Poll: Should the AI "Haggle" with its Deals?

[Stalker0]

Currently the AI does "haggling" with its deals. What I mean by that is that the AI will say it will pay 4 GPT for your lux....but it might be willing to pay 9. You have to increase and decrease your deal to maximize your benefit, aka haggling.

The other option is that the AI will always ask for the maximum deal it will allow. The AI will open up at 9 GPT, and you as the player know there is no point to increasing it.

Some might like the engagement of haggling, others may find it tedious, so lets see if there is common consensus.

The Poll: Should the AI continue to Haggle?

Yes - You want the haggling mechanic to remain.
No - You want the AI to always offer the maximum deal.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

Haggling contributes to carpal tunnel syndrome.

 

[randomnub]

Voted no. Please, no more unnecessary clicking. It was "engaging" the first 1 or 2 games, maybe.

By always offering the maximum value it will also become easier to spot unfair trade values (embassies and strategics fluctuating a lot come to my mind).

 

[Tekamthi]

i like haggling but only if the practice of incrementally making lower offers is not viable... ie maybe AI should refuse to trade til next turn upon rejected offer, or some other limiter

 

[youngsteve]

Am I imaging this or did this mod early on put the amount they were willing to offer lower if you tried to haggle upwards & they weren't willing to do so, or was that vanilla. Perhaps that should come in, & then the player would accept or take the risk that asking for more could risk the AI being at the top of what it was willing to take, & then offer a lower amount than originally asked.

 

[Hreat]

Thoughts I have never had while playing: "hmm, I wish I spent more time manually adjusting trade deals"

 

[LarryAR]

Gee, I must use the wrong UI. One mouse click to refuse, one to accept.
If I want to negotiate, then that's another choice.
Sometimes, I need and get a different mix of gold and goods from what is offered.
Choice is a good thing.

 

[bonniepbilly]

Voted no, and also, the value when expressed in gpt should be rounded down, to remove the benefit of tediously selling strategics one by one.
For example, if an AI values a strat at 75, currently we can sell it for 2 gpt twice, instead of 3 gpt for both.

 

[BornDownUnder]

For those players that prefer to not have to haggle then perhaps a community flag to toggle the option off.

I personally prefer the bartering system implemented, however I think it is in need of tweaking or an overhaul of mechanics which are used to come to the agreement to trade.

Currently one cannot really define any discernable difference between civs that really like or dislike you (At least, I have not found any difference) It seems to be just running off their actual need for the lux/strat which sets the base amount they are willing to offer, with the only really definable limit being how much gpt they have available to barter with.

I feel there needs to be a lot more weight to it via diplomacy measures and how the AI sees your relationship with them/others to invoke the need to have better diplomacy with other civs that you need to trade resources with.

 

[ryanmusante]

Has this been integrated?

 

[looorg]

Has this been integrated?

Yes. As far as I know. But the implementation is a bit wonky. For first time deals the AI offer you they are usually spot on. Sometimes you can squeeze another gold per turn or so out of it. But it's rarely worth it to try and haggle over it. Perhaps in the very early game but not after that. When the AI offer re-deals for some luxury or so tho they can almost always pay out many more GPT. They seem to keep the old deal and still think that is just fine. They do not re-evaluate the deal properly from any perspective. You can manually adjust them or remove one thing from the deal and then ask them what would make the deal work and they'll max it, more or less, again.