First off, you should be able to move your units into the cities of allies in order to heal up, get a defensive bonus, help protect those cities from mutual enemies etc. If that was possible, then, when you captured a city from an enemy that used to belong to an ally, it would automatically go to your ally instead of to you (or vice versa, if an AI ally liberated an enemy city that used to be yours).
More options for diplomacy
- Thread starter Warlord Sam
- Start date
First off, you should be able to move your units into the cities of allies in order to heal up, get a defensive bonus, help protect those cities from mutual enemies etc. If that was possible, then, when you captured a city from an enemy that used to belong to an ally, it would automatically go to your ally instead of to you (or vice versa, if an AI ally liberated an enemy city that used to be yours).
Shyrramar
Warlord
The developers should play a game or two of GalCiv. Its diplomacy is WAY ahead of Civ. You could give away units for the other race to use in a battle against a third party - so you could in effect be fighting a war without declaring a war. It also had this idea, that other Civs would not want to declare a war to you if they were trading with you (now the AI may start a war and lose two or three luxuries and gpt in the process, which is pure madness). They also didn't "gang up" against the human player. And, of course, they attacked the weaker civs and licked the rear end of the stronger ones - in Civ I have NEVER seen any civ no matter how small grovel before me, decking me with gifts because I was the true superpower.
All in all, I think that diplomacy is the one part of Civ that is in most desperate need of re-thinking..
All in all, I think that diplomacy is the one part of Civ that is in most desperate need of re-thinking..
wlievens
Warlord
You're right, GalCiv's AI is superior to Civ3's.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Hmmm, I feel that, if you capture a city from a 3rd party (and the city still recognises its former culture), then you should be given an option to LIBERATE that city!
For instance, in Birth of the Federation, if you land ground forces on a planet that had itself been captured from another race, then you were given the option to 'Capture' it or 'Liberate' it! If you choose the latter, then it should put you in the good books of the civ you liberate it for!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
For instance, in Birth of the Federation, if you land ground forces on a planet that had itself been captured from another race, then you were given the option to 'Capture' it or 'Liberate' it! If you choose the latter, then it should put you in the good books of the civ you liberate it for!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
you should be able to occupy the same square a allied unit is in with your units.
When Germany falled to the Allies, the Allied powers didn't keept the cities to themselves but gave them back to Germany. How could this be implemented in the game. May be you shouldn't be able to conquer territorry from another city after certain tech. like Nationalism or humanism.
When Germany falled to the Allies, the Allied powers didn't keept the cities to themselves but gave them back to Germany. How could this be implemented in the game. May be you shouldn't be able to conquer territorry from another city after certain tech. like Nationalism or humanism.
wlievens
Warlord
There should be a reward for giving the city back to its original owner (Liberating it).
rcoutme
Emperor
I think Judgement had it right with the 3-way (or more) negotiations. I still have teeth marks on my hands from the number of times that an alliance or MPP has caused me to go to (or remain in) war due to not being able to force an agressor to stop beating up on my allie.
I also think that you should be able to monopolize trade with the diplomacy. For instance, if you controlled 4 of 7 oil icons and some other civ controlled two of them, then you should be able to purchase his excess oil and then put the screws to anyone else who needs to purchase oil. Or you could form OPEC, setting the price of the commodity with the other suppliers and refusing to sell at a lesser price.
Probably, some of this belongs in a Trade thread, but while I'm on the subject: why is it that I can not gain an advantage of knowing a civ that others don't by brokering commodities. For instance, if civ A has lots of spices and nothing else and civ C has lots of iron but would like spices, I should be able to purchase extra spice and iron and sell them to A and C (for a healthy profit, of course).
I also think that you should be able to monopolize trade with the diplomacy. For instance, if you controlled 4 of 7 oil icons and some other civ controlled two of them, then you should be able to purchase his excess oil and then put the screws to anyone else who needs to purchase oil. Or you could form OPEC, setting the price of the commodity with the other suppliers and refusing to sell at a lesser price.
Probably, some of this belongs in a Trade thread, but while I'm on the subject: why is it that I can not gain an advantage of knowing a civ that others don't by brokering commodities. For instance, if civ A has lots of spices and nothing else and civ C has lots of iron but would like spices, I should be able to purchase extra spice and iron and sell them to A and C (for a healthy profit, of course).
shr00mz
Chieftain
i agree with multi sessions.. agree that i wanna be a neutral negotiator.. per instance the nation that builds the UN should made special unists (blue helmets) that cannot atack but only defend and the resources come from all nations that join the UN.. so.. they should be cheaper.. and like in real world they couldnt stand alone versus strong offensive but could care for peace among smaller conflicts..
shr00mz
Chieftain
totally agree.. and this is like we could have our little vietnam without getting a world war
Aeon221
Lord of the Cheese Helmet
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,995
All too few small wars (like the various invasions of Haiti, Panama, Nicaragua, etc. that the US has done W/O causing major WWs) and all too many WWs. I have seen games where there have been WW the whole time, simply because I could not get the computer to stop attacking my ******** allies, but also did not want to wipe it out completely.
Liberation and multi-party negotiating would be sweet. It would make a diplomatic victory worth going for!
Liberation and multi-party negotiating would be sweet. It would make a diplomatic victory worth going for!
shr00mz
Chieftain
it would be great to protect some nation by forcing an agressor tto stop attacking it yes.. like to have an option make a peace agreement with..
collin_stp
Warlord
Yes, but the Nazi party and Hitler were ousted, and goverments were installed suiting the victors. In CivIII, the leader is always the head of the civ. Maybe a semi-regicide game, in which you kill their leader, then you can install a friendly leader or gov.
I want the ability to build airbases on foriegn soil, or to use foriegn airbases, or both. Also, when my navy is fighting on the other side of the world, I don't like having to bring them all the way back home to heal. They should be able to make use of a friendly port in the vicinity. It would also be cool if I could send my troops to help defend a weaker ally's city with our troops fighting side by side. Finally, the ability to trade and sell arms is important. I hope they build that concept into the game.
Philips beard
Prince
It's already possible to return cities in the diplomacy screen! I use this option alot in multiplayergames, where my allies can use those cities far more efficient then I can, due to corruption and waste.
Ebitdadada
Master Baiter
They should also play any game by Paradox Entertainment:
Europa Universalis 1 and 2, Hearts of Iron or Victoria. Much better diplomacy. The best thing is that wars involving multiple nations can actually end with one big peace treaty. This eliminates the non stop war after nationalism is discovered.
Another thing, I'd like to be able to demand a deal. So i can say. "I'll give you 50gpt for iron and if you don't accept, I'll simply take your iron from you."
One more thing, I'd like to be able to buy strategic resources from nations that don't have the prerequisit technology.
I also absolutly love the international arbitration thing. Thought about it myself. I get really sick of the AI constantly being at war.
Europa Universalis 1 and 2, Hearts of Iron or Victoria. Much better diplomacy. The best thing is that wars involving multiple nations can actually end with one big peace treaty. This eliminates the non stop war after nationalism is discovered.
Another thing, I'd like to be able to demand a deal. So i can say. "I'll give you 50gpt for iron and if you don't accept, I'll simply take your iron from you."
One more thing, I'd like to be able to buy strategic resources from nations that don't have the prerequisit technology.
I also absolutly love the international arbitration thing. Thought about it myself. I get really sick of the AI constantly being at war.
rcoutme
Emperor
I also want the AI to be actually able to trade. Too many times have I gone to the bargaining table with something the AI really, really needs and they will not give up the necessary gpt/g/tech advance to give a reasonable offer. When players need a resource, they find a way to make a trade, even if it hurts their science, etc. ! The AI needs to be much more flexible.
In addition, I hate it when the AI says, "I don't think any deal is possible" when you are offering and that's it. You should have a counter such as, "Try me, I am much more reasonable than you think." Then the AI should offer all that it is willing to offer. You could then either accept or reject. Also, you should be able to ask the AI civs "If you had xyz gp would you be willing to offer it?" and if the answer is yes, you could then give the civ a gift at that level and then sell the resource to them. Yes, I know that you could always give them the resource, but this would allow you to know if they would be willing to offer 1000 when they only have 200. You could then give them 800 and get the bonus of a gift without having to give away the entire thing.
In addition, I hate it when the AI says, "I don't think any deal is possible" when you are offering and that's it. You should have a counter such as, "Try me, I am much more reasonable than you think." Then the AI should offer all that it is willing to offer. You could then either accept or reject. Also, you should be able to ask the AI civs "If you had xyz gp would you be willing to offer it?" and if the answer is yes, you could then give the civ a gift at that level and then sell the resource to them. Yes, I know that you could always give them the resource, but this would allow you to know if they would be willing to offer 1000 when they only have 200. You could then give them 800 and get the bonus of a gift without having to give away the entire thing.
Ryth
Chieftain
I like Judgement's idea for the expanding diplomatic overviews.
Also, the whole trading back cities thing - there would need to be the equivalent of the UN for it to be plausible (even for our suspending belief brains). There could be some fun side options like Militaristic nations laughing at you for giving in to the 'nice-guy' option. I love the little extra comments (ever asked your domestic advisor for a revolution during Anarchy?
).
Also, the whole trading back cities thing - there would need to be the equivalent of the UN for it to be plausible (even for our suspending belief brains). There could be some fun side options like Militaristic nations laughing at you for giving in to the 'nice-guy' option. I love the little extra comments (ever asked your domestic advisor for a revolution during Anarchy?
).
HAND
Armchair Philosopher
In SMAC you could request a faction to offer peace with with its enemy.."please call off your vendetta with XXX"... This is a must for Civ4
Arms sales!! lol just think of all the cash!
Weapons inspectors...Basically the same as spy in civ3 but allowed with by the civs involved. To prevent a friendly civ(or you!) getting paranoid about your/their military strength and positions. It could be the a very good boost in the civ relations worldwide too..Much like Nato and Russia today.
The UN council must be in Civ4! Just imagine the civs sat round the table trying to persuade others to vote for a certain issue or to veto it etc.. Again SMAC has a fine example of a interfaction council. The civ4 version should be more advanced than SMACS by far.
Arms sales!! lol just think of all the cash!
Weapons inspectors...Basically the same as spy in civ3 but allowed with by the civs involved. To prevent a friendly civ(or you!) getting paranoid about your/their military strength and positions. It could be the a very good boost in the civ relations worldwide too..Much like Nato and Russia today.
The UN council must be in Civ4! Just imagine the civs sat round the table trying to persuade others to vote for a certain issue or to veto it etc.. Again SMAC has a fine example of a interfaction council. The civ4 version should be more advanced than SMACS by far.
Similar threads
