Begging AI

[Honorable_Pawn]

Yeah. I think you should get positive bonuses from stuff like that. Like if Toku demands I declare war on Augustus (to pick random names), and I decline, while I should get the penalty from Toku, I should get a positive "+1 You refused a request to declare war on us" bonus.

That at least would balance it off.

Bh

Great Idea!!!

 

[Seven05]

Well, it's not as easy or convenient. In order to make this work, I needed to add a couple new "Memory" conditions. That causes a change in the save game format (because it has to save those conditions), so it's incompatible with other games.

I'll probably release it as part of a mod at some point, if I ever get my "personal" one to the point where I think it'd be widely appreciated.

Bh

How 'bout a 'quick' how-to in the SDK/Python forum for the rest of us with personal mods that haven't been released yet?

 

[skallben]

Yes, I do find their nagging faces so damn annoying sometimes. Especially in late-game. I wish I could just put some of them on ignore list. Or at least have the possibility to say "No I won't join your goddamn war against the Germans. And do not ask me that same stupid question every damn new years eve, Bonehead"

 

[Imrahil91]

Well, it's not as easy or convenient. In order to make this work, I needed to add a couple new "Memory" conditions. That causes a change in the save game format (because it has to save those conditions), so it's incompatible with other games.

I'll probably release it as part of a mod at some point, if I ever get my "personal" one to the point where I think it'd be widely appreciated.

Bh

Ok, thanks anyway

 

[IronCrown]

Diplomacy is fine and balanced as it is now. Mastering diplomacy is an important aspect of the game and shouldn't be easy. In reality almost every action that pleases someone will displease someone else. If you have bad relations with a nation, those relations will probably deteriorate further unless you make an effort to improve them.

As a rule, it is usually prudent to gift techs and even go to war, unless the leader asking for it is your enemy anyway or so weak that you don't care whether he likes you or not.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Yeah. I think you should get positive bonuses from stuff like that. Like if Toku demands I declare war on Augustus (to pick random names), and I decline, while I should get the penalty from Toku, I should get a positive "+1 You refused a request to declare war on us" bonus.

That at least would balance it off.

Bh

I think that's an excellent suggestion.

 

[IronCrown]

It destroys the balance of the diplomacy system. AIs ask you to join their wars all the time, so you're going to get huge diplomatic boosts with those you refuse to declare war on. If there's an advantage in such a refusal, the AI has to be rewritten so that it only asks when a) it really, really needs your assistance and b) knows that you are likely to help them. But the AI has no way to know this.

Besides, not joining a war against a nation isn't really something they would be overly thankful for. If Britain asked Germany to invade France, a refusal would only be what the French would take for granted

Usually a request for a military alliance will be made via secret diplomacy, so the would-be victim won't even know that they asked you and you refused them.

 

[lex_kravetski]

I think we need mod. Not only for bonuses but for AI vs AI trading too.

 

[krille]

Some help on the way:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6617315&postcount=6

 

[magicalsushi]

It destroys the balance of the diplomacy system. AIs ask you to join their wars all the time, so you're going to get huge diplomatic boosts with those you refuse to declare war on. If there's an advantage in such a refusal, the AI has to be rewritten so that it only asks when a) it really, really needs your assistance and b) knows that you are likely to help them. But the AI has no way to know this.

It's true, the AI won't cope with this well. However, note that the human starts off with a massive diplomatic disadvantage in the first place: AIs *never* refuse to go to war when asked to by another AI. I'm not kidding. The reason for this is that they always know in advance what the reply would be if they were to ask, and they don't bother asking if they know the reply would be 'no'. The human players are the only ones whom they'll ask without being sure of getting a 'yes'. This means you will never see the AIs give each other diplomatic penalties for refusing to join wars. A similar issue applies to demands for tribute or requests for help.

In the face of this bias, it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable to mod the game so that the human player gets diplomatic bonuses for refusing requests to join a war. However, we all know that it would make diplomacy too easy. At the end of the day, the diplomacy system in Civ 4 needs to be rewritten. It's better than it was in previous games, but there's plenty of room for improvement.

 

[krille]

Just make the penalty for refusing a(ny) request(s) very temporary... That's what I'm going to do. (Spam penalties should not last very long imho.)

 

[oranges]

Diplomacy is anything but fine and balanced. Sure, you can learn to work within the current system, but that does not make it good. Why and in what way would it be wrong to get a diplo bonus if you refuse to declare a war on someone? I would actually like to same to apply when I refuse to stop trading with a civ (just for roleplaying purposes, I would like to be able to say "sure, if you'll provide those resources to me" as a way to say bug off).

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Diplomacy is anything but fine and balanced. Sure, you can learn to work within the current system, but that does not make it good. Why and in what way would it be wrong to get a diplo bonus if you refuse to declare a war on someone? I would actually like to same to apply when I refuse to stop trading with a civ (just for roleplaying purposes, I would like to be able to say "sure, if you'll provide those resources to me" as a way to say bug off).

Someone already mentioned this, but i guess it needs to be reiterated: If a nation A asks nation B to go to war with them against an enemy (C), the request isn't shown to C. Only if B accepts the request and declares war on C will C ever know that A asked B (is this confusing?). If B denies the request, C will never find out that A asked B to join the war. Thus, there can be no bonus for "not going to war" since nation C would never know of the request. Same thing with stop-trade requests.

In this case, gameplay isn't being effected negatively enough to merit making the game more unrealistic.

Also, I find it slightly absurd that people are having a lot of trouble with diplomacy. I usually end up with "Friendly" rivals in the top scoring spots and anything else (usually Cautious to Furious) being in the last places. You just have to choose your friends, appease them well, and realize that nations can never be friends with everyone.

 

[Landmonitor]

Totally agree with IronCrown on that one.

I like how this part of the game works; if you want strong allies, you have to make enemies, otherwise you'll end up "cautious" with everyone. I like when you can pay for a bad modifier wedding gift.

 

[Al Capwn]

I like when you can pay for a bad modifier wedding gift.

I had that one pop up in a recent game...one of the AI's was upset because we had different religions and some couple decided to have the wedding according to my civ's religion instead of the AI's religion. I chose the option to "hold a national celebration and feast to honor the couple".
AI instantly declared war.
I did, however, get a +1 (maybe even +2 or +3) diplomacy boost to all other AI's that shared my state religion. It was fun.

 

[Al Capwn]

Another diplomacy thing I don't like is that negative modifiers seem to last for millenia. For instance, in a current game, I razed a Russian city (or maybe 2 or three ) around 1000BC. Then after discovering vassalage I DoW'd Russia again and got them to capitulate.
Fast forward 2700 years! and the Russians still have a -6 "You razed one of our cities" modifier against me?!?!
Are you kidding me? I would've thought that events that transpired over 2 millenia ago would've cooled off a bit by now. I can't think of ANY real life equivalent to holding a grudge for 2700 years.

 

[oranges]

At least you've razed on of their cities. I'm stuck with you declared war on our friend with three leaders in 1800 for obliterating Willem immediately after discovering bronze working. The only reason they were all friends is that we all share my Judaism religion. Two of three only new Willem because they managed to get a workboat to his border shortly before I conquered his third and last city. I guess those fishermen ties are hard to break

 

[Landmonitor]

These things just reflect long-standing divisions between people. This is totally realistic for nations and groups of people that have a very long history together.

Also, I've had fine relations with non-Russian AI that I have a couple of -2 modifiers for certain wars with. They don't really care overall if "you've wisely chosen your civics" and if they "care for [their] brothers and sisters of the faith".

 

[Supr49er]

Yeah. I think you should get positive bonuses from stuff like that. Like if Toku demands I declare war on Augustus (to pick random names), and I decline, while I should get the penalty from Toku, I should get a positive "+1 You refused a request to declare war on us" bonus.

That at least would balance it off.

Bh

This would be very balanced. It also needs to include a +1 "You refused to cancel trade with us" bonus.

 

[r_rolo1]

I concur with much of what it said so far: all the AI diplo system needs a complete rewriting....

A small example of my latest SG: Pericles is in war with Boudica ( #1 in power ) for ages and lacks oil. He asks me, with the usual AI politeness, if I want to give them it for free .... I decided that he's surely needing it and go to the table... bought some sushies and metals with the oil and still got some pocket gpt. Some turns later the guy Dows me....

I do understand why did that happened: I refused the demand and the guy decided ASAP to DoW me, regardless of what happened later... But IMHO if I am in war with a big power, maybe it is not a good idea to attack the guy that is providing me with a vital war resource, regardless of how pissed am I with him This kind of behaviour is not good for the AI, not good for the human and surely not good both for the Firaxis idolized "fun" and for RL appearance...

And @ Landmonitor

Surely you have a point in saying that the - diplo of the wars can be rationalized like that.... but Civ IV AI has no self interest "genes" on it, especially the self preservation: You can start eating the AI you want and if they aren't friends of a particular AI ,they would not give a d@mn, even if that means that the erase of their long time enemy is only the prelude of their own fall..... in RL even England and France swallowed their mutual and multisecular hate when Germany became menancing enough, just to give a example, or Athens and Sparta together vs the persians, Thebes and Alexander.....