About AI cheat, AI redlined, you cheese

Someone have been watching too much Star Trek. Building Data is still centuries away. ;)
 
I agree that red-lining greatly helps with the AI. It does show player that the AI civ will never trade those techs. However, I think as your relations are worse with an AI civ, less things should become red-lined. Why? For two reasons: If you are unfriendly with a Civ, I doubt you would know them well or talk to them much, so how would you know what they are willing to give or not. More importantly, it allows what people want, the ability to threaten AI properly. Here I am assuming your enemy AI Civ is on bad terms with you (and thus you should be able to try to demand anything from them, with a graduated negative modifier instead of a flat -1).

On the whole, I do dislike severely that the "simplified" AI diplomacy has led me to very flat and robotic relations with the AI. I easily know how to befriend a Civ, and sadly, without much effort, incite a Civ. To me, that takes some mistique out of the game. There's never a wonder on how their AI is working, it's too easy to see (even if I don't look at their modifier). Am I their religion? Do I use their civs? Do I trade with them / give in to their demands? That's all it ends up being. I feel there's nothing behind it, and it's exacerbated by few diplomatic options (both red-lines and otherwise) and begging. I agree a game of "could I have that?" "No" over and over is boring, but I wholeheartedly agree that if a friendly Civ will come begging, they should offer up somthing if they have it (even if it is an awful tech).
 
LeConquerant said:
Luckily there is no forum for computer players complaining how unfair we can be to them....
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that???? :D

Sorry HAL - got sidetracked just then. :p

Shut up R2D2. :confused:
 
johnny42strom said:
More importantly, it allows what people want, the ability to threaten AI properly.
Click to expand...
No, that's not what people want. If things stopped being redlined, they would then be complaining that they can't get the AI to give them anything by threatening them.

The issue is NOT wanting to issue threats, because there is no issue there. You already know that the threats will be ignored, so wanting to issue them anyway is just silly. The issue is that people want the AI to roll over and give them whatever they want.
 
Beamup said:
The issue is NOT wanting to issue threats, because there is no issue there. You already know that the threats will be ignored, so wanting to issue them anyway is just silly. The issue is that people want the AI to roll over and give them whatever they want.
Click to expand...

If I understood correctly, the issue isn't to give the player the ability to ask (and get) what he wants, but just to prevent AI from asking things from the player, which the player isn't willing to give. But this leads to an extremely easy exploit: you always make all things red and get rid of the annoying AI civs.

One workaround might be to make these "threats" more real. For example, when the AI comes demanding something, he should also have the dignity to declare war if it receives a "NO" as answer. On the other hand, a friendly AI would have the ability to ask for any gift, without the obligation of declaring war on refusal (just like the player doesn't get negative modifiers when he asks for gifts). Of course, the same rules would apply to the player also (when demanding, he should be forced to declare war upon refusal). To prevent exploits, you could also make that after the "gift" or "ransom" a 10 turns peace treaty is signed.
 
atreas said:
If I understood correctly, the issue isn't to give the player the ability to ask (and get) what he wants, but just to prevent AI from asking things from the player, which the player isn't willing to give. But this leads to an extremely easy exploit: you always make all things red and get rid of the annoying AI civs.
Click to expand...
That's one of the issues being discussed - and the one that actually has some amount of credence to it. The other issue being discussed, and the one johnny was mentioning, is precisely what I said.
 
atreas said:
One workaround might be to make these "threats" more real. For example, when the AI comes demanding something, he should also have the dignity to declare war if it receives a "NO" as answer.
Click to expand...
This effectively does happen now. I've said no to something and right afterwards the AI declared war. The diplomatic modifier dropped by me saying "no" too many times. That was the last straw for the AI.
 
does anyone know if the size of your army (or bank account) affects what items are redded out? because that, i think, is very relevant to the issue of the AI being unwilling to even discuss the trade. basically, it already took your threats/bribes into account. but i think the point about no negative trade modifiers for refusing help between AI is valid. i notice that the AI trade tech pretty freely, but if i have montezuma, who's furious at me for declaring war on him and crippling his civilization, asking me for astronomy the turn after i pop it from a goody hut with an explorer in a caravel, then some AI somewhere should be making similar unreasonable demands on another AI, and being refused, causing negative modifiers. i think this is a legitimate complaint, although some people seem to see it akin to complaining about AI advantages on higher levels, it's not level specific. it would seem to me that the AI red out items for each civ, based on relations, and that AI's don't bother asking for redded out items, thereby creating a big old love train.
 
naterator said:
does anyone know if the size of your army (or bank account) affects what items are redded out? because that, i think, is very relevant to the issue of the AI being unwilling to even discuss the trade. basically, it already took your threats/bribes into account. but i think the point about no negative trade modifiers for refusing help between AI is valid. i notice that the AI trade tech pretty freely, but if i have montezuma, who's furious at me for declaring war on him and crippling his civilization, asking me for astronomy the turn after i pop it from a goody hut with an explorer in a caravel, then some AI somewhere should be making similar unreasonable demands on another AI, and being refused, causing negative modifiers. i think this is a legitimate complaint, although some people seem to see it akin to complaining about AI advantages on higher levels, it's not level specific. it would seem to me that the AI red out items for each civ, based on relations, and that AI's don't bother asking for redded out items, thereby creating a big old love train.
Click to expand...

This is an extremely valid and important point. I always have "Aggressive AIs" mode switched on, and even on higher levels, Civ IV is a much more peaceful game than CIV III. Most leaders will very rarely go to war with each other, and in many games, some nations will avoid war for their entire history.

The above post made me think that the quoted statement maybe part of the reason. If a nation is Pleased with the player..but over the next few hundred years, a few begging requests go unheeded, this will probably lower to Cautious. If this cycle continues unheeded, the next stage will be closed borders, this resulting in more negative modifiers. If more requests go unheeded, eventually this will / may result in war.

If the AI nations never enter this cycle with each other, then the Pleased lvl (for example through shared religion, open borders, trades) will remain just that, unless some severe action is undertaken by one of them. And I have noticed that if nations have an Annoyed lvl with each other, it can remain this way almost indefinitately, it only seems to deteriorate if one enters a war (either with each other or another party).

Anyone who has played even a few times, knows how easy it is to go from annoyed to furious (you refused us help / you refused to stop trading with "x" / you refused us help during war time). If it is true that inter AI diplomacy never suffers from these penalties, then to me it would explain a lot.

Btw the above is just a statement of observation, not a complaint, but for me the game would be more interesting with more fluctuating relationships betweeb the AI nations.
 
You all are missing the point...


Those requests from the AI are there to give you a chance to improve your relations. If you give them what they want you get a +1...


If it didn't work this way how would you ever improve relations up from the level where they stop trading with you?

Its not that they're demanding something, they're saying "our relations are not so good, maybe you'd like to spend some money improving them?" If you don't want to and you're ok with them being annoyed just say no.

If the AI didn't ask for anything at all then once you got to annoyed you'd pretty much just be doomed to always be hostile to that civilization for the rest of the game as you couldn't make any trades and any gifts you'd make would be subject to the unsolicited donation penalty (which itself is good, you shouldn't be able to just buy up good will without the other party being interested in letting you, if you just randomly gave a human in muliplayer 2 or 3 techs and then said "now you can't go to war with me" they'd pretty much just laugh at you)
 
Dracleath said:
You all are missing the point...


Those requests from the AI are there to give you a chance to improve your relations. If you give them what they want you get a +1...


If it didn't work this way how would you ever improve relations up from the level where they stop trading with you?

Its not that they're demanding something, they're saying "our relations are not so good, maybe you'd like to spend some money improving them?" If you don't want to and you're ok with them being annoyed just say no.

If the AI didn't ask for anything at all then once you got to annoyed you'd pretty much just be doomed to always be hostile to that civilization for the rest of the game as you couldn't make any trades and any gifts you'd make would be subject to the unsolicited donation penalty (which itself is good, you shouldn't be able to just buy up good will without the other party being interested in letting you, if you just randomly gave a human in muliplayer 2 or 3 techs and then said "now you can't go to war with me" they'd pretty much just laugh at you)
Click to expand...
Almost always the relations bonus is not worth giving up a tech. The only time it is useful for me is when trying to convert someone to your religion who has another religion. It is exceptionally annoying when you first discover alphabet because you get 5 moochers each turn, and alphabet is the one tech you want to deny the AI until one of them discovers it.

Also if a human player demanded you tribute in multiplayer, you gave him the tribute and said "now you can't go to war with me" he will laugh at you too. You just showed him that you can be bullied into getting what he wants.
 
Meffy said:
And it reflects the real world pretty accurately. Far too accurately to be pleasant. But it's how things are.

The AIs want to beat you. You're far smarter than the AIs. So they have to use other methods to keep you from getting too strong, to defeat you if they can. Why wouldn't they do everything in their power to do so?

Yes, it can be frustrating. Okay, all kinds of things can be frustrating. There are two useful choices for how to react -- deal with it or mod it -- and one futile choice -- complain here and hope the devs change the way it works.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with complaining just to vent. Doesn't achieve anything but blowing off steam isn't just for civs that have railroads. ;-)
Click to expand...

(I know this was posted a while back, I havent been to active lately) :(

But as constantly argued the game isnt a model of reality. An alternative strategy to the AI is getting good relations with you and try to obtain an alliance. Now, I do admit every Ai should not go for this strategy in a game as there should always be warmongers. But as is, the AIs all react in the same way all the others do (some are just more annoying about it than others) and as pointed out in this thread or another I dont see -/+'s towards other AI for demanding tribute and such.

Add in the difficulty meter for allowing the AI to get cheaper stuff and then force you to cave, handing over techs while they rarely have to, mixed with no penalty for trading with YOUR worst enemy to your knowledge and you have an off balanced AI. Of course, you could know if they trade... or suspect it if you go into your diplomatic relations anytime you see a score modification update... this would mean keeping track of everyone's score simultaneously and not forgetting to check it every turn.

EDIT: I love when in my last game with Agg AI Hatty came to me asking for help wanting some tech, I believe it was Polytheism. I gave her help and she went to Annoyed from Cautious. had a +1 Open Borders and a +1 you gave us help. But her score I believed made her feel better than me suddenly. Its not balanced.

Please help us Flevance, England is getting riled up.
Grr. OK here.
Screw you jack@ss!
 
LeConquerant said:
Salamandre,
well the computer players, are just computer players. They are not willing to be challenged, they did not pay the 50-60€ to get the game, and none of them will go complaining you're getting more interactions from other computer players than they do.

I am not sure I voiced it that clear, but IMHO, I can not care less if it is more or less challenging for the AI than it is for me: it only depends on the difficulty setting you have. I often get asked tributes several times in a row when i am weak, but I do the same repeated demands on lower civ's before attacking them, just in case I can grab some more. And I often accept peace treaties + tributes only to stack up armies for ten turns, and tehn demand tributes again, and then attack again.

Luckily there is no forum for computer players complaining how unfair we can be to them....[/QUOTE]

lol

Mr. Bit: I'm done with this stupid @#$%ing game.

Mr. Byte: Why's that.

Mr. Bit: 'cause every time i play a game against this frikkin' noob he turns his difficulty down to cheiftain and i'm behind the 8ball right from the start.

Mr. Byte: But you always win.

Mr. Bit: That's not the point!!!
Click to expand...
 
Steve3000 said:
Mr. Bit: I'm done with this stupid @#$%ing game.
Mr. Byte: Why's that.
Mr. Bit: 'cause every time i play a game against this frikkin' noob he turns his difficulty down to cheiftain and i'm behind the 8ball right from the start.
Mr. Byte: But you always win.
Mr. Bit: That's not the point!!!
Click to expand...

yeees or

1.61 human exploits not fixed!!!
Duuuuuud that freaking game does not make any sense, we're stacking up gallions and frigates in cities, and despite that, those F&B (flesh 'n' bones) keep on attacking them, unharmed. It's clearly an exploit that unlike in civilisation I, we can't defend our cities with ships!, when is a mod coming? what's Firaxis doing here?
:lol:




Edit: replaced stardock by Firaxis... confused by galciv2 i am
 
Talking of human exploits, made me think of the worst of them all, and then I got to imagining...what if...the AI could reload the game.:wow:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
The AI Horatius League
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
Keler
Keler
T
AI League 2.0
Replies
12
Views
533
Thrasybulos
T
T
AI Survivor - Alternate Histories AI Ranking
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
11K
Thrasybulos
T
Keler
AI Survivor Switchheroo
2 3
Replies
43
Views
6K
Genghis the Barbarian
G
Keler
AI on AI- earliest elimination record you ever experienced?
Replies
16
Views
2K
Thrasybulos
T
Back
Top Bottom