How CIV5 diplomacy works

[bonafide11]

I wonder what is so difficult about programming a halfway decent AI.

Comments like this are what drives me nuts about this is forum. Programming a good AI has to be the most difficult and time consuming aspect of the game. Programming the AI to act logically and different from each other would take A LOT of work. The AI has to make a ton of decisions in the game and they try to program each one differently. Think about every question you ask yourself in the next game (several each turn, no doubt) and then think about how long it would take to program the AI to act intelligently and not all act the same every time.

People forget how AWFUL the AI was when Civ IV first came out. It wasn't until BTS that the AI was drastically improved, and that was two years after the game originally came out.

 

[DaveGold]

Yes, sounds like the mistake you made here was being the one to finish off Hiawatha. Being the one to eliminate another player apparently has huge diplomatic penalties with it- in such a situation you would have been well advised to just leave them with their last city and either sue for peace or just wait for somebody else to kill them and get tagged as the evil one

Sorry that's not my experience. If you capture any cities you can become a bloodthirsty one.

 

[Bezhukov]

Comments like this are what drives me nuts about this is forum. Programming a good AI has to be the most difficult and time consuming aspect of the game. Programming the AI to act logically and different from each other would take A LOT of work. The AI has to make a ton of decisions in the game and they try to program each one differently. Think about every question you ask yourself in the next game (several each turn, no doubt) and then think about how long it would take to program the AI to act intelligently and not all act the same every time.

People forget how AWFUL the AI was when Civ IV first came out. It wasn't until BTS that the AI was drastically improved, and that was two years after the game originally came out.

It is hard, but no previous Civ has been released with AI this clueless. Reminds me of mod level AI (Rise of Mankind/Fall from Heaven II) where the human is basically playing a different game that the AI doesn't understand how to play.

We'll get it fixed; but faster if we admit where we are.

 

[bonafide11]

It is hard, but no previous Civ has been released with AI this clueless. Reminds me of mod level AI (Rise of Mankind/Fall from Heaven II) where the human is basically playing a different game that the AI doesn't understand how to play.

We'll get it fixed; but faster if we admit where we are.

The AI is bad, no question. I'm just saying people need to be more rational about it and stop making claims like "the AI would be easy to program." Also, I'm not sure if the AI is worse than Civ IV's original AI. When it first came out, the AI was terrible. It took a long time for them to make the AI decent in that game. People need to stop comparing the BTS AI to Civ V's AI. They'll continue to improve it over the next few months and even more so over the next couple years.

By all means, people NEED to talk about problems with the AI and ways to improve it so they hear our ideas of what to do. I'm just saying let's not be ridiculous about complaining.

 

[E66man]

Sorry that's not my experience. If you capture any cities you can become a bloodthirsty one.

Yep. And taking the *last* city is an even larger diplomacy hit than taking the first (or subsequent) cities.

 

[Alziel]

Hi,

First post here (finally got around to registering)!

I have also noticed that refusing peace terms from an AI that you are at war with seems to net you a diplomatic hit with other Civs (that may vary depending on the personality settings for the leaders, I guess).

It will be interesting to see what the latest patch brings when we will be able to actually see the modifiers at work.

Cheers!

Alziel

 

[JudgeDeath]

I have also noticed that refusing peace terms from an AI that you are at war with seems to net you a diplomatic hit with other Civs (that may vary depending on the personality settings for the leaders, I guess).

I hope that's not true. Yesterday Rome did a DoW, and after I killed a few of its units began making suicidal (for me) peace offers - like I give them gold, resources open borders and a city for 10 turns of peace. I had a least 3 such offers before a flat peace for peace offer. If it's heads AI wins and tails you lose that would be very disheartening.

 

[Alziel]

I hope that's not true. Yesterday Rome did a DoW, and after I killed a few of its units began making suicidal (for me) peace offers - like I give them gold, resources open borders and a city for 10 turns of peace. I had a least 3 such offers before a flat peace for peace offer. If it's heads AI wins and tails you lose that would be very disheartening.

I completely agree that this would be unfair and of course with Diplomacy in its current opaque form my guess is completely a shot in the dark. I am just working on a gut instinct based on recent games that I've played.

However, in the games that I have played the drop in relations (i.e being labeled 'bloodthirsty' or a 'warmonger' by previously friendly civs) seem to have perpetuated after refusing peace deals that are level or which benefit me. Maybe if my instincts are right the AI is programmed to frown only on a refusal to accept fair peace deals?

Cheers

Alziel

 

[Jabberwockxeno]

Even after G&K, looking back on this thread, I find myself agreeing with most of the posts on the first thread.

It's a matter of understanding why the AI does X, or at worst, the system not being transparent enough, not that the AI is bad.