1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

1.0.0.62 Patch: AI /worse/ at trade

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Chibiabos, Oct 23, 2010.

  1. Egnarts

    Egnarts Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Trades and diplomacy in Civ5 is a complete joke. It's highly abusive, and beyond that is totaly irrelevant to the game. It's a joke as is.
     
  2. Öjevind Lång

    Öjevind Lång Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,371
    I think you people are whining over something which makes perfect sense. Anyway, if you need a goods to get one or more of your cities to celebrate "We Love the King Day", try offering the AI three goods you have a surplus of. Also, remember that none of the goods you have may actully make his cities go into celebration. If you give him a luxury that won't make his cities celebrate in return for one that will make yours do so, then the AI is the one that's getting shafted. The bigger difficulty in trading is a decided improvement, in my opinion.
     
  3. Windsor

    Windsor Flawless

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,385
    Location:
    Norway
    Unless the AI is cheating it doesn't know if the luxury you want will give you a WLtKD or not.

    The AI should be human-blind when it values resource deals.
     
  4. Yzman

    Yzman Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,692
    Location:
    Illinois, USA
    When the AI demands a non surplus resource from me, I often change it for another surplus I have and they still accept the deal. Problem solved.
     
  5. jagdtigerciv

    jagdtigerciv Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    468
    I haven't played yet, but I really hope this isn't the case. I was really enjoying 1:1 trades, it keep me a float and, more often than not, I noticed it kept AIs happy cap afloat as well.
     
  6. Ymir9

    Ymir9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    125
    I hope someone mods a fix for this quick.
    My favorite part of Civ ever since 3 has always been to seize a monopoly of luxury resources and rake in the profits from gpt sales.
     
  7. MadRat

    MadRat Cheese Raider

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Under the sink
    If The AI knows which luxuries you need then, I find it stupid that it often asks for luxuries/resources which you have 1 of in trade. Yeah, I'm going to give you my furs and gems along with the whale for the silver and make my civ even more unhappy ... ass :rolleyes: :lol:

    Rat
     
  8. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,182
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah, they usually like to throw in an arm and a leg if you let them choose what could make a deal work but will accept a surplus luxury instead of one where you have only one source of.
     
  9. brindle

    brindle Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 16, 2009
    Messages:
    51
    The developers really over-reacted. the problem with trade was never the 1 for 1 resoruce trades, it was that they would offer way too much $$ (and cash is king in this game) for resources (especially when they were already happy and got marginal gain from the resource).

    so lowering the amount of $$ offered was a good change, but getting rid of strait-up resource trade deals and replacing them with ridiculous jokes of deals was a bad step.
     
  10. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,077
    Location:
    Abroad
    You know what's really bad?

    I don't see the AI reevaluating luxury resources in the patch notes. Anywhere.

    What the heck happened to documentation?
     
  11. MeowTau

    MeowTau Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2010
    Messages:
    59
    The thing is it is not just the human player being shunned by the AI. The AI now expects these same ridiculous prices from other AI's. This is why they now all have a large stack of resources the entire game, when they didn't on the previous patch. They used to trade with each other. Now they do not trade resources at all.

    I really don't think they even play tested this. I now make more gold selling worthless open borders agreements than I get from selling luxury resources.
     
  12. Humakty

    Humakty Happy Goblin

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    762
    Location:
    CheeseLand, Lyon
    I was under the persistent impresion the patch only made things better. At least I can't fool them in stupid trade agreements only benefitting to my growing empire... plus they still do accept to sign research agreement, open borders when it seems obvious they do have to do so.
     
  13. LDiCesare

    LDiCesare Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,612
    Location:
    France
    Count me as disliking the systematic 2:1 resource change.
     
  14. Silvis

    Silvis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    78
    Location:
    Florida
    Wow, 2:1 resource exchange is ridiculous. Is it possible that if they have more than just 2 of that resource that they will lower the cost? I think that this is probably just a step in the way of improving the AI. Maybe they are just setting them up for later patches and slapping a bandage on the issue for now?
     
  15. d4everman

    d4everman Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    72
    I've noticed this too. Caesar won't trade one of his 5 whales for pearls unless I throw in my only dyes resource. Even though we've never been at war, and we're nowhere near each other on the continent.

    The AI is so ridiculous right now its easier just to take the resources from them. Indeed, you will most likely have no choice if you need the resource. Its like they intentionally tried to make the AI more infuriating and stupid. I began a new game this morning and along with the trade problems I don't see much improvement in the AI at all.

    1. Darius builds his second city pretty close to my border, which if allowed to stay there will be a choke point stopping my further expansion. Good move....if he were a human player. Unlike a human player he doesn't build ANY units other than workers! (He rush built an archer and one of his UUs in the two turns before I took his capitol, removing him from the game) I basically destroyed him with two spearmen, an archer and a scout....and at that time I only had 2 cities also)
    2. Caesar and Hiawatha turn hostile, instantly after Persia is gone. Despite the fact that they both asked me for pacts of Secrecy against him before I went to war....and that they're both on the other end of the continent.
    3. Oh yeah, both of them popped up from time to time to tell me to watch my back 'cuz of my weak army, and how I'm a bloodthirsty jerk and pathetic. Despite being more powerful than either of them.
    4. Hmmm....maybe I am weaker than they are. After all, I've noticed several times how barbarians beeline right for my units even when they are within killing distance of of one of their already weakened-on-the-verge-of-death-units. I can't prove it, but I'm almost sure that barbs are programmed to attack YOU if you're in their line of sight even though they could kill an AI unit with more ease and little chance of failure. While taking Persia's capitol a barb archer ran up...instead of targetting Darius' 1-sliver-of-red-almost-a-goner archer, it went right for my spearman who was at 90 percent strength. Even though the archer was right next to him. The Archer, BTW didn't move to a safer location....as if it knew the barb archer would keep me from attacking him again.
    5. I have NEVER seen a barb attack a city directly until today. Usually they wander around and pillage and never move out of range so even a city with no defenders can pummel them to death in a few turns. The same turn I took Darius' capitol they attacked it. (A barb archer and brute came pouring out of the darkness) Funny, since there were 2 barb camps near it before and Darius HAD NO ARMY!!!! until I decided to take him out. They could have easily captured his capitol from turn 10 or so. Again, I can't prove it, but it looks like the AI barbs will go after you even if they have little chance of killing your unit, but every chance at keeping you from winning a battle.

    This combined with the broken trade makes the game frustrating. Did they even TRY to make the AI engaging at all? Doesn't look like it.
     
  16. Dedrytus

    Dedrytus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    216
    I have got better results. He has ONE (2) trade resource, I have many... Should I make deal or not, how do you think?
     
  17. CyberTyrant

    CyberTyrant Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,261
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wisconsin, USA
    Judging by the manual, civilopedia and UI, I'd guess documentation wasn't real high on their list of priorities.
     
  18. Zhahz

    Zhahz PC Gamer

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Haven't tried enough with patch since. I've irritated every AI on my continent by warring with them, usually repeatedly and 2-4 of them at a time, and I have a lot of cities and wonders. They won't trade me anything 1:1.

    Before this patch the AIs wouldn't trade 1:1 once you got to be powerful or if you had ever dissed them, like saying "just passing thru" when they whine about your troops half way around the world.

    They seem a little more rigorous with the trade restrictions now. It kinda makes sense - why would you trade with the most powerful Civ (player) when it helps them get even more powerful? But, I think they've gone overboard.

    The AI is also ridiculous with peace treaties now in the opposite direction. They sometimes won't even just take a flat peace treaty when you've utterly crushed them...wait a few turns...then they offer you the same deal or more. And trying to get gold or anything else in peace deals seems impossible even when you've taken half their empire and their capital.

    So, I gotta test more to see about the 1:1 - seems like they'll do it before you start getting ahead but after that they're ridiculous with wanting such stupidly unbalanced trades that you'd never do it.

    I'm enjoying Civ 5 but this kind of sledgehammer balancing/fixing that seems to not get tested at all, or get tested by people who are clueless and miss the basic/obvious, is pretty annoying.
     
  19. MadRat

    MadRat Cheese Raider

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Under the sink
    That is kind of like shooting your foot to spite your face. The AI should really ask 'is NOT trading actually helping me any'? The problem is the game here is zero sum. Half these problems are not about the AI trying to win but about another player not winning. I have bene in many online and FtoF games where this kind of player is generally derided as an a-hole and blackballed.

    Example (RL) - Axis and Allies game - Germany sees that it is not going to win and the UK will win by game objectives (most points) so rather than trying to play well it decides to throw everything at the UK just to spite the UK player and letting the USSR get the cheap win by basically taking over all of europe. He did it all just to be an ass because he felt there was no point as he couldnt win; but still affect the game's outcome.

    Rat
     
  20. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    Well, we have to be fair.
    Documentation was clearly more important than such minor things as combat AI, AI in general, diplomacy and so on.
     

Share This Page