[DESIGN] Duration of Diplomatic Agreements

[Gilgamensch]

Originally posted by The Big Mc
what about border disputes the ai always goes in to my territory and settles.

Border disputes: If he really settles in your territory, yes a valid reason. Attack and case dismissed.

[The Big Mc]

yes you build a small fort close to his territory (like in a bottle neck). then cheeky thing builds on or too near to the fort and eventually it steels me fort too.

[Gilgamensch]

Originally posted by The Big Mc
yes you build a small fort close to his territory (like in a bottle neck). then cheeky thing builds on or too near to the fort and eventually it steels me fort too.

Not sure what you mean. If you had the fort before him, the territory shall stay yours. Can you explain a bit more in details?

[The Big Mc]

i make my fort then the ai walks onto my territory i tell him to get out then the settler steels all my territory disappears as his city takes over my fort because he settled within a tile of my fort

happened in the venial game a few times.

[Gilgamensch]

that sounds normal, you were too late As the city is being produced quicker than the fort is finished, you shall have build 3 turns earlier or tried to kick him off anyway..........

[Flinx]

If the city radius of a 'Civ A' city expands to encompass a fort built by 'Civ B' then 'Civ B' looses control of the fort. I think this is what Big Mc is talking about.

[The Big Mc]

yes Flinx

[Ekmek]

I think Big mc is talking about how borders shift when a city is placed or grows. In Civ3 I kind of understand because its more like cultural influence determines how "strong" your borders are (and enemy will grow into your territory is they have a higher culture value). I think Big MC is bringing up that problem.

A city being settled in tiles you own should cause a war and a rep hit to the settling civ (I lean towards prompting Should we declare war as opposed to automatic war)

I think border expansion, if no culture is used, should be that borders dont move with city placement. first come first serve.


Related to that, I think it links to my unit ability suggestion of CAPTURE TILE. Where a unit moves to a blank territory and captures it creating a civ-colored border around it. It would serve as claiming territory. Capturing another players territory would NOT be automatic war but prompt a question, should we declare war, the AI would declare WAR based on proximity to tile and aggressiveness.

[Peter Triggs]

How's this look?

These have a duration of 20 turns:

case PROPOSAL_OFFER_WITHDRAW_TROOPS:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_WITHDRAW_TROOPS:
case PROPOSAL_OFFER_STOP_PIRACY:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_STOP_PIRACY:

case PROPOSAL_TREATY_CEASEFIRE:



These last 30 turns:

case PROPOSAL_OFFER_STOP_RESEARCH:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_STOP_RESEARCH:
case PROPOSAL_OFFER_REDUCE_NUCLEAR_WEAPONS:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_REDUCE_NUCLEAR_WEAPONS:
case PROPOSAL_OFFER_REDUCE_BIO_WEAPONS:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_REDUCE_BIO_WEAPONS:
case PROPOSAL_OFFER_REDUCE_NANO_WEAPONS:
case PROPOSAL_REQUEST_REDUCE_NANO_WEAPONS:



These last 40 turns:

case PROPOSAL_TREATY_PEACE:
case PROPOSAL_TREATY_TRADE_PACT:
case PROPOSAL_TREATY_RESEARCH_PACT:
case PROPOSAL_TREATY_MILITARY_PACT:
case PROPOSAL_TREATY_POLLUTION_PACT:


And Alliances are forever.

Maq
Would be good if these numbers (counting down) were displayed in the diplo manager for each agreement
too.

That's a good idea but I can't make any promises. You will, though, get a message 3 turns before an
agreement expires.

Maq
Are these values going to be exposed in some text file?

There are some old fields in Const.txt that were used for just this. I haven't tied them up with what I
just wrote, but it wouldn't be difficult. OTOH, this is just the beginning. We might want to change
things much more significantly.

Keygen
Another idea would be the possibility of defining the number of turns that an agreement would last for,
while doing the negotiations, at list at some types of agreements and possibly with an upper limit. That
could be difficult to implement for the AI though.

At some point we're going to have to get into the AI's response logic. When we do I'd like to see that
implemented (if possible).

[Flinx]

Peter those numbers seem like a good place to start, and maybe even finish.

[EPW]

If a civ changes governments, perhaps all agreements with other civs should just be canceled. Or if they are changing into a similir government such as republic to democracy the agreements will remain.

[Flinx]

I disagree.

A nation may express disappointment at a regime change in another nation but they do not automatically cancel all agreements

[EPW]

well they defanitly reasses the situation, and they would have to discuss the agreements with the new government. Since civilizations in ctp2 go into anarchy during a government change it is probably represents some sort of hostile take over and its unlikely the previous leaders would be in charge. Therefore other nations would have to renew the agreements with the new government if at all. This is looking at it abstractly but I would think cancelling the agreements would simulate this somewhat.

[Gilgamensch]

I must admit, I don't like the idea of cancelling all treaties when changing government. Yes you go through a period of anarchy, but why shall an allience or whatever being cancelled.

If it would be an enforced government from outside (which we haven't got a stealth-unit for or a command for an existing one), yes I would agree, but if the nation decides to change the government through proper elections , why shall this have negative effects?

And Peter:

Having it just like this, I don't really like. If you are a peaceful nation you shall be more trustworthy than a bloody warmonger

[J Bytheway]

Originally posted by EPW
...its unlikely the previous leaders would be in charge.

Except that we know the same leader is always in charge of the human players government... The beautiful absurdity of civ games .

With regard to cancelling agreements, I think it's a bad idea - it would be too easy for a Human to exploit to avoid obligations.