Diplo hit that really needs fixed

[Veneke]

...

I'm not claiming to come up with a grand solution to this, and I honestly don't know if one really exists. I'm just saying that CIV does a relatively good job at balancing some peoples wishes at having a game in which the AI competes to win (a GAME) while having a game in which the AI does a bit of roleplaying at the same time.

On that point I agree. I certainly don't recall having the same problem getting into CIV that I had getting into CiV. It's certainly better now but the crux of the problem is essentially the same as it was at CiV's release - nobody understands why the AI does as it does. Even if you take apart the XML and take paper notes the whole game (which to my shame I've done) you'd be hard-pressed to understand the AI's foreign policy. If there's a single more immersion-breaking and/or frustrating feature in CiV other than the erratic/unclear diplomatic system I'd be very surprised.

Just a minor clarification but I assume when you say 'to play its role as near as possible to its historical context' you mean conduct its diplomacy with respect to its ingame situation adjusted for flavour rather than anything more prescriptive, like England and France hate each other until the late game, then become friends.

 

[Heinage]

...Just a minor clarification but I assume when you say 'to play its role as near as possible to its historical context' you mean conduct its diplomacy with respect to its ingame situation adjusted for flavour rather than anything more prescriptive, like England and France hate each other until the late game, then become friends.

yeah precisely flavour-wise role.

Not to the point where history is just being replayed

 

[Smokeybear]

Yeah, which is why in all of the civ games, I have never believed in even a wee bit of immersion or roleplaying or other nonsense like that. All of the civ games (except Civ3 ) in the series have their great points but the nature of the games do force you, somewhat, to play within their limitations, esp. at higher difficulties. There are some incredible fun ways to play Civ5 without bothering with the diplomacy stuff. I'm just strange and very biased that way.

Yep, to each their own I still enjoy the game very much, and am liking G&K a lot. It's no show-stopper that the AI diplo is holier than a swiss cheese, just one of the remaining annoyances I wish they'd eventually address.

 

[Smokeybear]

Of course. But those of us in the latter group want Firaxis to work more on it being a better, more challenging game (e.g., Civ6) instead of trying to dumb it down for the former group.

Seriously, if it is balanced between two disparate play-styles, then it doesn't succeed at either. I think the Civ5 model has great potential to being a difficult, challenging game but that's what they have to focus on.

Tut, tut! I'm not in any 'group' asking for the game to be dumbed down. I was just pointing out that there are a number of AI diplo actions that are extremely hard to classify as anything but mistakes or sloppy coding, allowing the AI to do completely idiotic and inexcusable things like accusing you of settling too close to them during the same turn as they plop down a city right in your freakin' coat closet, for example. I doubt that is 'working as intended', it's just an example of coding sloppiness that has yet to be fixed. And very much needs to be.

 

[Jabberwockxeno]

Hopefully, the DLL will be out soon and someone will fix this.

 

[compwiz1202]

I just had a funny one. I'm playing as France and it is around 1800 or so. I built my 4 cities thousands of years ago. Alexander suddenly pops up and tells me to stop settling near him. I haven't settled anything in forever.

The one thing I wonder is if my culture (I am going culture victory) took one of his tiles somewhere.

It's probably the same thing I hate. I already built my city, then like a century later Ramsses plops down a city right by me and tells ME not to settle near HIM

I don't think I ever saw natural culture hex acquisition anger a civ, but they don't like it when you buy hexes near them.

I always assume I'll be at war with my nearest neighbor.

It's true pretty much 100% of the time.

Definitely unless it's Settler. It mostly works to do anything you can to get the positive modifiers as long as it's not an aggressive civ, although sometimes that doesn't last for long either.

 

[Peng Qi]

The AI is far too irrational when it comes to diplomacy with the player. It makes any possibility of forging an alliance futile and a waste of resources when all the AI do is:

- Ask you for your resources (without payment)

Refusing this gives no hit anymore.

- Ask you to go to war and then hate you with a passion when you win it for them (the hell?)

If you make off like a bandit in a war and they get jack squat, hell yes they'll hate you for it. I would too.

- Suddenly thinks all your land is rightfully theirs despite having no previous grieves.

Maybe you shouldn't make yourself such an appealing target.

- Bribes your long-time city-state allies and tells you to gtfo.

That message is only so that you know what city states they're trying to influence, and that it will cause friction if you keep fighting over it. Kind of like real life.

- Attack you when you are close allies but you are in a war (or just at random).

No DOF=not allies. AI lies to you all the time about how much it likes you. Stop letting it dupe you.

- Steals your technology (or tries to).

So...you're saying that you should get to steal from AIs...but they shouldn't get to steal from you?

- Makes you pay for their research agreements.

They only do this if you are significantly ahead.

- Wants open borders to destroy your religion.

Again, an AI that actually likes you won't do this. It sounds like you're getting tricked a lot.

- Hates you for defending yourself against a third party (seriously?).
- and so on.

You mean for "defending" yourself by crushing and destroying them? Yeah they don't like that.