Diplomacy AI Development

[tu_79]

I think if nothing else this would be good for very late game. Your going for your win and you now longer care about a few deals here and there....I usually just agree to whatever deal the AI wants at this point just to keep them quiet. So such a button would be extremely handy.

What if you needed a trade office to make any item deal? If you want to prevent a player from pestering you with deal offers, then remove the office. Kind of like the embassy.

 

[Recursive]

What if you needed a trade office to make any item deal? If you want to prevent a player from pestering you with deal offers, then remove the office. Kind of like the embassy.

I think that's unnecessarily complicated compared to a checkbox or a button on the Discuss menu - there's already a lot of new code involved in this rework.

 

[vyyt]

I think that's unnecessarily complicated compared to a checkbox or a button on the Discuss menu - there's already a lot of new code involved in this rework.

I'd love such a checkbox! You are my hero!

Would it be possible to also add a timer to a refused type of deal for each civ? I hate declining Harald's offer for open borders every single turn, but I don't want to miss an offer for a DOF or lux trade from him.

 

[Recursive]

I'd love such a checkbox! You are my hero!

Would it be possible to also add a timer to a refused type of deal for each civ? I hate declining Harald's offer for open borders every single turn, but I don't want to miss an offer for a DOF or lux trade from him.

It's possible, although the UI work involved would probably create complications, plus it may need storage in memory. I'll see what I can do.

 

[vyyt]

It's possible, although the UI work involved would probably create complications, plus it may need storage in memory. I'll see what I can do.

Thanks!

Sorry, I probably worded it poorly. The timer would not have to be visible in the UI. What I meant was: Harald (why is it always Harald???) shows up at my doorstep and asks for open borders. I say "Nay", and then he won't ask for open borders for the next X turns. But I he can approach me with different proposal and I can initiate the open borders deal from my side any time I want. It's just so annoying to keep declining the open borders request to Harald every single turn.

Edit: I thought that such a/similar code already existed for DOFs. I don't know what others think, but if it is too much of a hassle, I think the checkbox will be just fine.

 

[Stalker0]

It still very strange to me that AIs will trade me their open borders, but often refuse to accept my own. They literally won't even take it as a gift!

I get that ultimately this is a mechanic that gives you benefits like more tourism....but its so strange that an civ would refuse to be allowed access to my areas.

 

[Recursive]

It still very strange to me that AIs will trade me their open borders, but often refuse to accept my own. They literally won't even take it as a gift!

I get that ultimately this is a mechanic that gives you benefits like more tourism....but its so strange that an civ would refuse to be allowed access to my areas.

It's probably Tourism.

 

[a3kov]

I'm thinking a "refuse all trades with this leader" checkbox may also come in handy here.

Amazing!
Can we also have "Skip insults" global checkbox ?

 

[Recursive]

Amazing!
Can we also have "Skip insults" global checkbox ?

I plan on making that a diplomacy AI option already.

 

[Akbarthegreat]

Just an analysis of some AI voting patterns on some WC resolutions (a lot of this has been observed in the April beta, so if there's something that has already been tweaked please ignore it).

1. World religion: The AI is way too polarized on this resolution, i.e they really want to pass it for their own religion, but they really do NOT want it passed for other religions. This results in WR being proposed every other session and it inevitably failing (unless the majority of civs pursue one religion, which is rare). This is a big issue because this makes the WC very easy to exploit for the human. I can pass 4-5 sphere of influence resolutions, and nobody notices it because they're too busy voting for/against world religion.
2. Sphere of Influence: I believe the way it works currently is that all AI's that don't have significant influence with the CS in question like it if this resolution is passed. This makes relatively less sense because I could be enemies with a certain civ, yet they will like me for proposing SoI. I think it makes more sense if this divided civs into camps, with your friends(or DP partners maybe?) likely to vote for it and enemies against. Also say civ X is allied with a CS, and civ Y is at war with X. That should make Y more likely to vote for a different player's SoI over that CS. In particular neutral civs certainly shouldn't like you for proposing SoI because all it is doing is making you stronger. Similar arguments can also be made for Open Door.
3. International games: The AI votes for travel ban because it recognises a CV runaway, but also vote for International games, which seems contradictory since the main effect of this resolution is to increase tourism. Non-CV civs should vote against this motion, especially if one civ already has a lot of tourism.
4. World's fair: Similar to above, I think this should be viewed more as a "CV vs rest of world" resolution. +33% culture is a good defence against a CV runaway. Although it could possibly backfire if a civ is already influential with everyone and is just waiting for two T3 policies.
5. Scholars in Residence: I haven't been able to get a concrete idea of this resolution yet, but does the AI consider the number of CS allies has in addition to its technological advancement when deciding whether it should vote for/against it?

 

[Vhozite]

From what I seen opinion on Scholars in Residence seems purely based on where the Civ is tech wise. Tech leaders are almost always against it and civs lagging behind are obviously in favor of it.

 

[Stalker0]

1. International games: The AI votes for travel ban because it recognises a CV runaway, but also vote for International games, which seems contradictory since the main effect of this resolution is to increase tourism. Non-CV civs should vote against this motion, especially if one civ already has a lot of tourism.

Earlier in the game, the tourism bonus is actually not that impactful (based on my recent CV breakdown work), and the 2nd place free GP is really good. So I think AIs would be fine with it at that point. However, after Internet (where the proposal is REALLY strong for CV players)....than it should get a more hostile reception.

 

[Zanteogo]

Just a suggestion, to steal something from Civ6 rise and fall..

Could long lasting peaceful relations add a bonus the longer peaceful relations are maintained? To keep it simple say for every 25 turns without being at war trade route give 1 culture for both parties? Caped at 9 +1 to cap per era, doubled with friendship?

Sort of like how research agreements give a reason to stay friendly.

 

[Zanteogo]

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.

It's like this level of inter civ diplomacy exists, but can never be used due to the AI just outright declaring almost everything impossible.

Heck, even trying to bribe an AI to vote for THE VERY THING THEY ARE PRESENTING, yup, almost always impossible.
Trying to trade fully healed cities back to your vassal? Impossible.
Offering to trade to declare war against the civ that's currently attacking a civ? Nope, impossible.

It's like the fear of having humans exploit AI trading was taken too far. Way too often things are just impossible, even though there are clear advantages for the AI to partake in them.

 

[Vhozite]

Heck, even trying to bride an AI to vote for THE VERY THING THEY ARE PRESENTING, yup, almost always impossible.

Out of curiosity, how often are you guys able to trade votes in general? The “IMPOSSIBLE” trade values are definitely annoying when trying to buy AI votes, but I’ve also noticed the AI will almost never try to buy votes off the player. Even when I control by far the most votes I feel like AIs only try to buy votes for 1 or 2 WC sessions the entire game, and usually it’s only 1 AI you’re friendly with buying votes.

I understand the AI not wanting to deal with a Civ they don’t like, but I feel like that negative bias should be overlooked for the purpose of vote trading if you control enough power in the WC. AIs will naturally hate you for passing resolutions they don’t like or blocking their proposals, but then they almost never try to influence how you vote with bribes. As a player I try to bribe civs as much as possible, even paying them to vote for their own proposals so I can guarantee some of their votes don’t go against my interests.

 

[Zanteogo]

Out of curiosity, how often are you guys able to trade votes in general? The “IMPOSSIBLE” trade values are definitely annoying when trying to buy AI votes, but I’ve also noticed the AI will almost never try to buy votes off the player. Even when I control by far the most votes I feel like AIs only try to buy votes for 1 or 2 WC sessions the entire game, and usually it’s only 1 AI you’re friendly with buying votes.

I understand the AI not wanting to deal with a Civ they don’t like, but I feel like that negative bias should be overlooked for the purpose of vote trading if you control enough power in the WC. AIs will naturally hate you for passing resolutions they don’t like or blocking their proposals, but then they almost never try to influence how you vote with bribes. As a player I try to bribe civs as much as possible, even paying them to vote for their own proposals so I can guarantee some of their votes don’t go against my interests.

Last game I actually made a point on contentiously checking this. I didn't have a single occurrence where the AI was willing to trade votes. Rarely the AI will ask me to vote, but it's always way undervalues them.

Like I said, it's a bigger issue with the trading system that seems to have become worse with time. I remember being able to trade way more often in earlier versions. Again, I believe it's a side effect of over correcting humans exploiting AI trade deals.

 

[Vhozite]

Also while I’m here, I just want to take a second to thank @Recursive for his work. I feel like I’m always in here complaining and making suggesting; we really appreciate the work you do to make this mod great

 

[Powerwise]

1 - Achievable for coop war requests with some work, already the case for DoF requests. Trade deals can be made the next turn unless the AI has traded whatever you want away already (delayed responses on trade offers would open a number of potential exploits, although it's not impossible). Don't think there's any other statements where this is important.

2 - The reason for the AI asking only when they want specific things in trade (and for cooldowns) is to avoid spam. If every AI had a trade offer every turn, it would become chaotic. The ability to gift units to major civs was removed in VP.

I could look into a system of giving more hints at how to improve diplomatic relations, but again, there can be a lot of civilizations in a single game and if all of them popped up to tell you what they'd like frequently it would be spammy and annoying. If there was a better way of conveying this information, then perhaps.

3 - I've proposed on Github that we add a button to City-States to cancel/stop all quests, to prevent unintentional Influence gain.

4 - The AI keeps some of this information hidden for strategic reasons. If you can see that they have an enormous negative modifier because of your warmongering, for example, then you can more easily deduce when they aren't really FRIENDLY. If hidden modifiers and invisible number scores are an issue for you, there's already Transparent Diplomacy.

There are a couple dialogue options that could use a mouseover popup to explain the diplomatic consequences. I'll add that to the to-do list.

I'm not sure how else it can be made clear - I suppose raw Opinion numbers could be added to these popups, but I think that would cause confusion for players who aren't playing with these values visible.

5 - This is too vague to be actionable. Are you proposing a mass joint war, or...?

Have you ever considered just making an entirely new game?

 

[JamesNinelives]

Out of curiosity, how often are you guys able to trade votes in general? The “IMPOSSIBLE” trade values are definitely annoying when trying to buy AI votes, but I’ve also noticed the AI will almost never try to buy votes off the player. Even when I control by far the most votes I feel like AIs only try to buy votes for 1 or 2 WC sessions the entire game, and usually it’s only 1 AI you’re friendly with buying votes.

I understand the AI not wanting to deal with a Civ they don’t like, but I feel like that negative bias should be overlooked for the purpose of vote trading if you control enough power in the WC. AIs will naturally hate you for passing resolutions they don’t like or blocking their proposals, but then they almost never try to influence how you vote with bribes. As a player I try to bribe civs as much as possible, even paying them to vote for their own proposals so I can guarantee some of their votes don’t go against my interests.

Trading for votes seems fine to me - I can't always get what I want but I can almost always get something. What kind of relations did you have with the people you are trying to trade with?

I regularly get proposals to buy my votes as well. I don't think the AI treats the human any different from other AIs in this regard. Perhaps they just prefer to trade with someone else?

 

[Stalker0]

Trading for votes seems fine to me - I can't always get what I want but I can almost always get something. What kind of relations did you have with the people you are trying to trade with?

I regularly get proposals to buy my votes as well. I don't think the AI treats the human any different from other AIs in this regard. Perhaps they just prefer to trade with someone else?

For me, the AI will offer to buy my votes, but never sells them to me unless we are like eternal clansmen or something.