Diplomacy AI Development

Have you ever considered just making an entirely new game?

Yes. But I don't have the funding, resources or manpower to accomplish such a thing. :)
 
Usually I can buy votes from AIs I'm friendly with. I don't see much problem with selling votes also - if they don't contact me, I can contact them instead (though finding out who has a diplomat in my capital can be cumbersome).

Though I know it's been brought up already, I just finished my last civ play through and something that needs tweaking is the AI with everything being "impossible" when it comes to trade deals.
I hate current situation. In Vanilla I could always bribe a warmonger to attack my rivals. Maybe it was exploitable, yes, but it was a working mechanics.
Now they say "impossible" even when they clearly have military capability and I am asking them to attack their enemy . Actually in all my VP games I haven't been able to bribe anyone to war at all.
They're clearly able to attack, so I want them to give me the price, even if it's crazy high, but not this bs "impossible".
 
I get offers for the AI to buy my votes quite a bit. It is rather glitchy though. You can change what the AI wants you to vote for, it seems like when they pass the willing to pay threshold they don't care much what you for vote.
 
Deal AI rework is on my to-do list but it won't be done soon. You'd have to ask Gazebo for interim changes.
 
I get offers for the AI to buy my votes quite a bit. It is rather glitchy though. You can change what the AI wants you to vote for, it seems like when they pass the willing to pay threshold they don't care much what you for vote.

An AI who is willing to pay you for a vote on one subject is often willing to pay you vote on other subjects as well. So I don't see it as a glitch - it works the same whether they approach you or you approach them :).
 
It's still unfair to the AI that you're basically rejecting their offer while forcing them to accept your other stuff instead. I think @Recursive is disallowing changing AI offers next version.
 
It's still unfair to the AI that you're basically rejecting their offer while forcing them to accept your other stuff instead. I think @Recursive is disallowing changing AI offers next version.

I don't really understand where you are coming from? You're not forcing anything on them. You are simply making a counter-offer - they will and do reject it if they don't like it.
 
It's still unfair to the AI that you're basically rejecting their offer while forcing them to accept your other stuff instead. I think @Recursive is disallowing changing AI offers next version.

Nope - that's coming later.

Also, contrary to what has been said here, the AI evaluates each vote choice individually.
 
I don't really understand where you are coming from? You're not forcing anything on them. You are simply making a counter-offer - they will and do reject it if they don't like it.
It's their turn. You aren't supposed to be making any offer. Imagine trying to sell your Incense to an AI during your turn, but the AI counter-offers you 1gpt for your Sugar instead. And you can't make another offer this turn.
 
AI counter-offers you 1gpt for your Sugar instead

I do not understand at all. You refuse of course, and then the interaction is over.
the AI counter-offers you 1gpt for your Sugar instead

You aren't supposed to be making any offer.

The AI does give counter-offers - that's what the 'what will you accept for this?' button is for. And yes, sometimes they make offers that are ridiculous or add items you have no interest in.
And you can't make another offer this turn.

Like you said, Recursive is looking into allowing the AI to make multiple trade offers in a turn.
 
It's their turn. You aren't supposed to be making any offer. Imagine trying to sell your Incense to an AI during your turn, but the AI counter-offers you 1gpt for your Sugar instead. And you can't make another offer this turn.
Does it even matter who's turn it is? It would be an unnecessary restriction. Yeah, I imagine this scenario and there is nothing wrong with that, I can just decline and that's it
 
@Recursive
Can you pls explain Netherlands behavior ? In some games he is buying luxes for good prices, like 10gpt or sometimes even more. In other games he pays only 4 gpt even if Friendly to me all game long. I think offering better prices is the correct behavior as it benefits him so much.
 
He probably pays less if he already has/is nowhere close to monopoly, AND already has that lux imported.

To be fair, he should outright value it at 0 for the "already monopoly and imported" case, to avoid exploit. Not sure if he already does that.
 
To be fair, he should outright value it at 0 for the "already monopoly and imported" case, to avoid exploit. Not sure if he already does that.

Not sure how it's calculated, but often for resources he already has a copy of they are valued at a very low value. Not zero, but close to it (5 gold in cases I've seen). Which seems as intended, to me.
 
He pays 5 gold, note it's not gpt, when he doesn't need it. In my case it's like 4-5gpt and generally comparable to other civs. Which means I don't have the incentive to sell to him and to him only, except for a diplo bonus (if I need it at all). Actually when it happens, there are multiple civs who pay much more (6gpt is very common).
It looks like some games he wants to push the UA to the max, and other games he forgots he has it at all.
Could it be because of Goddess of Festivals ?
 
Interesting. I've only really noticed a difference between Netherlands with the Festivals pantheon vs. Netherlands without the Festivals pantheon.
 
Top Bottom