******** AI Penalty System

[agoodfella]

I made my first "tribute" demand from a Civ I am about to pummel into the ground (hoping that it might trigger them to declare war on me).

well, they paid it, which gave me:

- 2 "arrogant demand"

Thing is, I currently have "-4" for trading with their worst enemy.

Shouldn't an ultimatum for all of their gold be considered at least as bad if not worse than trading with their enemy???

 

[Mercade]

Yes, I'd say that demanding gold is an offensive action towards them that should result in a severely negative opinion of them. I don't know what the penalty you get for actually declaring war with them, but extortion should be quite bad, too. I wouldn't necessarily say that trading with their worst enemy should be a lesser offense, but it is within reason to expect them to be somewhat in line. Could be, though, that the trade penalty is related to the duration and the amount of the trade. If you extort them a 2nd time, I suppose their opinion of you will shrink further.

 

[tfroggydawg]

I agree, I was playing a game today and had half the world turn against me and basically I got owned because of a number of stupid ways i gained bad reputation.

I am thinking the system needs tweaking or I need to learn to manipulate it better.

one of those

 

[rube203]

That's nothing... if I recall correctly when I nuked the AI... it read "-2: You nuked us." ... It's possible that it was -4 and I just am remembering wrong, however, either way, I sent two ICBMS at them and because of religion and other factors, they were still pleased with me.

 

[upstart]

yeah...things like taking two of their cities(one being their bejing, their old capital) should really put a rather big dent in relationships, rather than just being slightly worse than making an arrogant demand...

i say there should be -10 and -100(enemies for life) penalties instead of -1's or max -4 for everything.

 

[Nvim]

The penalties are far more severe at higher difficulty levels, I don't think it is much different numerically, it is just the AI is a lot more sensitive to it from my experience.

As to hatred for life, in real life America launched two nuclear weapons at Japan in WW2 and have been for a very long time now fairly close and cooperative, I think the AI is as realistic as we can afford when it comes to playability.

It is very easy to tick off the AI's at higher difficulties, if I was hated for life for taking over some cities the game would be extremely difficult considering it is more or less everyone vs you, despite the AI's going at eachother they help eachother a lot more than they help you.

 

[Runriot]

yeah...things like taking two of their cities(one being their bejing, their old capital) should really put a rather big dent in relationships, rather than just being slightly worse than making an arrogant demand...

i say there should be -10 and -100(enemies for life) penalties instead of -1's or max -4 for everything.

I launched 6 ICBMs at the French in my last game. 3 to individual cities, and a group of 3 into their capitol...

wound up with a -90 You NUKED us!

 

[lachiendupape]

I launched 6 ICBMs at the French in my last game. 3 to individual cities, and a group of 3 into their capitol...

well done i say (see my englishm,en vs french thread)!

 

[Lobox]

Its little irritating that the AI gets angry for me trading with the other nations and also that they demand so many times to break the treatys.

And why do they get angry when I dont like to go to war on theirs enemys?

 

[TerraHero]

What i find anoying is when they ask you for something, its "No we wont give you" and sometimes even get you -x "Arrogant Demand"

But if tehy "ask" you something and you say no in return you get -x "Refused to help us"

Its a bit of a lose-lose situation, you cant ask them anything or your arrogant, and if you turn them down in return you are refusing them help, either way YOU are the bad-boy in there eyes.

 

[Elhoim]

Thing is, I currently have "-4" for trading with their worst enemy.

The point is that perhaps you traded with more than one enemy, and it all falls in the same category...

 

[IglooDame]

What i find anoying is when they ask you for something, its "No we wont give you" and sometimes even get you -x "Arrogant Demand"

But if tehy "ask" you something and you say no in return you get -x "Refused to help us"

Its a bit of a lose-lose situation, you cant ask them anything or your arrogant, and if you turn them down in return you are refusing them help, either way YOU are the bad-boy in there eyes.

Which strikes me as pretty realistic, all things considered.

 

[Kwyjibo]

It sort of depends on wether to consider your question for their gold as a call for help (they consider themselves more powerfull than you) or if they see it as extortion. I have had several games where some civ asks you some tech, and you give it to them, then later you ask them to return the favour and they will without negative effect (unless off course you are being unreasonable).

BTW, lachiendupape, why don't you keep your hatred towards the French to the other thread? That way I can just ignore that childish thread.

 

[agoodfella]

Well an update.

I saved my game, went to war and nuked the Civ I was extorting just to see what happened:

- 3 for nuking them!
- 4 for trading with their worst enemy!!!!!
- 14 for extorting them

Huh?!?!?!?!

It's just a stupid flaw in my opinion.

Getting nuked should always be the WORST possible thing that one Civ can do to another. Period.

 

[weasel77066]

Just curious, did you notice the other civs in the world and how their opinion changed of you? (after you nuked someone) That would be funny if 'ground zero' had a -3 factor and all your naighbors had a -15factor...

edit: Also there are a lot worse things than being dead. You could make them red

 

[Pushead]

Its a bit of a lose-lose situation, you cant ask them anything or your arrogant, and if you turn them down in return you are refusing them help, either way YOU are the bad-boy in there eyes.

Yeah, but you forget that you have your own +/- system that the computer doesn't see. Maybe you have a -9 gazillion against them for not giving into your request, and a -3 for arrogant demands. Declare war and smack them into submission.

 

[dh_epic]

It's not a question just of how much it bothers them.

It's a question of how much it angers them to RETALIATE.

Getting nuked and threatened may seem like horrible things. But when you think about retaliating against a bully, let alone a nuclear bully, sometimes you have to swallow your pride. In other words, yes, you would be -10 for them doing something horrible to you, but you'd be +8 because you are that afraid of them.

Otherwise a weak AI would be stupid enough to go to war with someone who has the power to slaughter them.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Which, of course, was a speciality of the CivIII AI.

 

[Khaim]

I must say that the "trading with worst enemy" bit is really annoying. I've had -4 from that even when I was totally destroying said worst enemy in a war. I sure wasn't trading then, but the -4 penalty wouldn't go away. I'm rather suprised it finally disappear when I eliminated the rival civ...

 

[Oni]

I think some of the things make since. Penalties shouldnt just go away... But after certain actions (espeacially by the AI civ them selves) the numbers need to adjust.

I declared war on a civ... Other civs gave the penalty for declaring war on their friend. HOWEVER, I got them to go to war with them also. Now, I can maybe understand that... BUT, eventually the war ended as I conquered what I wanted out of the war. After a few turns of peace, one of the civs I asked to delcare war with me (and which was giving me a -ve penalty for warring with their friend), asked me to go to war with them.

Why would they want me to war with their so called 'friend'. If they are going to request me to go to war the penalty for my having warred with them should certainly go away. ESPEACIALLY after I am at peace.

Now you think that would be it.. Well this is where it gets really stupid.

I didnt want to war with them of course. So i rejected the proposal. So then I received a -ve penalty for not warring when they requested.

So in the end I was getting a -ve penalty for warring with their friend which I was now at peace with) and a -ve penalty for not assisting them in a war against their so called 'friend'.


Now that is just bassackwards and needs to be fixed.