Diplomacy modifiers

[KevinLancaster]

In my opinion, they should make positive modifiers like DoFs, trades, etc. have a weak effect that lasts a long time, so they eventually stack up, allowing you to build up friendships with other civs. Negative modifiers like denounciations should last a much shorter time but be much more severe. Also they should get rid of stupid modifiers like "They're trying to win the game the same way" or "Your friends found reason to denounce you" and the "They believe you're a warmongering menace to the world" tag shouldn't last forever. I think that this would simulate actual diplomacy a lot better than the current system we have.

I mean, by the end of a normal game everyone hates each other and are constantly denouncing or at war. No one ever signs defensive pacts and alliances never form. This isn't very realistic on a global scale at all. It almost feels like the civs are just warring city-states that can't unite, instead of nations. The fact that they hate you for crimes commited many turns ago also isn't realistic. In real life the WW2 Allies aren't constantly denouncing Germany for World War 2, and even if the Allies did "denounce" them before and during the war, they helped them rebuild right afterwards.

 

[Salawow]

Anything that would make friendship last more than a couple of turns would be very nice.

I also think they sould introduce some kind of real "alliance", and maybe an option that would make "If you are allied with the winner, you do not lose the game". Some civs could have a trait like "I dont care about winning, but i realy dont want to be on the losing side".

Because realy.. right now, there's absolutely no point in being friendly with another civ at end-game unless you're leading the race.. and i hate that.

 

[ShahJahanII]

In my opinion, they should make positive modifiers like DoFs, trades, etc. have a weak effect that lasts a long time, so they eventually stack up, allowing you to build up friendships with other civs. Negative modifiers like denounciations should last a much shorter time but be much more severe. Also they should get rid of stupid modifiers like "They're trying to win the game the same way" or "Your friends found reason to denounce you" and the "They believe you're a warmongering menace to the world" tag shouldn't last forever. I think that this would simulate actual diplomacy a lot better than the current system we have.

I mean, by the end of a normal game everyone hates each other and are constantly denouncing or at war. No one ever signs defensive pacts and alliances never form. This isn't very realistic on a global scale at all. It almost feels like the civs are just warring city-states that can't unite, instead of nations. The fact that they hate you for crimes commited many turns ago also isn't realistic. In real life the WW2 Allies aren't constantly denouncing Germany for World War 2, and even if the Allies did "denounce" them before and during the war, they helped them rebuild right afterwards.

I once got denounced twice in a row for wiping out the super-violent Aztecs. they would have taken over the world if someone hadn't stopped them. Siam and Arabia declared war on me at the same time a few turns later.

 

[cairnsy44]

I once got denounced twice in a row for wiping out the super-violent Aztecs. they would have taken over the world if someone hadn't stopped them. Siam and Arabia declared war on me at the same time a few turns later.

That is just plain ridiculous. I think it all stems from the fact the AI is "out to win" as opposed to creating a more realistic environment. I think diplomacy took a big step backwards from IV, but not enough to stop me playing it and, for the most part, enjoying it.

 

[Becephalus]

I once got denounced twice in a row for wiping out the super-violent Aztecs. they would have taken over the world if someone hadn't stopped them. Siam and Arabia declared war on me at the same time a few turns later.

If you had just cut them in half instead of wiping them out the AI wouldnt have been as mad. But yes it could use some tweaking and these are decent suggestions.

One area I think really needs looking into is that if you want to stay peaceful you should be no means make DoF with anyone. Because it almost always leads to a war either from helping them, or not helping them.

 

[ShahJahanII]

That is just plain ridiculous. I think it all stems from the fact the AI is "out to win" as opposed to creating a more realistic environment. I think diplomacy took a big step backwards from IV, but not enough to stop me playing it and, for the most part, enjoying it.

It is possible to go into the game files and make the AIs a bit more peaceful. You go into, XML, Leaders, and then tune down the < ApproachWar></ApproachWar> modifier by about 2 for each civ. I don't do this however, since I don't know what kind of consequences this will have in-game.

 

[apocalypse105]

How many positif modifiers you add this typ of AI just can't handel it...


It is programmed to win and will backstab you if he can.... There is unfortantly no diplomacy because of this...

This AI makes his decissions by numbers what is his military strenght, his gold happiness, who is he at war?? He has become to big and so on....


I voted No(this will not work) because they need to change the typ of AI to make it work thats someting i say yes to

It is possible to go into the game files and make the AIs a bit more peaceful. You go into, XML, Leaders, and then tune down the < ApproachWar></ApproachWar> modifier by about 2 for each civ. I don't do this however, since I don't know what kind of consequences this will have in-game.

This is something that firaxis should do not the player

 

[ShahJahanII]

If you had just cut them in half instead of wiping them out the AI wouldnt have been as mad. But yes it could use some tweaking and these are decent suggestions.

One area I think really needs looking into is that if you want to stay peaceful you should be no means make DoF with anyone. Because it almost always leads to a war either from helping them, or not helping them.

Cut them in half? They were 2 cities! But the had an army large enough to do some serious damage. Every one was against them, but when I wiped them out, I got the "They believe you are a warmongering menace to the world" diplo modifier. Look at some countries in real life, they are in many wars, and yet they still have positive relations.

 

[apocalypse105]

Cut them in half? They were 2 cities! But the had an army large enough to do some serious damage. Every one was against them, but when I wiped them out, I got the "They believe you are a warmongering menace to the world" diplo modifier. Look at some countries in real life, they are in many wars, and yet they still have positive relations.

Like somebody on this forum allready said it should be a negatif modifier but within a certain time..

If you declare 2 wars over a period of 100 years you are clearly not a warmonger..

But if you declare 2 wars in a period of 10 years welll that change the cause..