyton's download area is experiencing tech difficulty--and Civ's CTP site is...o don't even get me started on THAT site(;b)...could you zip me over a copy of yours? (Or anyone else?) I have the hack and every other thing, but not the patch.
That would be Dankenswert




------------------
"Smells like monkey in here."


"Verrosten est X-beine das Fahrbar Bliken Obszon
Abgabepflichtighoffenburger!?!?!?!"

[skorpion59]

Nordicus,

Never could get around the problems I was having so I reinstalled everything from scratch. Are the above problems on the version I have and do you have a new one.

Wes,

Gee, thanks for the sig. That's just what I wanted to be known for.

[Nordicus]

Hey, Skorpion...
I just emailed you about this, so I won't reguritate (;b) needlessly. Know what it is, so don't put the string files (dip_str, info and ldl_str) and there shouldn't be any problems. I did the same thing, starting from scratch, but this time each file I add, I'm gonna test (I usually go all-out and throw it all in there and test later...but clearly this is a not good approach).

Hey, later man.


------------------
"Smells like monkey in here."


"Verrosten est X-beine das Fahrbar Bliken Obszon
Abgabepflichtighoffenburger!?!?!?!"


"Like Wes said...."

[WesW]

Nordicus, the patch's zip name is cctp_1_2_us for me, anyway. Maybe you can do a search and find it. That file is huge; I don't think my email could handle it.

Also, I have started a new game with your diplomatic flis in, and there seems to be definite differences in AI conduct.
I am in the middle of the pack power-wise. The AIs seem much friendlier. I guess that falls under point 22.
Also, I am sharing a continent with the Hebrews (that is who I was contacting about exchanging tech. with when the crashes occured), and they haven't attempted a special attack on me. Neither has anyone else, for that matter. I didn't change the stuff pertaining to slavery and conversion in my mods, so I think it is related to your changes.
Another time, I was attempting to exchange tech with the Chinese. When I entered the exchange, they had a smiley attitude towards me. They didn't accept my offers, so nothing positive happened. However, their attitude towards me improved to the heart symbol because of the contact. What could have caused this?
Finally, the AIs seem more reluctant to exchange tech, refusing to do so even when what I was offering was more advanced than what I was asking for in return. I would like to see it changed so that the AI will accept most of the time.
I'll take a look at the dip_str and get back to go. Keep up the good work.

[Nordicus]

Wes, ol buddy, hey...
Yes, I got ahold of the patch, and almost everything's reinstalled now--thank you for thinking about it though.

On a side note:

Problems related to your crash (my crash, and...whoever else's crash):

--I recently found this file in eng/gamedata
(ps_info.txt)
missing from mine (???)--I have it in now, so this might explain some things;

--in this file (same eng/gamedata folder), dip_str, I found a number of further errors:

1. [player.1 (or2).civ_name] identification cannot be inserted into dialogue text quotations (no effect: just shows, for example: you're, say, Russia--hostile Chinese diplomat reacting to your demand for 200 good:
"Mao Tse Tung refuses to give into your demand that we give you 200 Gold"--RESTAIL_REJECTED added--". We do not fear [player.1.civ_name] and therefore shall not bend to her will."

The [player.1.civ_name] itself gets inserted, not my civ's name. All of these are fixed, so now that whole answer looks thus:

"Mao Tse Tung refuses to give into your demand that we give you 200 Gold. We do not fear Russia and shall not bend to her will."

([player.1.country_name] was the correct command, and I got confused by the [player.1.civ_name_singluar]--i.e. for Russian--and [payer.1.civ_name_plural]--which would be for Russians. I thought that having seen the 'civ_name' that it would be used for civ names; it's not: 'country_name' is.)

2. Adding lines in it seems to cause problems, so I took out everything I included, which is really quite too bad because the AI's random responses are pretty limited as it is now...not to mention way too random: too bad I couldn't add specific answers for specific questions--like if you're just annihilating some civ and he wants a meeting after the lastest city got flattened, instead of him acting arrogant and calling you Stupid (well, I changed that to Infamous, trying to avoid name-calling and have words that describe what he really might say), because that is not "diplomatic," especially since his enitire culture is on the brink of extinction, he would rather be kissing your ass and trying to do everything to get you to accept a cease fire, including be polite and calling you very nice things--since insulting you will likely not make you stop.
So, don't know about grovelling--it would have to be added, and that doesn't seem to work well. But I'll see later.


3. The in-commented lines (MADLIB_RESTAIL_ACCEPT_N MADLIB_RESTAIL_REJECT_N
MADLIB_OFFER_TAIL_WH)
were out-commented again--this seems to be why things kept crashing when you or I (or anyone else) went into diplomatic negotiations. I don't know why they were taken out--perhaps only a certain number of these adjoining phrases can be juggled by the engine, or only so many are marked to be included. Whatever the reason, I think that it was the cause of many problems.

4. Included adjectives (MADLIB_EMOTE_*whatever*_A (or)_R)
have been excluded, so that now that number for each group (DEMAND, EXCHANGE, OFFER, TREATY, either A (ACCEPT) or R (REJECT)) is the same. I don't know if these extra adjectives I added caused any problems, but I thought it's better to be safe, so they're out.

5. The minor dialogue mistakes concerning keeping player names, civ names, etc., constant, in context, and grammatically sound, have been corrected--for the most part, since I need to test each dimplomatic situation to be 100% certain.

Yes, your crash occurred because it was trying to answer you and used one of the in-commented MABLIB_RESTAIL reactions--they were probably Neutral too (the French were in my game that crashed when they tried answering me). So, that's fixed. Thanks for the information--I was able to fix it more quickly that way.

No, the special attack increase is only when (in v1.2) you build the Wormhole. I didn't touch anything regarding Slavers or slavery, so I don't know about that. (Maybe they know you're a nice guy, Wes, and are using the Golden Rule with you .)
Really, I can't explain that.
I think I know why the Chinese acted that way--I've changed that in my latest version. Originally, the AI will be a bit happier if you offer or offer to exchange, I increased the intensity in my first version. They won't be that friendly to you now just for the offer. If the offer is accepted, then it's justified for them for to be in a better mood.
I generally tried to address this hatred the AI feels when it's not justified--the AI should treat a player equally in many mays, as it would other AI civs; obviously, it has to know between human and other AI and treat you a bit differently, especially in certain situations, but I think it makes more sense if you earn distrust or dislike, THEN look out, but if you just want a peaceful game and treat other peaceful AI civs decently, hey. If you want to fight everyone, that's different, you should be treated differently in that case.
I mean, there should be a slight pentalty for being human, sure, but not "Hatred," and there sould no penalty for being a peaceful human, and there should be a great penalty for being a militant human. If you're a human in 1st place, well then that's a bit different too. I think. I'd like to see instead of 'hatred,' rather more 'distrust.' I think that's what might be happening in your game--just too much--not real hatred for you but definite distrust. Your view on that?

As for exchanging techs, I never touched that. I did have a peek at that when I was going through diplomacy_pre_outgoing, and it looked like the AI knew when to exchange and when not to, so I don't know. I could have a longer look later and see if that can be increased. I think warlike AI civs would be unreasonable anyway (and should be). But it sounds like you were getting along with most AIs but unable to get them to cooperate with you? Well, I see no problem with increasing that, but we might want to agree on what sort of AIs will be more reasonable, and which might stay the same, hey? I don't think making the change for every AI civ would make sense. What do you think?

Anyway, thanks a lot for the info and the comments, glad to hear it's working sorta how I thought it would
I have some questions for you, but I'll do that in your thread.

Later.

N.
[This message has been edited by Nordicus (edited October 28, 1999).]

[WesW]

"If you're a human in 1st place, well then that's a bit different too. I think. I'd like to see instead of 'hatred,' rather more 'distrust.' I think that's what might be happening in your game--just too much--not real hatred for you but definite distrust. Your view on that?"

I have finally started to pull ahead in my game, and I am getting more distrust from some of the civs now. One of them declared war on me whan I landed a diplomat to open an embassy. I think this is definitely an improvement-good work.

Glad to hear you hadn't done anything as far as the special attacks. They do keep things from getting boring.

I think you could increase the willingness to trade info of the sci- personalities for sure. The war- ones could maybe be more interested in the war tech. I don't know if you can tailor things like this or not. I remember that there are lines in the advances text which specify what category the advance falls under.

When you're finished debugging the strings texts, send me a copy and I'll plug it in.

[Nordicus]

Wes:

Hey, good to hear.
Lemme know how the other civs react to you now that you're ranked 1st--I'm quite interested in seeing if anything changes, even though most changes aren't in your version, but a few are.

I think you could increase the willingness to trade info of the sci- personalities for sure. The war- ones could maybe be more interested in the war tech. I don't know if you can tailor things like this or not. I
remember that there are lines in the advances text which specify what category the advance falls under.

Yes, glad we're in agreement. As far as I know, you can't be specific about advances. I haven't checked everywhere, but in diplomacy_pre_outgoing, you've got something like (well, I'll quote it)

if( advance_to_me and not advance_to_him
and hate_him
and stronger_than_him
and not yes_humbled_this_turn
and not yes_ive_been_losing)
{
gimmee_adv
good_message_to_send
found
rand_min_25
rand_max_100

Now, the problem I had was adding lines similar to this--I've yet to see if universal changes help, but--even though all the words were sound, no 'syntax' errors.
If that can't be done, then there's only three lines like this regarding the AI demanding advances, so you might be able to change one, include a line like:

and warlike

That would make only warlike civs demand an advance (in addition to the other criteria there above)...but that advance could be anything. There are lots of inputs there (silly because there's only three advance ones like quoted above), such as

// This says how much I hunger for knowledge.
// return mycost * fz_advances_skipped * fz_demand_advance;
output demand_advance [0, 1] = 0
left wont_demand_adv(demand_advance, 0, 0.1)
tri thinkin_bout_demandin_adv(demand_advance, 0.5, 0.25)
right gimmee_adv(demand_advance, 1.0, 0.25)

but nothing about specific advances...unless you know where these lines are? I haven't been able to find any yet.
So we're limited there, unless you have other ideas.

Oh, what civ attacked your diplomat?
Was it warlike or slaver or what?

Yeah, all done with the string text files. I'm 95% sure, at least. Like I said, I have checked them thoroughly but haven't had time to test--no, more correctly, I haven't been able to, due to the SET_GOVERN errors I've had since reinstalling it all and the Apolyton Pack (????????).
Anyway, I'll send those tonight.
Later.


N.

[WesW]

I was attacked by the warlike Assyrians. After I conquered them, I knew I would eventually win the game, so I started a new one.
The trade advance suggestions were just that- suggestions. I don't know much about the diplomacy aips.
Well, you keep on working, and I will, too.

[Nordicus]

Wes:
Excellent. That's good--that's what should have happened.
Yeah, no, the trade idea was good--I already put it in version 1.2, which is WORKING I must say I'm pleased to say.

Using the Nordicus Rule (checking to make sure it works before inflicting it upon innocent bystanders), everything went well.

All the changes listed here (above)I was able to work all of them in without too much difficulty. There's definitely closer to 40, ten or so being in diplomacy_begin, but those can be included when I check it line by line.
It's fused in with your mod, including the latest AIPs you sent...so we really ought to rename it, think? And what about the other sub-mod stuff, like the default gamedata stuff--Color00, map, and DiffB? Have that in there for those odd people like me who like 16 civs on a map twice the size of the default gigantic one starting at -5000?
Keep it as something optional, I dunno.

Well, we'll work it out later. I'm going to get back to my playtesting to see how all of this stuff works.

Later, man.


N.

[Atahualpa]

I have hardly ever accomplished a peace treaty. It is more of that way: I ask him to make peace, he rejects and 2 turns later he asks me to make peace. Thats ridiculous, why didnt he accept then before?

[Nordicus]

Atahualpa:
Yeah, I know. I personally like how in Civ2 you could make (and so could the AI) an offer of Peace Treaty (NOT a Cease Fire, even though in CTP they're basically identical) to another civ, yunno? Like when you first meet them, are not at war, and wish to have a something stating that you'd like to maintain peace with them. Hopefully, with the changes I made, the AI will offer more like these and accept them too (depending on if you're peaceful or warlike). I've tried to change the name of "Cease Fire" anywhere I see it to "Peace Treaty," also, since you can't have a Cease Fire if you're not firing anything to begin with!
But it is silly, the AI being so picky, esp. if it's losing--I tried to make the AI be more willing to accept a Peace Treaty, as well as offer one, when it's getting beaten. It's what a sane human player would do, so why not the AI?

Wes: The "Like Wes said..." in my sig was from a comment I made to someone about how whenever a question is posted that I can answer, I see you already responded to it, so I basically just add some trivia and say "like Wes said...."

Oh, have you heard from Don Blevins? Any ideas there???

[skorpion59]

Nordicus,

I'll play too. "Like Wes said...elsewhere"
I would like to see continual breaking of the No Trespass agreement just about a call for war. 1st Offense, ALL civs start disliking you, 2nd Offense, ALL civs start hateing you, 3rd Offense, ALL civs justifyably(is that a word) attack you. I realize this can't be done but I would like to see some improvement in this area. It is what bothers me the most because I have to attack them to get them to stop and that makes me the bad guy.

My 2nd call to action would be more offers and acceptance of Peace Treaties, especially early in the game. I would also like to establish an Alliance early in the game, before anybody starts taking a lead. It would be a crap shoot. Did you ally with a poor civ that you will have to help defend or did you ally with a powerful civ which you will have to defeat after the 2 of you wiped everybody else out. Throws an interesting twist into it.

Thirdly, much, much more map but mostly tech trading. Again, earlier in game if possible. If you are not at war with a civ I see no reason why they should not trade maps. Period. Also, if your not at war and you are even or stronger than the other civ they should trade techs with you. (Kind of like the US does. You play by the strongest guys rules.)

Just throwing out some thoughts and ideas. But please look at the no trespassing problem.

Don


[This message has been edited by skorpion59 (edited October 31, 1999).]

[Nordicus]

Skorpion:

Got it, check your mail when you get in.

Noticed already:
AI decreased tolerance for trespassing. During initial contact, while everyone (13 civs) was neutral in Regard toward me, the Thai (well, Vietnamese in my game) leader was insanely mad at me, apparently for no reason. (What I do to test diplomacy out right away is use the cheat tool, drop a diplomat down by every civ's first city, establish an embassy, and get going from there, disbanding the diplomat as soon as he's done his job.) But I didn't disband the diplomat on Vietnamese soil right away--the next turn I did. That's why he was so angry. I tried this with the Inca an hour later in a new game: same result--no tolerance at all. Two incursions and they went to war. I think this would be a realistic attitude--anyone else?
But I rigged it so that AI civs will be nicer to you if you keep your word, in all manners of diplomacy. Trust is the key here: since you can give the AI all the gold and advances to gain favor, I made trust more important because it's so fragile. So it doesn't matter how much they like you, if they don't trust you, you're ***ked until you can behave, as it should be. (If this current diplomacy worked in the real world, there'd be no World War II because after Germany attacked Poland, all it would have to do is right away talk to England and France and give em lots of gold and some tech...no more problem from them Right.) So, I'm looking for realism here.

But it won't be fair unless they follow the same rule. There's still a few options open if the changes I've already made don't balance this new border policy. The real test will be seeing if this cures the Wandering AI Syndrone.

I've also been watching how the AI settles: over and over, its first cities are always by water--only if it begins the game in the middle of a large land mass does it settle there--and (4 civs out of 15) the ones that didn't do this were one square away and on a river.
Wes--did you change the AI's settling strategy?
Another thing I noticed, and this is due to Wes's files, I'm guessing: a few turns into the game, a few AI civs already started farms. After their first unit appeared, wham, down went a farm.
Man, I've seen AIs go half a game and never have even one farm.

Don, if there's no improvement with the AI respecting the new border policy (which is no tolerance), then I'll get back in there and see what else can be done. Like I said, the AI will likely attack you after two incursions now. Generally, the more you break your word, the more (and this includes all AI civs) the AI will dislike AND not trust you, so repeated border violations will result in several AI civs having to deal with you (as I think it should be) quite harshly. And no amount of gold will help you.
As for Peace Treaties, I'll have to look into this further--I did not notice the immediate changes I'd hoped for; however, I'm usually Russia, a warlike civ, and my changes in this area are for peaceful civs primarily (the way it should work, according to my changes:

if you're a peaceful civ offering a Peace Treaty and you're not at war:
the AI should accept;

if you're both peaceful civs, not at war: the AI should offer you a Peace Treaty).

If this doesn't go this way, I'll have to look into it. I think peaceful civs are bound to be more skeptical of warlike civs, so I didn't make it so that warlike civs offering Peace Treaties will be accepted unless there is 'like' or greater and trust established.

Map and Tech exchanging should be generally easier, depending how peaceful you are, If the AI is intimidated by you, it should be easier as well.
I've already noticed a bit more give from a weaker civ when I'm bullying them (yeah, I know, I'm not nice, but the AI will be like this too, especially regarding advances, if it thinks it's stronger than you). But this will need more testing.

So, I'm off.
Later.

N.

[WesW]

My changes should have the AI building roads sooner, but not farms or mines, I believe. How soon are you talking about? After the AI founds its first city and first unit it is storing up enough PW for a farm?
Regarding settlers: I didn't do anything as far as this is concerned. Are you using my terrain mod? If not, oceans are so much better than land, it makes sense for the AI to settle there.
About trespassing: Did you refuse to remove your diplomat when requested? If so, then this change it what I wanted. Also, in my current game, I keep getting messages from the Americans every 10 turns or so asking to sign a peace treaty. We have never been at war, so this gets a little annoying.
I do think the AI seems more eager to trade tech, which I like.
Things seem to be going well; keep pecking away at it.

[Nordicus]

Wes:

I'm talkin soon, like I said, as soon as the first unit's done--but this is only for a few out of 15.
About the settlers--ya, I think this is probably something from CD's mod that I just never noticed before.

Update:
More testing has shown that it wasn't the diplomat who caused the anger; it was a Warrior, a regular unit.
I've had diplomats parked near 4 different AI capital cities and there's no reaction. But as soon as I put any unit other than special there, there is much ado.

Wes, the Peace Treaty thing, yeah, that's right--except for the frequency. It's not a "cease fire" they want but a "Peace Treaty," you know, like in Civ2. I don't know if they should be asking so often, or at all considering you already have one. Are they doing it to renew the Treaty? Because if they are, we can just extend how long the treaties are valid.
I now have five offers from the AI, but I might need to look at this. Here are the civs:

Swedish (in my game)--Cleric
Chinese--WarMany
Egyptian--WarMany
Jewish (in my game)--Cleric
(and 2 turns after refusing mine)
Japanese--WarMany

I can't seem to get a Treaty with a scientific civ, though. And I'm really behaving myself.

Also, trading tech is easier--after insulting the Americans, I was able to trade with them (they had a frowny face on).

I think it's going well--did you get the updated dip_str file? I have had no problems at all now with the diplomacy_begin in there.

Looks like so far just extending the length the Peace Treaty.

Later.

------------------
"There can be no maximum of creation without a concomitant maximum of destruction, no supreme good without supreme evil"--Heller, paraphrasing Nietzsche.


"Stimpy...YOU...EEEEDDDDDEEEEEIIIOOTTT!!!"--Ren.

"Verrosten est X-beine das Fahrbar Bliken Obszon
Abgabepflichtighoffenburger!?!?!?!"


"Like Wes said...."

[This message has been edited by Nordicus (edited November 01, 1999).]