Wish there was a Protector diplomacy bonus

zarakand

Prince
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
562
Location
Chicago
I'm in a game where I liberated Sweden from the Celts and made peace with the Celts. Now, the Celts are invading Sweden again and about to eliminate them again. I don't want to go to war and found a way to peacefully protect the Swedes..by surrounding their city with my troops so no Celtic troops can get in. I'm sure several people have done this before, and here's a screen shot.

Anyway, I feel like this should give me a nice diplomacy bonus with the Swedes don't you? Unfortunately, there is no mechanism to recognize and reward this behavior.
 

Attachments

  • Civ5Screen0000.jpg
    Civ5Screen0000.jpg
    435.7 KB · Views: 351
I agree that protecting the AI against invading civs should give more of a diplomacy bonus, pretty much like killing barbs near city states. However, that would require you being at war with the common enemy, and killing the units.
 
I've used tricks like that to pin annoying GPs against mountains so they can't convert my cities. While it's a part of the game, it's clearly a cheat and I can't say that it'd be a good idea for the game to not only sanction but encourage it. Not unless they also went to the next step such as to program the AI so that it could make a demand, "Stop blockading my units!" with a big dip penalty if you didn't relent.
 
I have always wanted a better mechanism for puppet warefare. Right nowt he only way to do this is to gift units to the AI - the problem is that the diplo bonus doesn't seem to be proportionate to the relative power of what is gifted.

If you quadruple the AI miliatry forces, you should get a HUGE bonus. Especially if they are losing a war they can't get out of. That would be a nice feature.

Also, whenver I gift units to the AI they use them in the most braindead way possible, always fun to watch...
 
Basic diplomatic features would be nice, but Firaxis axed most/all of them with Civ 5 and we can only hope there will be some in Civ 6 now. If not, we will have other games. The competition is catching up. :)
 
Off topic, but in Civ 6, I am hoping for the possibility to sell units to the AI, like you can offer Arabia to buy 4 tanks for example, and negotiate the price like any other trade (gold/luxuries/resources and so on).

I'd love to play as Charlie Wilson of the US, and feed the lesser civs with modern weapons at a low price! :king:
 
I've used tricks like that to pin annoying GPs against mountains so they can't convert my cities. While it's a part of the game, it's clearly a cheat and I can't say that it'd be a good idea for the game to not only sanction but encourage it. Not unless they also went to the next step such as to program the AI so that it could make a demand, "Stop blockading my units!" with a big dip penalty if you didn't relent.

I think that would be an awesome addition to diplomacy. It would make the game a lot of fun. They could be angry at you for donating units as well.
 
I reroll really crap starts (no resources, stuck on own island with nothing around, tonnes of mountain). I also reroll starts with cobs I don't feel like playing, like the 30th game with India.

Otherwise I play
 
I'm in a game where I liberated Sweden from the Celts and made peace with the Celts. Now, the Celts are invading Sweden again and about to eliminate them again. I don't want to go to war and found a way to peacefully protect the Swedes..by surrounding their city with my troops so no Celtic troops can get in. I'm sure several people have done this before, and here's a screen shot.

Anyway, I feel like this should give me a nice diplomacy bonus with the Swedes don't you? Unfortunately, there is no mechanism to recognize and reward this behavior.

It would be nice, but programming the AI to recognise that you`re being nice and not trying some underhanded way to get the upper hand is almost impossible.

Only Humans are so far able to recognise altruistic behaviour in such a fashion to understand it. No computer can match that.
 
Liberating civs is a complete waste of time - as far as I can tell they get the tech that they had at the time they were eliminated - which can put them several eras behind. If I wanted to shoulder 100% of the responsibility for defending a liberated civ, I'd have puppeted them instead. Liberated civs need to be returned to a tech level based perhaps on the tech level of the civ they were liberated out from, and perhaps get a few free units to see them on their way. And it goes without saying that if I liberate a civ, I expect some deference from the bastards.
 
Bringing civ's back to life is annoying, I once restored Sweden (coincidence?) and immediately following my pressing end of turn I was denounced by them.

Thanks bud!
 
Agree with that on liberation... as it is now, it's really only a good idea if you had good relations with them before they were wiped out.

Side note: If I understand correctly, with BNW, you *do* get an effective -1 to your # of cities conquered, when you liberate a civ, even if you weren't the one who conquered them in the first place. (BNW changed the old small hit for each city / big hit for last city of a civ with a fairly flat hit for each city.)
 
On the one hand, it would be nice if the protected civ would recognize that you are helping them. If anything, sometimes they will think you are planning to attack them, if you surround their capital with military units!

Then again, maybe it's a good thing cause otherwise the aggressor civ would get mad at you for "interfering" in the war.

So right now it sorta balances out since no one recognizes your efforts! :)
 
To do something like that they'd need to introduce a whole new AI program to make it recognize obstructionist behaviors.

The AI as of now isn't nearly evolved enough to understand such concept, and if it was they'd rather improve the attacking behavior.


There's then another fact, that should be considered. You want the defended AI to recognize that you are helping them, but by logic shouldn't the attacking AI also recognize that and therefore get pissed at you?


I think it would be all a lot easier if defensive pacts worked as a deterrent, so that AI A correctly won't attack AI B unless it's prepared to wage war against you and not just the weakling AI B while completely ignoring the fact that with a defensive pact the war is automatic.
 
To do something like that they'd need to introduce a whole new AI program to make it recognize obstructionist behaviors.

The AI as of now isn't nearly evolved enough to understand such concept, and if it was they'd rather improve the attacking behavior.


There's then another fact, that should be considered. You want the defended AI to recognize that you are helping them, but by logic shouldn't the attacking AI also recognize that and therefore get pissed at you?


I think it would be all a lot easier if defensive pacts worked as a deterrent, so that AI A correctly won't attack AI B unless it's prepared to wage war against you and not just the weakling AI B while completely ignoring the fact that with a defensive pact the
war is automatic.

I believe they should fix this first. It's always annoying when someone DOW on my ally, when they only have half of the size of my army.
 
Bringing civ's back to life is annoying, I once restored Sweden (coincidence?) and immediately following my pressing end of turn I was denounced by them.

Thanks bud!

Yeah, this sucks. If Civ 6 doesn't have better diplomacy I'll pass.
 
Top Bottom