1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

I'm sick of the broken diplo !

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Bug Reports' started by Navarre, Nov 6, 2007.

  1. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    I post here because it's a gamebreaking thing IMO, qualifying as a freaking bug.

    I'm sick of having to deal with a -5 penalty with each leader because they all come making absurd demands every damn turn. It's always "give me that please", "give me that or I'll break your bones", "come at war with us", "stop trading with this one", ...

    EVERY DAMN TURN !!!

    And usually three of them ! So you've got the choice : you refuse, and suffer a -1 penalty with the bloody beggar, or accept, and suffer a -1 to -3 penalty with one or several others opponents.

    Meanwhile, each AI absolutely loves each other, and is pleased with the same modifier that makes them annoyed with me. So we have the hidden "AI love" modifier, and the stupid demands modifier, ending with a nice -10 diplomacy handicap with each opponent. How is that fair ? You build the AP, everyone votes for the other, even if you have better modifiers. And if you spread the religion, expect another to win a diplomacy victory. I've ever seen AI loving heatens they were at war with more than me, dammit, because they asked me 7 times to stop trading or join war.

    I don't care if someone can exploit it. When I buy a game, I don't care what others will do with it. I want a fair game. So let the AI make absurd demands to each other and start on the same ground that the human player. If we have negative modifiers for refusing joining a war or giving something, it'd be fair they have the same problem.

    And I'd like them to understand that no means NO ! I'm sick of having to say the same damn thing to the same damn stubborn AI for 6000 bloody years. Give us the redding power please, a box we can check for things we refuse to trade or do.
     
  2. DagHammarskjol

    DagHammarskjol Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    135
    I'm not too good at this game yet, but what I gather from reading around here is that it turns out to be important to pick allies and enemies from early on in the game. Then when "friends" "ask" for things, give it to them, and when enemies "ask", don't give it to them. This will give you good diplo with some countries and bad with others, rather than bad diplo with all countries.

    Then of course will be those awkard situations when two of your friends turn out to be enemies toward each other. That's life. :mischief:

    -FrL-
     
  3. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    Yeah, that's supposed to be the way it works, to force you to take sides. But sorry, I'm on my side first, and I won't impair all my game to please one or another who only thinks to his (its) own interest. Do I deserve to be hated by the whole world for that ? I don't think so. AI refuse to give me freebies and don't join in a war if I don't bribe them. Why should I ? And when you face a Mansa Musa who's not only out teching you but comes knocking every time you discover a tech he doesn't have while he won't trade any of his if you don't give him an advantage, how are we supposed to deal with that ? Give him everything just to make sure we'll have the same modifiers than the others have for free ? That's ridiculous.

    Note : despite my date of inscription, I play this game since Vanilla came out. I losed the password for my first account and the forum doesn't send the mail for reinitialisation. The diplo was already upsetting back then and BTS just made the things worst. Now it's like having to deal with a horde of beggars sitting on your doorpath every time you go out.
     
  4. GarretSidzaka

    GarretSidzaka Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    4,696
    Location:
    Arizona
    i think there should be an "Ignore" option, just like the AI gets :(
     
  5. Junuxx

    Junuxx Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,153
    Location:
    the Netherlands
    Maybe a 'solution' is to play in preset teams with a couple of AI's against another team or teams, or use the 'always war or peace' option. You'll have friends and enemies, yet they won't be so stubborn and unclear.
     
  6. Spitefire

    Spitefire Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    340
    if you can handle a little xml you could do what i did that is inverting the diplo modifiyers for warmonger love (all AI that normally have a +1 or +2 diplo with a AI that is deemed a warmonger personality human need not apply instead i changed it to -1 and -2) so that the AI was a little less buddy buddy that warmonger love is so illogical seeing as if someone is on a warpath its more likely that the target will be one that is the bigger threat not the one thats going to stare out the window at you till your army comes knocking.

    if i have 2 players bordering me and one plays like gandi and the other like montazuma im not going to declare war on ghandi first seeing as the monty wannabe is going to ram his spear up my backside if i give him the oppertunity.
     
  7. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    In my last game I ended with a total of -28 "you didn't help us in war".

    -28 !!!

    Most of these wars involving people I didn't care about fighting on continents I couldn't go anyway. Am I the only one to think there's something wrong here ?

    I scored -16 with only one opponent. The guy was on another continent, didn't like me from the start, and though kept coming on and on and on to ask me to help him against others who were dogpiling him for some reason. At the end, he hated me more than any of those who attacked him, just because of this ******** modifier.

    Duh ! :mischief:

    IMO, the modifiers for refusing to give a tech or join in a war shouldn't even exist. I mean, when you ask a favor, you hope the guy will accept but you don't hate him for 6 billions years if he refuses. And those modifiers don't exist between AI, so... If anyone can tell me how to remove it, I'd really like to. Too bad I can't handle xml.
     
  8. Party

    Party Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    176

    Meh, the solution there is to actually declare war when they ask you too. Since it's on another continent you can probably make peace before they even have a chance at striking back at you. Not to mention they are probably defensive at that point.

    And I think it's a realistic system, remember how pissed off Americans got at France over Iraq?
    Freedom fries.:lol:
     
  9. ICNP

    ICNP The Third Superpower

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    772
    Location:
    Missile Silo
    It is abnoxious when they demand something especially because the penalties last for so damn long. The worst part is that there are multiple rewardless demands that all STACK. Religion is the biggest pickle because it is so early you have no way of boosting relations so all you see is that big -4 for being a heathen.
     
  10. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    I did, several times. I just can't fight EVERY damn war on the planet !
     
  11. Defiant47

    Defiant47 Peace Sentinel

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,602
    Location:
    Canada
    I think there should be an option of "ask me this and I declare war on you". Such that if they would ask you to join them in a war, you would automatically declare war on them. This would make them thing twice before doing that.
     
  12. Party

    Party Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    176
    Just do a phooey war. Declare war then make peace ASAP without sending any actual troops.
     
  13. Smidlee

    Smidlee Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,348
    In most civ types game diplomacy can make the game a cake walk since it gives the player too much power. Civ4 has the one of the best Diplomacy that doesn't break the game. As it's been noted before it's diplomacy works as intended since this is the only way an AI can demand the player's intention.
    Dag is right, you should pick who you are going to be friendly with and the ones you are not. This was done so you can't set back causing world wars AI vs AI while you take out one AI at a time. Thus not a bug.
     
  14. Tirse

    Tirse Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    36
    Agreed that those modifiers are annoying. Personally I believe there should be a limit to how far this can go, just as most positive modifiers have such limit. I mean, it's ok to have someone hate me for eternity (after all, this is what -20 modifier really is) after I razed half of his cities to the ground, but getting the same -20 for not joining some absurd war is... well... absurd. There should be some hard cap on this.

    Another thing is those modifiers last FAR too long. One can refuse to join war/give tech/stop trading in bronze age, and the modifier sticks around at the time of steam engines (well, on marathon it does). "You declared war on us/our friend" sticks forever, that's just stupid (and unrealistic). The funny thing is that "friend" modifier sticks even if civs involved are no longer on friendly terms!

    I know about the "picking allies" theory, but somehow it never works for me - sooner or later my supposed "ally" will turn on me (unless, of course, I'm far and above on the powergraph). As far as I'm concerned, there is no way to prevent "AI hate" syndrome, and the only way to prevent the results is to be the biggest bully around (so I don't really care if my actions hurt their feelings).

    Ah, guess I just suck badly at diplo games.
     
  15. Party

    Party Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    176
    I once got one that was like -50 for nuking his cities then invading and razing them.
     
  16. JujuLautre

    JujuLautre Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    3,112
    Location:
    Kansai, Japan
    AIs usually make demands when they feel you are weaker than them. Don't forget that too.
    Also, giving into demands is a great way to improve relations. You have to weigh the benefits and demerits of each demand, but lots of times it's good to give in.
     
  17. Navarre

    Navarre Legio XIII

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    France
    Yeah, but that's not working that way. The truth is, in most games your friends will at one time or another fight each other, and then fight another one who fights another one who fights you, and they ALL will come asking you to help. All of them, every five turns, forever. That's just broken. You can't build or maintain a coherent diplo, and less than anything decide one line to follow, because they all will be declaring on each other without reason at one time and they all frown at you because you do/don't join in every war, ending with negative modifiers everywhere whatever you do. At the very least they should remember the answer and not come five or ten turns later ask the same damn thing while the modifiers stack forever.

    Yeah, that too. I remember a game where I declared war on Genghis in 3800 BC with my two warriors and took his undefended capital, killing him by the way, and Louis XIV frowned for that the whole game on me. That happened before anyone could trade or even have open borders, even before any of us had a religion, meaning Louis was pleased with Genghis for the very moment they met, while he's been cautious with me for ages despite us having the same religion, open borders and trading resources. Instant AI love... How's that fair ?

    As for the "they feel you're weak" thing, that ain't true. Most of the ones who demand tribute will do it no matter what, even if you're an era ahead and thrice their power. Most of the time I'm on the top three military speaking, and the most ******** leaders come asking for a tribute anyway. Being weak just makes the things worse and more demands, but even if you're the top dog you'll have Monty or another retard with a bunch of axemen in 1900 AD asking you a tribute at one time or another. And before anyone asks, no I don't agree with demands of ******** warmongers, even if that could make things better between us. That would be just illogical. Most of the time I answer "Muahahaha" and close the window. :D
     
  18. Spitefire

    Spitefire Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    340
    The programmers need to take a clue from some of the better more indepth RPGs (the ones that arent nothing but hack slash fetish) where the 2 diffrant nations have a skill level for diplomatic abilitys so that when negoiations can actully take place, compaired to now where you kiss the ass of the AI and always big them the better end of the deal sending you further into a pit of inability for when thay decided to turn on you and your only option is haveing a larger army (that is broken) why in the hell is the only way to hold your ground is haveing a larger army.

    In civ 1 and civ 2 this was not the most important factor there was other ways to hold your ground and win without the need to hold the larger military force, Alpha Centari was similar in that a player didnt need to hold the largest military to win and i dont refer to the alternat victory options, its been awile sence i was able to play that one so i cant say for sure but one of them is the best the civ games have ever been.

    However in every victory condition tye in civ 4 unless you use the always peace option your military is ether the number 1 concern or number 2, so if any part of this game is broken its how important military is this would not be so bad if not for the fact that combat in civ4 is slow, irratating, and is for the most part disfunctional.

    Oh and the fact that the civ4 GFX team was intent on makeing every improvment/unit on the planet had full animation activity at all times ensureing that the team had ether never played the game themselves or fully intent on makeing sure the game would not work without have at least 10X the recommended system stats.
     
  19. Smidlee

    Smidlee Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,348
    There is a old post here where someone won a Civ4 game without building any military. I doubt you can do this in any other civ game.
    Even with the tougher civ4 diplomacy, a good player can still use diplomacy in their favor.
     
  20. Spitefire

    Spitefire Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    340
    Recently played a game of civ 1 and won on the highest difficulty setting useing diplomats as my mode of conquest i built only 3 unit types diplomats settlers and caravans and ran a trade distribution rate of 4.Lux 4.Tax 2.Sci and lead the tech curve for 90% of the game by end game i had a few level 28 citys so i did not use the ICS stratagy, seeing as civ 2 has a similar system only slightly expanded i think i could do the same on that one after getting familiar with the adjustments.

    So yes it is possable in other civ games, if you look back the negoiation table has changed so little its quite sad.

    Civ 3 and 4 are wargames and thay do that part well except for the bog down that 4 makes, but other then that thay do poorly.
     

Share This Page