AI Diplomacy deals is broken

[darko82]

Could you point us to one of the many AI programmers in this forum?

Amazing. Which, of the many AI programmers in this forum, has confirmed such a bold claim?

In short, is there any truth to anything you just said Takfloyd?

Please answer, I'm honestly interested.

Many people just refrain from ******* on Firaxis here. But the negativity is getting everywhere. Go to CP subforum, for instance. It's hard but come on. There should be some boundary.

The game is not finished. My concerns in "Should the game be delayed?" thread are confirmed.

This will hit the sales, too. Because you just cannot tantalize or hoodwink people forever.

 

[Zuizgond]

I gave up trying to trade stuff with AI.

 

[skyclad]

Same problem for me as in civ 5. "What would make this deal work" does not work satisfactory and you are forced to manually enter stuff and guess until its close enough to what you want...

 

[LDiCesare]

Yes I agree with it.
Having a diplomacy AI unable to consistently give the same answer when you propose the same deal is proof of not knowing how to program not test.
Being unable to attack a city is also terrible and not acceptable.

When I look at some code in the lua files, I'm also afraid of the level of programming displayed. Parts of it look like the code has been rushed/not cleaned, parts show that there's a poor understanding of some basic programming concepts.

Other ai issues such as traffic congestion due to 1upt I am more forgiving for.
However, there are basic errors that simply can't be forgiven. Not being able to attack a city is not acceptable. It's probably one of the first things the ai should be taught in the same way the first thing you learn in chess is how to checkmate.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Yes I agree with it.
Having a diplomacy AI unable to consistently give the same answer when you propose the same deal is proof of not knowing how to program not test.
Being unable to attack a city is also terrible and not acceptable.

When I look at some code in the lua files, I'm also afraid of the level of programming displayed. Parts of it look like the code has been rushed/not cleaned, parts show that there's a poor understanding of some basic programming concepts.

Other ai issues such as traffic congestion due to 1upt I am more forgiving for.
However, there are basic errors that simply can't be forgiven. Not being able to attack a city is not acceptable. It's probably one of the first things the ai should be taught in the same way the first thing you learn in chess is how to checkmate.

Thanks for your answer, are you perhaps interested in improving the AI through mods, if that is even possible with the tools they provide?

 

[LDiCesare]

Thanks for your answer, are you perhaps interested in improving the AI through mods, if that is even possible with the tools they provide?

Right now? I doubt it. I only looked at the map generation code and a few xml files so far. I very strongly doubt the routines to code city attack or evaluate diplomacy are opened yet but I didn't look for them.

 

[excommunicatus]

Same here. Kongo, which I have never met, declared war on me And it was me who appeared in the diplomatic screen declaring the war on myself. I declared war on myself

Had this happen, but one-upped. Somehow I declared war on myself around turn 40 in one game. Immediately afterward, America declared war on me, for being such a shameless warmonger. Umm...

 

[Deaga]

Example 3:
Thsi one is more of an UI problem.
Someone sells you something. They offer 1 gold and 1 gpt.
You click gold. It goes up to 101.They still agree. You go on clicking until you find out they will agree to 143gold and 1gpt, but you had to click it by dichotomy instead of the "what would make it work" single click.

This one particular instance looks like a feature. They're lowballing you, maybe you'll take that deal? But they're actually willing to pay more... I see no issue there.

It's the only point where I see no issue, though. As you and many others have said, most of diplomacy/trading is broken.

 

[skyclad]

"Haggling" with the AI is not good play. It just means, with more clicks you get more stuff...
Only if they have values for "favourable deals" which are visible to players. Like, lux for 200 gold is fair, Lux for 100 gold and AI likes you a little. Not just, click more and get more and thats it.

 

[bladex]

not only is it broken but a few turns usually after accepting a deal the AI will do a surprise war on you especially if you let them in your borders..don't trust any of them!

 

[Cymsdale]

This one particular instance looks like a feature. They're lowballing you, maybe you'll take that deal? But they're actually willing to pay more... I see no issue there.

if "haggling" is an intended feature, that is dumb. Strategy games have moved past this, for good reason.

 

[Victoria]

It seem to work fine.... just nag the AI enough and it gives in

 

[Deaga]

"Haggling" with the AI is not good play. It just means, with more clicks you get more stuff...
Only if they have values for "favourable deals" which are visible to players. Like, lux for 200 gold is fair, Lux for 100 gold and AI likes you a little. Not just, click more and get more and thats it.

I'm not arguing wether that is good or bad design, but it does seem like something that could be intentional. I feel like it's a nice design for the more casual players, who may feel like master negotiators doing so. Of course, for seasoned players, it's pretty bad and just reduces to more clicks, as you've said. And it does seem like this "haggling" mechanic is what causes the AI to give everything it has for next to nothing, which is simply terrible design no matter how you look at it.

 

[LDiCesare]

This one particular instance looks like a feature. They're lowballing you, maybe you'll take that deal? But they're actually willing to pay more... I see no issue there.

It's the only point where I see no issue, though. As you and many others have said, most of diplomacy/trading is broken.

If it's a feature, then it's a bad one. Obfuscating the user interface is just downright moronic. It hurts those who want to play well and doesn't bring muchor anything to the more casual players.

 

[Heklios]

The best part is when you manually set up a deal the AI just proposed you, that he then absurdly refuses, and clicking "make that deal fair" leads to a total clown fiesta offer.

Ex:
Kongo proposed me a new deal !
Sugar for Cotton.
Sounds fair.
What about.. you top it off with 2 gold per turn ?
NO.
Fine, fine, Sugar for Cotton then.
NO.
Uh. Er. Aight. What then ?
Your Sugar, Dies, Fur, Iron, 2 Horses, 45 Gold and 17 Gold per turn. For nothing. Gift please. I'm serious.

 

[Brutus2]

The one that frustrates me the most is that when I'm at war with the AI and I offer straight up peace for peace with nothing else on the table they will say "no way to make this work" but if I ask them to add all of their gold and resources suddenly they are happy to make the deal.

That is straight up broken. No way to justify refusing peace unless they get to give me all their stuff.

 

[Barathor]

Once any bugs are resolved, I'd also like to see:

1) The AI offer their highest offer right off the bat; I shouldn't have to fiddle with +/- to see how high they'll go (yeah, I know I don't "have to", but I can't help squeezing them if I can without any penalties).

That, or... turn it into more of a fun bluffing game. You only get so many counter offers (depending on their attitude towards you) before they're insulted or done bargaining with you and they cancel it for a number of turns. This way, there's more risk involved and you have to be careful if you wish to make counter offers with them. Also, sometimes the AI will offer you much lower than they're willing to pay.

I think I'd prefer the simplicity of the former one. Plus, the latter can probably still be gamed once you figure it all out.

2) When pressing the left and right arrows to change gold amounts, have holding Shift change the amount by 10 and holding Ctrl changes the amount by 100. I know I can type it, but I'd prefer to just keep my hand on the mouse and click, click, click.

3) The AI stop offering open borders within their deals! I always have to erase it and then fiddle with the amounts until the AI is happy with the new offer. When I'm interested in having open borders, THEN I'll edit the offers and include it. Until then, keep it off the table; unless the AI really is interested in it and needs it (for example, to help get to another civ they're warring with). Actually... that still has nothing to do with their side of the table, they should still keep their own open borders off it. Again, I'll add it in if I'm interested.

 

[LDiCesare]

Civ 1 had this mechanism of "so many counter offers". If you wanted to speak to an AI too often, it just refused to talk to you.
That is extremely frustrating and leads to save/reload fests. It may be ok in a real time game where stuff happens during the time or you get a delay between asking and getting an answer, but not in a turn based game where the deal should take effect immediately.

 

[plus]

you think that's strange ? try this :
i had tarjan as a neighbour, a tough guy..he had so many luxury resouces,and i only had 2 .and he didnt want to trade any of what i had (which he didnt have) with me!!! eventually i got so pissed at him that i click on demand button (i was sure it'll trigger a war..)and i demanded him 2 luxuries for free. and he accepted ! this game is crazy...

 

[Atwork]

That, or... turn it into more of a fun bluffing game. You only get so many counter offers (depending on their attitude towards you) before they're insulted or done bargaining with you and they cancel it for a number of turns.

I had in mind something like the bargaining system in Witcher 3.