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

Negotiating empire borders with AIs

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Snerk, Mar 13, 2006.

  1. Snerk

    Snerk Smeghead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    7,678
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Norway. You'll never leave
    Theres something about the way empire borders are set in civ that dont appeal to me. The way where borders are strictly controlled by cultural outputs from a given city i kinda dislike. Not that i have a better alternative system but still I thinks there must be a better way. What i think should been added was some sort of way of negotiating land borders with other civs. So you could buy or claim land aereas from other civs, maybe with important resourses on it. I dont know about you but this is an aspect i miss in civ. I hope someone once can make a mod that incorporate this. Would be wicked!

    Anyway what do you think?:dubious:
     
  2. Crighton

    Crighton Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,136
    Sad to say, but Star Trek: Birth of the Federation (the Star Trek version of CIV II) had that function. Disputed areas would be a mishmash of the two conflicting team colors. And you could deman or you could cede the teritories to/from your rival. It wasn't tile specific though (which would have been nice).

    ST:BOTF also had an Inteligence system for espionage and defense which could be incorporated into CIV nicely, IMHO.
     
  3. tombeef

    tombeef King

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    838
    I agree with this. It would be more realistic and more interesting, countries bought and negotiated land all the time.
     
  4. Guerra

    Guerra Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada.
    I really wish they'd include border treaties, in diplomacy, players can agree to fixed borders to reduce border tension.
     
  5. ChicagoCubs

    ChicagoCubs Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    361
    I would like an "Establish Common Border" option, but I don't know the coding implications. This would basically freeze your border with your neighbor.
     
  6. DarkFyre99

    DarkFyre99 Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    419
    That's a great idea. Sort of a declaration of truce in a culture war. :culture: :ar15: :culture:

    Borders could be based on the distance from cities, rather than on the culture. Culture would only be used in the case of a tie.

    Not sure how it would work if there was a third civ thrown into the mix that didn't have a border agreement with the other two. Would the Civ with the lowest culture in the tower get the tile if the Civ with a border treaty would normally get the tile, because it has the most culture?

    It would be interesting to see the results if two civs have border treaties with a third civ, but not with each other.
     
  7. Lord Gideon

    Lord Gideon Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Bloomington, IL
    It would be more historically correct. I mean, remember the Louisiana Purchase? We got that, and neither Civs, France or America were exerting much culture. I think a lot of time borders are determined on can you pay for the land or can you kill anyone else who tries to trespass on it:ar15:. Not, who's great artist has made a great work.
     
  8. tombeef

    tombeef King

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    838
    Don't forget the purchase of Alaska, or negotiating the boundaires between Canada and the U.S. after the War of 1812.
     
  9. CIVPhilzilla

    CIVPhilzilla Reagan Republican

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    4,714
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Or the Louisiana Purchase.
     
  10. Nestorius

    Nestorius Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    330
    I agree, but I've been able to justify the current way in my mind.

    For most of history, there were no nation-states. Rulers ruled the cities while the countryside was decentralized and in flux. Actual borders were less important than the loyality of the area's local notables. So, culture flux just represents the influence you have on those disputed tiles.

    By modern times it seems weird, but the borders do generally seem stable enough to me when there is peace.
     
  11. KabukiJo

    KabukiJo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    97
    Location:
    Korea, Hot Dog!!!
    But wouldn't it be great if you could solidify borders somehow with your neighbors? That way, if you are trying to be friends with your neighbors (for the UN vote or something) you could get rid of the "-3 our borders are conflicting (or whatever it is)"
     
  12. HawkeyeGS

    HawkeyeGS Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Australia
    It is a shame you don't have the UN setting boarders at the 38th paralell and the like. Oh Well
     
  13. Ranos

    Ranos King

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    819
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I would like to see a combination of the two. Culture starts out determining borders but once the borders have met, they don't expand into the other civ's territory. The cultural influence still continues to exapand though. In this way, a city can still be influenced by another civ's culture. That city could flip, the same way it does now, but if the civ that it flipped to accepted it, the civ that originally owned it would get angry and could possibly start a war to reclaim it.

    I would also like to see a percentage of the troops in flipped cities remain. Something like a 25% chance that a unit will flip with the city.

    Wars would see the borders move back and forth as units moved onto the other civs tiles. So if Civ A moved a unit onto a tile belonging to Civ B, that tile would flip to Civ A until Civ B moved a unit there to reclaim it.
     
  14. Junichiro

    Junichiro Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    122
    Well, Louisiana purchase can be justified in civ terms as selling of New Orleans city cast out by enterprising French settler to another continent...same for Alaska.
     
  15. mike p

    mike p King

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    I believe there is something similar already coded. Once I was bordering Mansa Musa and dropped a crappy little city that was surrounded on 3 sides by my civ. I eventually took over every tile surrounding it and got it to revolt. I went ahead and signed a permanent alliance with him and the borders of that city expanded as a result. And I never got it to go into revolt again. :(

    Basically, the borders adjusted so that he got the tiles in his 'fat cross' that were closer to his city than any of mine. Not exactly what the OP was asking for, but it's probably a lot easier to implement!
     
  16. SilentDemon

    SilentDemon Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    150
    I'd somewhat like to see this idea implemented also but as the quote aboves begins to touch on, border agreements and purchases can almost always in some way correlate back to the original idea of culture. In the example of the Lousiana purchase this was a huge tract of land right next to fledgling America that was owned by the French whose empire was situated a few thousand miles away. It would have been almost impossible for the French to keep this piece of land seeing the distance from their homeland and proximity of it to the already expanding United States. In this idea, the cultural idea of civ would represent that a nearby nearly inactive state will inevitably be dominated by their neighbors borders and be consumed regardless of whether it be by anexation, purchase etc.
     
  17. vinstafresh

    vinstafresh Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    385
    I think this might be valuable if occupied tiles would have an effect on the expenses as well. This would give some extra counterweight to having a lot of culture (just like every unit costs an amount to maintain in order to halt the growth of an army)
     
  18. LordOfTheDrinks

    LordOfTheDrinks Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    18
    I think the easy way will be some kind of "accept foreign workers" so to speak...
    In one recent game I was close to Isabella and some of my cities pushed her borders back while some of her cities were pushing mine -- we basically ended with cities unable to work precious tiles (not special resources, just regular ones, but still precious) without any bonus for the other party -- those tiles were anyway OUTSIDE the fat cross of the "cultural aggresor". There was no clear solution (war would have been stupid -- we were basically best friends and happily stomping together on everyone in sight... :D) so I really wanted to be possible to give her some kind of "right" to work "my" tiles as long as they weren't worked by me -- and get something similar in return of course.
     
  19. Dusty Monkey

    Dusty Monkey Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    110
    Semi-Related, but:

    There are still hundreds of border disputes all over the world while the countries in question are otherwise peaceful with each other.

    See for yourself with the C.I.A. Fact Book. Just about every country has a dispute or two. Some have a dispute with everyone around them (China.)

    I believe the -Modifier for cultural borders in Civ4 reflects this nicely. Sure the disputes in real life arent "cultural" .. but so what?

    Also I like to view building cultural improvements as akin to fortifying a unit. +Culture improvements fortify a region.



    As for a diplomatic/political mechanism for trading tiles.. this sounds like the perfect setting to abuse the A.I's stupidity.
     
  20. warpus

    warpus In pork I trust

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    51,210
    Location:
    Stamford Bridge
    Border negotiations wouldn't really make sense w/ the current culture-defines-borders model. It would be too complicated to combine the two ideas into some sort of a balanced framework.

    Besides, the developers had to severely limit the already existing diplomacy because they were unable to make the AI smart enough to negotiate wisely. Considering this, I doubt they'd be able to give the AI good border-negotiating skills.
     

Share This Page