Send us a check for $50 and we'll send you the latest version at least 24 hours before anyone else can have it.
G
Diplomacy AI Development
- Thread starter Recursive
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ai civ v diplomacy vox populi
Send us a check for $50 and we'll send you the latest version at least 24 hours before anyone else can have it.
G
Zanteogo
King
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2015
- Messages
- 989
50 dollars ?
I'd buy Civ6 if I had 50 dollars. Thanks but I'll wait
Save your money. Honestly you would be better sending it to G.
The Celts forward citadel me, I assume for the iron?
Now a somewhat sensible player would likely trade for Iron especially when they have the big rolling steam train coming infront instead of making enemies behind.
Or only use it if they had several generals.
Sure I was maybe 3rd in score and not super diplomatic so it probably makes sense for the AI to hate me instead of the AI rampaging the entire west half of the map.
Of course she gets absoutely eradicated by the mongols.
How does the Mongols do it?
Yeah sure the AI is better diplo than me but he's got 6 cities more than 2nd and by far most land, ahead in techs, (far ahead in score), builds/captures most wonders and AI's:
a) dont hate him
b) denounce number three on the scoreboard before the mongols
c) even at this stage has a defensive pact with one AI
They really dont see their doom.
Is it the Mongols playing a brilliant game or is it the others not able to grasp the basics?
Btw are defensive pacts between player and the AI a nono? (seems borderline impossible to have and not just this game)..
I get too much "lets dogpile on the non AI" vibes.
Edit: A wild guess is that very quick (possible with cavalry) steamroll wars dont accumulate as much AI anger as long drawn out wars that the human gets into.
My theory is that this makes (in particular) Mongols and Askia less prone to warmonger rage despite being huge warmongers.
Now a somewhat sensible player would likely trade for Iron especially when they have the big rolling steam train coming infront instead of making enemies behind.
Or only use it if they had several generals.
Sure I was maybe 3rd in score and not super diplomatic so it probably makes sense for the AI to hate me instead of the AI rampaging the entire west half of the map.
Of course she gets absoutely eradicated by the mongols.
How does the Mongols do it?
Yeah sure the AI is better diplo than me but he's got 6 cities more than 2nd and by far most land, ahead in techs, (far ahead in score), builds/captures most wonders and AI's:
a) dont hate him
b) denounce number three on the scoreboard before the mongols
c) even at this stage has a defensive pact with one AI
They really dont see their doom.
Is it the Mongols playing a brilliant game or is it the others not able to grasp the basics?
Btw are defensive pacts between player and the AI a nono? (seems borderline impossible to have and not just this game)..
I get too much "lets dogpile on the non AI" vibes.
Edit: A wild guess is that very quick (possible with cavalry) steamroll wars dont accumulate as much AI anger as long drawn out wars that the human gets into.
My theory is that this makes (in particular) Mongols and Askia less prone to warmonger rage despite being huge warmongers.
Spoiler :
Last edited:
Lol
Though seriously, is there a way to support the project financially? Or perhaps the developers have a list of charities they support?
I don't like the the way Open Borders are renewed. Right now if you have Open Borders which expires your troops are being removed from the territory of your friend on the turn which OB expires. The AI asks me (on the same turn it expires) if I want to renew the OB agreement. I say yes let's renew sure thing, but my troops nevertheless get kicked out from my friend's territory. And I have to push my previously crossing troops all over again through his territory to reach their destination.
This is annoying. My troops should get kicked out of his territory only if I choose not to renew the agreement.
@Recursive
This is annoying. My troops should get kicked out of his territory only if I choose not to renew the agreement.
@Recursive
Just confirming are you on the latest version? This was one of the things that was supposed to be specifically fixed in that version, so if your still seeing the behavior its important they know.
Than to Github with you good citizen! Let the devs know so they can fix it.
Jokes aside, VP is nonprofit, but feel free to donate to any charity or movement of your choice if you're feeling generous. There isn't an official list or anything. Though, please don't donate to any groups with a bigoted/hateful agenda in my honor.
My personal recommendation for any charitable donations (not speaking for anyone else) is to pick a secular charity that's run by people who are personally affected by a societal evil (i.e. poverty, discrimination, illness, etc) they're trying to fix, and where a high percentage of your donation goes towards the actual cause. These charities tend to make more use of donations given to them.
This is a bug. Please report this on Github or in the Deal AI Development thread, not here.
General_Drax
Warlord
Change to Yes. It charges the same.
Bug. Please report on Github and/or the Deal AI Development thread, preferably Github.
Wait that is a bug? I thought it was just my vassals being churlish. It happens to me all the time.
I think the AI currently underestimates the danger. It falls into thinking that they can win a war which ultimately leads to them getting eliminated.
I was at war with Askia. We fought for a while giving heavy casualties both him and me. It was total war not just border skirmish. He lost one city and the war was moving into a final battle for his capitol.
But we decimated a lot of units in the process. I barely was holding the city I captured. He even re-captured it twice, me capturing yet again on the next turn. Life or death war.
All this hapenning next to his capitol. His only city left at that point. For a moment it seemed like he had slight advantage in troops, but nothing conclusive. It just seemed the war will drag in blood. I even was considering a peace. I approached him few times to reach a deal but he refuses apparently confident he can win.
I said okay so you want total war to death when you could have peace. I did not have enough troops to take his capitol but I did something nasty he did not expect.
I popped two great general citadels next to his capitol, strategically placed to push him back in defense mode. This changed the battlefield dramatically. Suddenly the advantage was on my side however now he was at a situation defending for his life rather than acting aggressively. A few turns later he started asking me for peace. Too late. I took his capitol under siege and he fell.
What I am trying to say is that the AI underestimates the human opponent. He had slight advantage in troops and refused peace but he grossly underestimated that he has 1 city left while I have 4 cities. He cannot win such a war of attrition. Worse his misjudgement led to his elimination. He apparently did not see that nor my generals who I can activate any moment.
Maybe the AI should be more careful in situations when he is left only with his capitol and be more eager to seek peace even if he thinks he has slight troop advantage.
I was at war with Askia. We fought for a while giving heavy casualties both him and me. It was total war not just border skirmish. He lost one city and the war was moving into a final battle for his capitol.
But we decimated a lot of units in the process. I barely was holding the city I captured. He even re-captured it twice, me capturing yet again on the next turn. Life or death war.
All this hapenning next to his capitol. His only city left at that point. For a moment it seemed like he had slight advantage in troops, but nothing conclusive. It just seemed the war will drag in blood. I even was considering a peace. I approached him few times to reach a deal but he refuses apparently confident he can win.
I said okay so you want total war to death when you could have peace. I did not have enough troops to take his capitol but I did something nasty he did not expect.
I popped two great general citadels next to his capitol, strategically placed to push him back in defense mode. This changed the battlefield dramatically. Suddenly the advantage was on my side however now he was at a situation defending for his life rather than acting aggressively. A few turns later he started asking me for peace. Too late. I took his capitol under siege and he fell.
What I am trying to say is that the AI underestimates the human opponent. He had slight advantage in troops and refused peace but he grossly underestimated that he has 1 city left while I have 4 cities. He cannot win such a war of attrition. Worse his misjudgement led to his elimination. He apparently did not see that nor my generals who I can activate any moment.
Maybe the AI should be more careful in situations when he is left only with his capitol and be more eager to seek peace even if he thinks he has slight troop advantage.
AI isn't supposed to offer Yes votes to sanction the other player.
My current Morrocan vassal is horrible. He concentrates all his Diplomats on city-states I am allied with, he won't trade more than a pittance for my luxuries, he is constantly in a "guarded" state as regards me, even after I liberated his cities in a war!! Very irritating. I am considering ending his existence.
Oh, and yes wants me to give him everything just so he can vote against me in the World Congress. Screw Morroco.
Oh, and yes wants me to give him everything just so he can vote against me in the World Congress. Screw Morroco.
He really is one of the worst opposing 'peaceful' AI's to have in your games, isn't he?
JamesNinelives
Emperor
Who would you say the best enemy to have is? XD
