Diplomacy AI improvements

Azmodanrom

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
33
Location
Strana Mechty
The diplomacy design is good, but the implementation is quite lacking. So I’m proposing some modifications – I hope the devs read this. All the numbers here are just to make the point – proper balance should determine the final values.
First, the "attitude" of the AI should be split into bands (clearly displayed for the user):
- "friendly" : from 0 to +15
- "admire" : from +16 to +30
- "love" : from +31 upwards
- "unfriendly" : from -1 to -15
- "despise" : from -16 to -30
- "hate" : from -31 downwards
Possible deals are possible only in the proper band: "non-aggression pact" from "despise", "delegation/embassy" from "unfriendly", "friendship" from "friendly", "alliance" from "admire", "federation" from "love" and so on.
Also, regular deals should be possible from "despise" upwards, but with the AI wanting an imbalance at lower levels and giving stuff more easily at higher levels (like, at "unfriendly" AI wants 200 gold for a work of art, 150 at "friendly", 100 at "admire" and so on).
On "hate" level almost no deals are possible, so only time will "heal the wounds" ..see below.

Another big change should be regarding "actions": any action has a 100% effect for a number of turn (let’s say 50), that 50% effect (25 turns), then 25% effect (25 turns) and then it’s forgotten. This way, an action loses all consequences after some time (100 turns) and the reputation (good or bad) tends to return to 0.
Example: you promised to not settle – during the 20 turns of the promise you get +5 rep. After upholding your promise you get +10 for 50 turns, than +5 for 25 turns, then +3 for 25 turns and after nothing. And, of course, -10, -5 .. etc if you break your promise.
Same with "declare friendship" – during the 20 turns of the action, you get +10, after +5 for 20 turns, +2, +1.. but after the initial 20 turns you can declare again, to in turn 1 in the second declaration you are at +15 ..long friend bonus :)

Also there should be current rep modificators – these can change from turn to turn. The ones related to the agendas that are currently in (some good, some bad), but also some modificators related to your current relative status:
- "powerful": +5 your army score (the sum of all your units combat strength for example) is 50% bigger, +10 if double
- "weak": -5 if army score is 50% less, -10 if double less
- "cultured": +5 if one era ahead in civics, +10 if 2 eras ahead
- "uncivilized": -5 if one era behind in civics, -10 if 2 eras behind
- "advanced": +5 if one era ahead in tech, +10 if 2 eras
- "backward": -5 if one era behind, -10 if 2 eras behind

Warmongering should also be changed:
1) the casus belli should alleviate more of the penalty – more for the other civs, less for the target civ.
2) Almost all things the AI can do against you should be a special "2 step casus belli" – settler near border, spied on you, have units on your border, have religious units inside your territory, etc. First step is asking them to not settle, not convert (this could be always active, not after they settled, converted). If the AI refuses to "promise", the player has the casus belli.
3) Second, the warmongering penalty should be applied at full strength only to the "recipient" of the warmongering action. Other civs should care 50% less if you declared war on another.
4) Warmongering to other civs should depend on the relation between them: if you declare war on civ1, and civ2 is at -20 "despise" towards civ1, then the warmonger rep should be decreased by 20. If civ3 is at +10 "friendly" towards civ1, the warmonger rep should be increased by 10. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. This could also fix the bug where someone asks you to declare war on another civ and then denounces you as warmonger: if they ask you to declare war, they should already be at war (so at -30 "hate" level) so your warmonger penalty will be a +30 "love" rep with them – for the duration of the war.
5) Warmonger penalty rep should depend on distance between the capitals. From the example above: if civ1 capital is at 20 hexes from mine, and civ2 is also at 20 hexes – no modifier. But if civ2 is 20 hexes from me and 40 hexes from civ1 – apply -50% penalty. And if the civ2 is at 40 hexes from me but 20 hexes from civ1 – apply +50% penalty. This way a faraway civ that has no contact with you or civ1, will not care about your warmongering.
6) Add "Lebensraum" casus belli – if a civ has a city less the X hexes from my capital.
7) All warmongering actions are subject to the decay proposed above, so that a war from a long time ago will not have any impact 500 years (turns) later.
8) Warmongering rep should also apply between AIs and the relationship between them.
9) Warmongering of an AI towards you (the player) should count and warmonger rep between two civs should be summed up.
Example: If they declared surprise war on you and so they have a -50 rep towards you, when you declare war on them your -50 rep towards them should cancel out – and you will have no warmonger penalty to that civ. So when someone wrongs you, when you wrong them they shouldn’t act as if you are the bad guy.

War, after the pace treaty of 20 turns, will have a lingering decaying negative rep as well, like an action.
Also, AI civs can declare surprise war only if you are at "despise" or lower – and can join the war of an ally if "unfriendly" or lower. Later in the tech, allies can sign a "defensive pact" that will automatically declare war one someone who declare war on the ally – no matter the rep level or casus belli.

Some actions should only be possible after a previous action has been completed: for example, "joint war" possible only after alliance, "joint science program" only after declaration of friendship, etc.
But once the requirements are met, the AI must accept the action. No more not allowing delegation for no reason.
Of course there could be some modifiers in the agenda, like "paranoiac" that will not allow delegation until "friendly".

Also, this opens up the "diplomatic victory" – get a "federation" pact with all existing civs. This would mean to get past +30 rep with everybody at the same time.

Other improvements:
- Add "closed border" civics card: religious units and foreign traders cannot enter your territory; permanent -10 diplomacy rep with everybody while the card is active – this is to prevent religious conversion
- Add "iron curtain" civics card: outgoing international tourists reduced to 10%. No international trade routes (incoming or outgoing) – this is to prevent someone else’s culture victory
- Add to spy a new mission: "Propaganda" – increase your reputation (+10) with target civ (mission possible only in a capital) – subject to action decay
- Add to spy a new mission: "Disinformation campaign" – decrease the reputation (-10) of another civ (mission possible only in a capital) – subject to action decay
 
After some more playtime: the main problems with diplomacy are clarity and the warmongering system.
Warmongering is ok as a system, but there needs to be ways to declare war and not anger everyone forever. Solution in the OP
Clarity is to reduce frustration of players with the decisions of the AI. Like when you have positive rep and the AI is still unfriendly.

Also, denouncing should only be done for breaking promises - but it should also affect other civs. Like if you promised to not convert cities of another civ and you did, other civs that you promised the same thing, should get some negative rep for being "worried" you will do the same to them.
 
First of all, I tried to consider if the Technical Support might be the best section, and I think it is, as I hope that the Crew behind Civilization can read this and find a solution for further patch.

My experience with Civilization VI is by far the best experience in terms of fun, I had an essay due in 2 weeks, and somehow I had 6 hours left to do it (I just can't stop playing).

But I really need to criticize the AI, I just can't stand it, it's almost frustrating. Other leaders keep denouncing me for absolutely no reason, even when I don't go against their agendas.

1. When I ask them to respect a promise, they keep breaking them and it seems like there are no consequences for them. It should seriously be a factor for a casus belli.

2. I don't understand why I can ask a leader to stop spreading his religion in my territory but I can't do the same for another leader.

3. Why can they ask us to remove our military units from their borders, but we can't ask them the same.

4. I keep getting denounced as a Warmonger, even though I'VE NEVER, NEVER declared a war against anyone and that I have an inexistant army (like perhaps 3 or 4 archers).

5. One time, Pedro II (leader of Brazil) denounces me for claiming a great person. I know that it went against his agenda... But when I play Peter of Rusia, I can't denounce him if he goes against my agenda (Westernizer) even though I can be ahead of 2 or 3 eras against almost all civilizations.

6. Deal system is really off... I can't get a good deal with other civilizations, let's say I want to deal Diamond with another civilization, they are going to offer me 1 gold per 30 turns. But when a few turns letter, they ask me to trade them diamonds, they are up to pay to 40 gold per 30 turns. It seems that when I initiate the trade terms, I can't get a good deal, but when they do, it's all in my favor...

ps: Also, if I can give a suggestion for a further patch, I once was an ally with two leaders that hated each other. It could be a good idea to implement things like being a mediator/conciliator and try to bring other leaders together.

Also, there was an interesting thing in a video-game named Stellaris: You could create a complexe alliance with multiple leaders and eventually form a confederation where it could be ruled by a president and the leaders of the federation could propose and vote for political directions. It could be a nice addition considering it goes well with the Government type in Civ 6 and it can force other leaders to adopt a same government to be considered in joining the federation.

That sums my thread, sorry for my english as french is my first langage. I wish everyone a nice day and a good gaming session ;)
 
Last edited:
I've also had issues with AI for the same reasons and I think you're right the diplomacy currently in the game is fairly weak and it's more one-sided towards the AI. When you can't demand much out of them as they can.

Also it should be normal to have troops guarding along your borders without having the AI denouncing you for breaking a promise just because you have troops within your own borders. When both you and the AI have cities next to each other and it's entirely fine of them gathering around as if they were preparing to invade you.. so you're pretty much screwed either way.
 
Back
Top Bottom