On Romancing the Blowers Daughter

[vorshlumpf]

Two things that I wish the computer AI would acknowledge in their attitude toward you:

- fighting their enemy within their boundaries, e.g., "You protected our lands from harm! +1"
- fighting their enemy within one square (or two?) of their city, e.g., "You saved our city! +2"

Since we're on the subject of diplomacy, and I apologise if this has been mentioned by someone else, but it is really annoying that the AI will only ask you to join in a war for nothing. Yet, to get them to join a war you have to have a dozen techs or so handy to gift to them (excuse my exaggeration). Your choices are limited to: join in the war for nothing but good rep, or decline and get bad rep.

There is a lot more I'd like to see with AI diplomacy, but I'm already delving into pipe-dream land.

- Niilo

 

[QES]

Two things that I wish the computer AI would acknowledge in their attitude toward you:

- fighting their enemy within their boundaries, e.g., "You protected our lands from harm! +1"
- fighting their enemy within one square (or two?) of their city, e.g., "You saved our city! +2"

Since we're on the subject of diplomacy, and I apologise if this has been mentioned by someone else, but it is really annoying that the AI will only ask you to join in a war for nothing. Yet, to get them to join a war you have to have a dozen techs or so handy to gift to them (excuse my exaggeration). Your choices are limited to: join in the war for nothing but good rep, or decline and get bad rep.

There is a lot more I'd like to see with AI diplomacy, but I'm already delving into pipe-dream land.

- Niilo

The reason for this is simple. The AI will always be stupider than a human. In order to have the computer represent "tough dealing" it has to make requests that are clearly not fair, and always try to one-side trade negotiations. Becuase where as you might be able to appeal to a human being that a deal is "fair" theres a lot of manipulation and double-handed dealing that goes on during diplomatic sessions. Language and how you word your commitments and ideals is crucial in diplomacy, and it can affect whether you get the oil deal, or whether they assult you physically. In a game, since responces are scripted, it has to be based on value alone, and then your "diplomatic" +s and -s influence at what point the computer accepts a deal. If youve a ton of + diplomacy with a civ, they are likely to give you things you demand for free! Though you'll take a slight hit in diplomacy. The reason for them demanding things for free is to continously keep the diplomacy fluid and not static. If it was static, the HUMAN player would be in 100% control of all the diplomatic consequences (and consequently all world wars and international effects) and diplomatic arrangements. To prevent this, and give the player a bit of a challange, as well as keeping the computer players competetive, they're going to err on the side of unfairness in their favor.
-Qes

 

[vorshlumpf]

I don't think it was a game design decision as much as a simplicity decision. I feel you could easily code the various factors that could make diplomacy more dynamic using an AI, but it takes time. I have no problem with a civ demanding a join a war at their side, but it would be nice if my Friendly ally said, "Look, I need you to fight in this war with me, and I notice you don't have an Iron resource for a wicked-cool army. How about it?" Or, the other way around ("Sure, I'll join you, but my army is short on swords and armour so how about some Iron love?").

- Niilo

 

[QES]

I don't think it was a game design decision as much as a simplicity decision. I feel you could easily code the various factors that could make diplomacy more dynamic using an AI, but it takes time. I have no problem with a civ demanding a join a war at their side, but it would be nice if my Friendly ally said, "Look, I need you to fight in this war with me, and I notice you don't have an Iron resource for a wicked-cool army. How about it?" Or, the other way around ("Sure, I'll join you, but my army is short on swords and armour so how about some Iron love?").

- Niilo

Well i agree with you whole-heartedly. Which is why i started this thread, I want more complexity in diplomacy. More "depth". "Deepness" "Deeposity" So to speak.

Anything that adds to this is something im going to generally support.
-Qes

P.s Plus nerd-love is funny.

 

[Maian]

If you've any programming ability, you should tinker around and see what you can come up with. That is the easiest way to see something in the game. Had I any programing skill I'd be working on a hundred different things.
-Qes

I actually am interested in trying to implement some Total War features, like heirs and stuff, but at the moment I'm rather busy trying to implement hero equipment and stuff

 

[QES]

I actually am interested in trying to implement some Total War features, like heirs and stuff, but at the moment I'm rather busy trying to implement hero equipment and stuff

Well when you get the heir's stuff started, post your running-results here. It'd be great to see whats working and whats not, perhaps there are lurker's out there who'd know a thing or two and could help when the time comes.
-Qes

 

[Starship]

The Lopez is working on a dynacide & regicide mod component currently, and I think he's nearing completion. You may want to save yourself some energy. You'll need to find his threads (in C&C, and Mod Components) to check out details, and ask him questions. I bring it up b/c the FfH team is incorporating his Mercenaries mod eventually, and this would seem another ideal candidate once the bugs are out.

Also, QES, I hope you take this the right way, but you talk, ALOT. You say so many things, on so many threads, that it makes me not want to read the threads because you just chatter on about everything and nothing. Sometimes less is more, I say this because it's not that your ideas are bad, or anything, but it's like your trying to dominate the posts by sheer volume...? Please don't take that the wrong way because I'm not trying to start a fight.

 

[QES]

The Lopez is working on a dynacide & regicide mod component currently, and I think he's nearing completion. You may want to save yourself some energy. You'll need to find his threads (in C&C, and Mod Components) to check out details, and ask him questions. I bring it up b/c the FfH team is incorporating his Mercenaries mod eventually, and this would seem another ideal candidate once the bugs are out.

Also, QES, I hope you take this the right way, but you talk, ALOT. You say so many things, on so many threads, that it makes me not want to read the threads because you just chatter on about everything and nothing. Sometimes less is more, I say this because it's not that your ideas are bad, or anything, but it's like your trying to dominate the posts by sheer volume...? Please don't take that the wrong way because I'm not trying to start a fight.

It's very hard to truly offend me, so none taken. And yeah, I've posted alot. There are 4 potential reasons for me to post. A) I genuinely have something unique thought out and want responces on. B) Another post I see makes me wonder x,y and z things and i want to learn more through discourse. C) Something a poster says opens up an opportunity for a brief joke, humor keeps me sane, and finally - D) I've recently been ill and have little to do. It is quite distressing when the brain works and the fingers work, but the rest of the body does not.

Every person I've ever met makes me think, this increses my curiosity in whatever they happen to be thinking/discussing. If I post alot, its most likely becuase I find it all so terribly facinating. If this is wrong, ill dutifly stop. I just am very easily "into" everything i come across. Sometimes i ask direct questions, sometimes i made direct statements - In both cases I want to learn, which is the only real reason to post, outside of wish-fulfillment in the FFH mod itself.

I hope these reasons explain why I post so much. I am truly facinated by what everyone says, and since im sick, I have little else to do. If you dont read my posts thats fine, I honestly dont believe many people do. But enough read them to respond, and its the responce I always delight in.

On Lopez:

Very cool, i hope that it'll be finished soon, so I can take it for a test spin. I'm not even sure how the merc thing works, but im curious beyond all get-out.
-Qes

p.s. Were you honestly curious why I post so much? Or was this a not-so-subtle request to stop? Or more of just a statement in general showing a bit of annoyance with me? Doesnt really matter, im just curious, as always.

EDIT: Starship i should also mention that i remember you from the last time i was on this thread, and i think you told me something similar then too. I was last here this past winter....the last time i was sick. I had a different sign on name then (and ive forgotten it now). This is why I put in my profile "Idea hurricane" As i was telling someone who was overly complimenting me (something i take more issue with than criticism) i see my role as simply coming in, blowing a lot of hot air around, flinging small animals at defenseless bystanders, then retreat back into the void. What can i say, my ideas come in bulk. I'd use the "spoiler" thing if i knew how, I know that then my posts would be less intrusive.

 

[Coca_carola]

If you've any programming ability, you should tinker around and see what you can come up with. That is the easiest way to see something in the game. Had I any programing skill I'd be working on a hundred different things.
-Qes

as a matter of fact I have a little "experience" in c++ or more like I know how it woeks but i don't have any clue how you mod in civ 4 There is some kind of tutorial for that on the forums?

 

[Starship]

QES - Here are the links to the Lopez's regicide/dynacide project.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174504

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=165906

I think you'll find it interesting reading.

Hmmm....my response was....a little helpful advice, and a little annoyance.

Please ignore the annoyance, as I was just generally grumpy last night.

This is a public forum, and I am wrong to condemn anyone who is excited about this awesome mod from speaking about it. It's not my board, I am not on the team, and thus I misspoke. Sorry for the grumpiness, talk on.

 

[snarko]

In order to have the computer represent "tough dealing" it has to make requests that are clearly not fair, and always try to one-side trade negotiations.

Do you ever accept it though? I never accept demands. I accept perhaps one out of 100 requests for help. It has little if any impact on my game besides from being annoying.

Also the AI frequently ask me to join a war when I'm already in the middle of one! They couldn't even pay me to join their war when I'm already fighting elsewhere, much like I can't pay them to join my war when they're already involved in one.

 

[QES]

QES - Here are the links to the Lopez's regicide/dynacide project.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174504

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=165906

I think you'll find it interesting reading.

Hmmm....my response was....a little helpful advice, and a little annoyance.

Please ignore the annoyance, as I was just generally grumpy last night.

This is a public forum, and I am wrong to condemn anyone who is excited about this awesome mod from speaking about it. It's not my board, I am not on the team, and thus I misspoke. Sorry for the grumpiness, talk on.

NO worries. I get annoyed by my own posts too.
Just not alot to do when your bed bound.
-Qes

 

[QES]

Do you ever accept it though? I never accept demands. I accept perhaps one out of 100 requests for help. It has little if any impact on my game besides from being annoying.

Also the AI frequently ask me to join a war when I'm already in the middle of one! They couldn't even pay me to join their war when I'm already fighting elsewhere, much like I can't pay them to join my war when they're already involved in one.

This is a very good point, they do make the demands but i almost always ignore them. It'd be great if we could see some sort of consequence for not accepting the demand. Instead of merely 'Help me with this war' it should be something like "Help me with this war, or ill cancel our trade agreements"

And "you should give me money else ill take your cities and burn them to the ground".

THese (if generally true, and not bluffing,) would give me pause before immediately ignoring their requests.

Still, sometimes they should be bluffing.
-Qes

 

[QES]

as a matter of fact I have a little "experience" in c++ or more like I know how it woeks but i don't have any clue how you mod in civ 4 There is some kind of tutorial for that on the forums?

Kael has a "how to design a mod" thread you could look at? Else i dont know, i tinkered with previous versions of CIV, and this is so far beyond my skill I stick with abstract conceptuilizations, and design theory.
-Qes

 

[vorshlumpf]

I'm assuming this has turned into a general AI diplomacy thread . . .

I recently managed to get one adversary to go to war against another, despite her desite not to. When I asked the Amurites to fight the Malakim, she said she feared their military might (cool). Then I noticed that the Malakim had a defensive pact with the Kuriotates. Guess what - the Amurites were fine with taking a bribe to declare war on the Kuriotates, which triggered the defence pact. Done and done.

Obviously it would be nice if it wasn't possible to manipulate the AI like this.

- Niilo

 

[TheBoatman]

For the romances: All you need is to disassemble The Sims and copy a bit of code

More diplomacy would be nice. Some examples I'd like to see:
- magical pacts (sharing mana for adept building purposes),
- technological pacts (forces both to research certain technology with beakers added together),
- ability to settle "close bordes problems" by agreeing on a borderline,
- secret pacts ("We have sworn to attack that state in the middle in y.486" making it possible to prepare for mutual fight, which is nearly impossible with the "declare war")

However there is always the AI problem. I know from my own experience how difficult it is to balance AI preferences (more choices -> much more problems). And in Civ4 the main AI problem is the lack of long-term aims which could override some short-term decisions.

 

[QES]

I'm assuming this has turned into a general AI diplomacy thread . . .

I recently managed to get one adversary to go to war against another, despite her desite not to. When I asked the Amurites to fight the Malakim, she said she feared their military might (cool). Then I noticed that the Malakim had a defensive pact with the Kuriotates. Guess what - the Amurites were fine with taking a bribe to declare war on the Kuriotates, which triggered the defence pact. Done and done.

Obviously it would be nice if it wasn't possible to manipulate the AI like this.

- Niilo

However, i see this is as plausible ways of encouraging war in normal diplomatic relations. It seems very plausible to me to play off a civs hatred of another, to trigger war with a 3rd civ that you orgiionally want them to fight.
-Qes

 

[QES]

For the romances: All you need is to disassemble The Sims and copy a bit of code

More diplomacy would be nice. Some examples I'd like to see:
- magical pacts (sharing mana for adept building purposes),
- technological pacts (forces both to research certain technology with beakers added together),
- ability to settle "close bordes problems" by agreeing on a borderline,
- secret pacts ("We have sworn to attack that state in the middle in y.486" making it possible to prepare for mutual fight, which is nearly impossible with the "declare war")

However there is always the AI problem. I know from my own experience how difficult it is to balance AI preferences (more choices -> much more problems). And in Civ4 the main AI problem is the lack of long-term aims which could override some short-term decisions.

I like all of these, hopefully diplomacy will get an overhaul eventually. I'm sure part of it will involve "questing" when that comes around, but still my origional purpose (and it is becoming a generic diplomacy thread) was to add a great deal of flavor and "personality" or PERONAL TOUCH to diplomacy. Someone might not go to war with a common enemy because of xy and z concerns, but if its "her man" who's in trouble, it might be enough to tip it over to war. The idea that sometimes we wage war, we do things, not for some logical profoundly mathematical reason, but instead because "It seemed like the right thing to do at the time". Etc. Get emotion involved (in a game) and it becomes a story.
-Qes

 

[Bad Player]

- secret pacts ("We have sworn to attack that state in the middle in y.486" making it possible to prepare for mutual fight, which is nearly impossible with the "declare war")

Yeah I'd definitely like to see some mechanism that allows civs to agree to declare war together rather than one declaring war and then trying to convince someone else to join them.

 

[Chalid]

I have not read all of this but seen some idears for different diplomatic Actions and behaviour.

I would be very gratefull if someone could collect the different proposals and post them in the Weaknesses of the AI thread.

One thing i always wanted that you actually gain something when you fight another civs war.
One thing i am thinking about is units. I remember that time in SMAC where the AI moved some units into your territory and gifted them to you so that you can better fight its war.

Another thing that i really hate is that sometimes the AI asks you to attack someone and in the next turn itself makes peace and you are alone fighting the AIs ex-war...

Edit: collective War planning is already on my list to do.