Diplomacy AI Development

CppMaster said:
Yeah, that is strange. @Recursive IMHO a civ shouldn't want to pass this resolution if the civ controls less than average of natural wonders. What do you think?
Click to expand...

What if it would help an ally that's opposed to the civ's enemy? That's the issue with the World Congress..you can't just think about yourself. :)
 
CppMaster said:
Oh ok. I thought that AIs like this resolution no matter what.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, I still need to take a detailed look at voting logic. My point is just that it isn't quite that simple!
 
I looked at the logic for this and it's quite simplistic - it just checks how many World/Natural Wonders the player has.

Code: 
    // Cultural Heritage Sites
   if (pProposal->GetEffects()->iCulturePerWonder != 0)
   {
       int iNumWonders = GetPlayer()->GetNumWonders();
       int iTempScore = -50;
       if (iNumWonders > 0)
       {
           int iFactor = bSeekingCultureVictory ? 5 : 2;
           iTempScore += iNumWonders * iFactor;
       }
       iScore += iTempScore;
       iScore = MIN(70, iScore);
   }
   // Natural Heritage Sites
   if (pProposal->GetEffects()->iCulturePerNaturalWonder != 0)
   {
       int iNumNaturalWonders = GetPlayer()->GetNumNaturalWondersInOwnedPlots();
       int iTempScore = -35;
       if (iNumNaturalWonders > 0)
       {
           int iFactor = bSeekingCultureVictory ? 20 : 15;
#if defined(MOD_BALANCE_CORE)
           if (MOD_BALANCE_CORE) {
               iFactor = bSeekingCultureVictory ? 50 : 30;
           }
#endif
           iTempScore += iNumNaturalWonders * iFactor;
       }
       iScore += iTempScore;
       iScore = MIN(70, iScore);
   }
 
Ok, so AI doesn't look at others for this proposal. It only counts how many World and Natural Wonders it has. Therefore AI could vote for it even if it would get the least from that, making its situation relatively worse. I would vote otherwise in that case.
 
CppMaster said:
Ok, so AI doesn't look at others for this proposal. It only counts how many World and Natural Wonders it has. Therefore AI could vote for it even if it would get the least from that, making it's situation relatively worse. I would vote otherwise in that case.
Click to expand...

I think you're taking this too literally, usually i play with comunitas with all (8)civs in one big continent and another unexplored continent, so there are a lot of natural wonders sometimes we get to Modern Era and there are still 1/2 Natural Wonders to settle, what I mean is, it would be dumb if just because the AI doesn't have a NaturalW when the voting occurs doesn't mean it's smart to vote against it...
If there are no more possible NaturalW to settle than it's only logical for the AI to vote against that if it doens't have any. That's my take on it :undecide:

EDIT: I had a few ortographic mistakes ahah
 
Carloshooter said:
I think you're taking this too literally, usually i play with comunitas with all (8)civs in one big continent and another unexplored continent, so there are a lot of natural wonders sometimes we get to Modern Era and there are still 1/2 Natural Wonders to settle, what I mean is, it would be dumb if just because the AI doesn't have a NaturalW when the voting occurs doesn't mean it's smart to vote against it...
If there are no more possible NaturalW to settle than it's only logical for the AI to vote against that if it doens't have any. That's my take on it :undecide:
Click to expand...
What do you mean I take this code too literally? Should I read between the lines? It's not exactly a poem :D
I'm not saying that AI should vote against that. AI shouldn't vote for it when it would benefit the least from that resolution, no? (It could vote for it just to improve relations with others, but it's not in the code that was pasted here)
JamesNinelives said:
Seems a bit of a niche situation. In games I've played if you have a natural wonder it's usually in your interest to vote for that resolution. Having more than one is kinda rare.
Click to expand...
It's not rare at all at that stage, when some civs conquer territories. Also not only Natural Wonders count, but World Wonders too and disparity here is almost always.
 
CppMaster said:
What do you mean I take this code too literally? Should I read between the lines? It's not exactly a poem :D
I'm not saying that AI should vote against that. AI shouldn't vote for it when it would benefit the least from that resolution, no? (It could vote for it just to improve relations with others, but it's not in the code that was pasted here)

It's not rare at all at that stage, when some civs conquer territories. Also not only Natural Wonders count, but World Wonders too and disparity here is almost always.
Click to expand...

I'll revise WC logic as part of my interaction rework.
 
CppMaster said:
Ok, you're right! My bad. Still, I don't consider having more than 1 Natural Wonder as a rare case.
Click to expand...
Tend to agree. Theoretically the logic should overweight Civs who are rivals and/or who are winning the game.

I always thought it was silly that everyone always loved the Natural Wonder resolution — although arguably there's a place for people-pleaser resolutions too, I guess.
 
CppMaster said:
What do you mean I take this code too literally? Should I read between the lines? It's not exactly a poem :D
I'm not saying that AI should vote against that. AI shouldn't vote for it when it would benefit the least from that resolution, no? (It could vote for it just to improve relations with others, but it's not in the code that was pasted here).
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about something else not the code ahah (sorry). The way you wrote it(or I read it) I understood that you wanted to say that they "needed" to vote against. I totally agree with you, they should not vote in favour of something that they would not benefit in any way, unless their vote is bought of course :thumbsup:
 
Carloshooter said:
I thought you were talking about something else not the code ahah (sorry). The way you wrote it(or I read it) I understood that you wanted to say that they "needed" to vote against. I totally agree with you, they should not vote in favour of something that they would not benefit in any way, unless their vote is bought of course :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
I think @CppMaster 's point is that if your yields increase by (say) 1% and every other player's benefits by 5%, then you don't actually "benefit" in the sense that Civ is a game where only one player can win.
 
wobuffet said:
I think @CppMaster 's point is that if your yields increase by (say) 1% and every other player's benefits by 5%, then you don't actually "benefit" in the sense that Civ is a game where only one player can win.
Click to expand...
But if one of those civs that benefits a lot is your ally, then that would also change things. It seems even a fairly simple proposal is more complicated than it seems :crazyeye:.
 
InkAxis said:
But if one of those civs that benefits a lot is your ally, then that would also change things. It seems even a fairly simple proposal is more complicated than it seems :crazyeye:.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but does AI consider it? It's not evident from this code.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BaldSamson
AI Cancels New Defense Pact
Replies
4
Views
651
BaldSamson
BaldSamson
Y
Question about Tradeable Cities with AI
Replies
5
Views
692
azum4roll
A
Alpakinator
How strong AI do you like to play against?
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
rkkn
R
Tekamthi
ancient era war/peace
Replies
4
Views
868
Fluffball
F
G
Easy money
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tekamthi
Tekamthi
Back
Top Bottom