Diplomacy, which system?

Which system?

  • Point-System, less realistic

    Votes: 43 50.0%

  • Whatever the system is now, more realistic

    Votes: 43 50.0%
  • Total voters
    86
aatami said:
Your point is irrelevant (and all points of the same type are as well): To my understanding, we are discussing about and comparing the systems them selves, and not small perks that can be easily patched and modified without making a whole new diplomacy system...
Click to expand...

I think we've already established the fact that people are split between opinions right? So I'm just keeping the discussion alive.

And it's not as irrelevant.

I'm just saying, if Civ 5 still uses a point system, but the problem there is the lack of negative/friendly modifiers (since for some reason they use opposited, minuses for positive things and pluses for hostile things) I'm might've wrote my OP wrong because the developers hid the actual points. I'm just saying that the Diplomacy simply lacks modifiers that improve your relationship but yet they have plenty of modifiers that make it easy for the AI to hate the player. That wasn't the case on Civ 4, there were plenty of modifiers that were postive enough that kept certain AI's friendly towards you.
 
TheKingOfBigOz said:
I think we've already established the fact that people are split between opinions right? So I'm just keeping the discussion alive.

And it's not as irrelevant.

I'm just saying, if Civ 5 still uses a point system, but the problem there is the lack of negative/friendly modifiers (since for some reason they use opposited, minuses for positive things and pluses for hostile things) I'm might've wrote my OP wrong because the developers hid the actual points. I'm just saying that the Diplomacy simply lacks modifiers that improve your relationship but yet they have plenty of modifiers that make it easy for the AI to hate the player. That wasn't the case on Civ 4, there were plenty of modifiers that were postive enough that kept certain AI's friendly towards you.
Click to expand...
But isn't the topic this thread is for comparing an abusable point-only system vs. a system that has both points and a more human like AI? Or did I understand the whole thing wrong?
 
The systems are very similar. In Civ4, you could manage some AI as though they were sheep. In civ5 you cannot, because the AI can attack regardless of diplomatic status between you two. This seems to me perfectly valid, therefore I prefer the system of civ5.
 
aatami said:
But isn't the topic this thread is for comparing an abusable point-only system vs. a system that has both points and a more human like AI? Or did I understand the whole thing wrong?
Click to expand...

Alright, then in that case there's noting to discuss more right?

Admins should feel free to lock this thread then.
 
Shurdus said:
The systems are very similar. In Civ4, you could manage some AI as though they were sheep. In civ5 you cannot, because the AI can attack regardless of diplomatic status between you two. This seems to me perfectly valid, therefore I prefer the system of civ5.
Click to expand...

But then what becomes the point of diplomacy, if your diplomatic status doesn't mean anything?
 
Putmalk said:
But then what becomes the point of diplomacy, if your diplomatic status doesn't mean anything?
Click to expand...

In real life, as long as they were not twice your size, even if you were not their vassal, you could attack whoever you pleased, whether it be for their resources, land, increase in population, or merely for the lessened threat and competition.

I prefer the CiV diplomatic system, it is more realistic.

And your diplomatic status still means something, it's just more of an influence than a driving factor.
 
I would be surprised if points got less then 90% of the votes.
Click to expand...

Looks like 33 out of 65 people prefer the CiV system.
 
HardRocker said:
Looks like 33 out of 65 people prefer the CiV system.
Click to expand...

Yes, but you forget about those who could choose neither choice. They would I think be the majority. The system will be based on new ideas to fit CiV.
 
HardRocker said:
In real life, as long as they were not twice your size,even if you were their vassal, you could attack whoever you pleased, whether it be for their resources, land, increase in population, or merely for the lessened threat and competition.

I prefer the CiV diplomatic system, it is more realistic.

And your diplomatic status still means something, it's just more of an influence than a driving factor.
Click to expand...

edited for you
 
I disagree with the poll. The current system is less realistic than civ4's point system. Right now, the leaders try to act like human players. In civ4 they tried to act like civilization leaders.

In a civilization game, for me acting real is acting like a leader, not like a chess player.
 
TheKingOfBigOz said:
I guess the current system isn't bad, but from what I've noticed AI never forgets, which is the biggest let down, there's very few pluses you can get and very big minuses you recieve (coveted lands, wonders, warmonger etc)
Click to expand...

Yes... there should be "memory decay" where after a number of turns, the AI forgets (or puts less weight) on certain things. Maybe those numbers could be bumped back up with repeat "offenses", but it is rediculous when the AI holds a grudge against you during the industrial age over something you did during the classical age.
 
Overall I prefer Civ 5 diplomacy to Civ 4. I think the basic idea is very good, unfortunately it is sloppily done and poorly presented. For example, last night Gandhi denounced me then the very next turn asked me to help him in a war, saying: "will you join me, friend?" or something like that :crazyeye: Yes they try to act like a human player but they fail. A human player wouldn't do that, unless they had some kind of personality disorder.

Another example, I posted a picture in the funny screenshots thread showing Washington, who was "Afraid" of me, calling to say how pathetic I was. If he's afraid of me why on earth would he think it a good idea to insult me to my face? :lol: But while these things look really stupid I don't think there is too much wrong with the underlying system. If they could somehow block nonsensical and contradictory situations like the two I just mentioned, and make negative diplo events decay over time like Thorburne says, I think it would work really well.
 
Diplo on CiV basically doesn't exist. On CIV diplo was a big part of your overall strategy. On V you can beat Deity without practically paying any attention to diplo.
 
I voted for the point system. Especially since even CiV uses a point system, why don't they just show how exactly does each AI hate you/ like you? Since I can just go to the xml file and see most of them, I do not see the reason for that "mysteriousness". Anyway, something a little bit irrelevant, but does anyone have any links of the complete list of "the pluses and minuses" of the AI's towards the player?

So far, I have found these:
Spoiler :
Negatives (those with a plus):
Broken co-op war promise= 20
Saying "Don't worry, our troops are merely passing by" , then attacking= 40 and= 15 to the rest of the world
Taking an AI protected City State= 40
Attacking an AI protected City State= 20 and falls to 15 if you did it "a while ago"
Ignoring expansion promise= 15
Breaking expansion promise= 20 and if that civilization that asked you not to expand near them is a heavy expander you get another 20, thus going to 35 --if you ignored it-- and 40 if you promised, then broke the promise.
If they Denounce you= 35
If you Denounce them= 35
If you Denounce someone they have a Declaration of Friendship with= 15 and you get an additional 15 for each friend of theirs you Denounce.
If "A friend found reason to Denounce you" you get 20 for each friend that Denounces you.

Beneficial (those with a minus):
Declaration of Friendship= -35
Returning a civilian= -20
Making a Declaration of Friendship with a friend of an AI= -15
Fighting against a common enemy MAX influence= -50
Traded recently MAX influence= -30
AI asked for help and you assisted them MAX influence= -30
If you have Denounced the same leaders as the AI= -15
 
And the poll is of course totally irrelevant. There is nothing realistic about AI who hates you because "you're trying to win the same way we do" or who declares a new war while already warring against two civs and being no stronger than any of them.
 
JamesCivFan said:
I voted for the point system. Especially since even CiV uses a point system, why don't they just show how exactly does each AI hate you/ like you? Since I can just go to the xml file and see most of them, I do not see the reason for that "mysteriousness". Anyway, something a little bit irrelevant, but does anyone have any links of the complete list of "the pluses and minuses" of the AI's towards the player?

So far, I have found these:
Spoiler :
Negatives (those with a plus):
Broken co-op war promise= 20
Saying "Don't worry, our troops are merely passing by" , then attacking= 40 and= 15 to the rest of the world
Taking an AI protected City State= 40
Attacking an AI protected City State= 20 and falls to 15 if you did it "a while ago"
Ignoring expansion promise= 15
Breaking expansion promise= 20 and if that civilization that asked you not to expand near them is a heavy expander you get another 20, thus going to 35 --if you ignored it-- and 40 if you promised, then broke the promise.
If they Denounce you= 35
If you Denounce them= 35
If you Denounce someone they have a Declaration of Friendship with= 15 and you get an additional 15 for each friend of theirs you Denounce.
If "A friend found reason to Denounce you" you get 20 for each friend that Denounces you.

Beneficial (those with a minus):
Declaration of Friendship= -35
Returning a civilian= -20
Making a Declaration of Friendship with a friend of an AI= -15
Fighting against a common enemy MAX influence= -50
Traded recently MAX influence= -30
AI asked for help and you assisted them MAX influence= -30
If you have Denounced the same leaders as the AI= -15
Click to expand...

Yeah it uses a point system that doesn't work you forgot the warmonger rate the city state jealousy , the wonder hate...

THere are so many negatif modifiers and only a few positif right good desing :lol:
 
LegionSteve said:
Overall I prefer Civ 5 diplomacy to Civ 4. I think the basic idea is very good, unfortunately it is sloppily done and poorly presented. For example, last night Gandhi denounced me then the very next turn asked me to help him in a war, saying: "will you join me, friend?" or something like that :crazyeye: Yes they try to act like a human player but they fail. A human player wouldn't do that, unless they had some kind of personality disorder.

Another example, I posted a picture in the funny screenshots thread showing Washington, who was "Afraid" of me, calling to say how pathetic I was. If he's afraid of me why on earth would he think it a good idea to insult me to my face? :lol: But while these things look really stupid I don't think there is too much wrong with the underlying system. If they could somehow block nonsensical and contradictory situations like the two I just mentioned, and make negative diplo events decay over time like Thorburne says, I think it would work really well.
Click to expand...

Yes, funny how the AI acts. That is a valid point "memory decay" sounds like a good idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KayAU
Which are your favourite civs (in Vox Populi or vanilla)?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Darth Tribble
Darth Tribble
R
Possibility of bringing success chance back to espionage system
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
azum4roll
A
rsc2a
(7a) VP Events Overhaul (Expansion Pack system)
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
APLion
A
Tigranes
Oppenheimer and DoC
Replies
9
Views
810
brett0007
brett0007
S
(7-20) Sabotage Production Spy Mission Redesign [Spy Update 9]
Replies
4
Views
233
AndreyK
A
Top Bottom