One-sided trades (after patch)?

[Aldor]

Whats up with that? Before you could go and offer the AI a fair resource trade, 1 for 1. Now they ALWAYS want something else too, either other luxury resources, or cash. Why did this have to be changed? Does the AI act the same in trades with other AI as well, or is this AGAIN the stupid old AI-vs-human bias???

Yes, I'm angry about this change, and want it reverted back please. Thanks.

 

[MadRat]

Whats up with that? Before you could go and offer the AI a fair resource trade, 1 for 1. Now they ALWAYS want something else too, either other luxury resources, or cash. Why did this have to be changed? Does the AI act the same in trades with other AI as well, or is this AGAIN the stupid old AI-vs-human bias???

Yes, I'm angry about this change, and want it reverted back please. Thanks.

The AI is overcompensating for being such a milquetoast in earlier versions and giving away its cities and resources like candy.

Rat

 

[pagh80]

I agree that you should be able to trade luxuries 1:1

 

[sukritact]

Wow, I might not update after reading this.

 

[cman2010]

I noticed this as well but I seem to remember the ai doing this before. I could not get a fair trade with some ai's after the patch and the ones that did trade seemed more conservative than before.

 

[Aldor]

I understand that it may be difficult for the AI (or the programmer of it) to determine what a "fair" deal is, but this certainly doesn't go for luxury resources. If I have a luxury the AI needs, and it has one that I don't have, what could be more fair?

 

[xxxlambo]

Of course this is assuming they have more than 1 of this said resource. Whatever I tried to trade 1:1 on lux they would ask for more if I was taking their only one of that type. If they had 2 or more then they would be happy to trade 1:1 are you saying the patch changed it to always ask for more?

 

[DarkMaster]

I'm having the same problem. In the past, it used to be that surplus resources vs surplus resources traded 1:1. Now it's 1 for 1 of mine + one sided open border + 100g, and that's for a friend.

 

[Aldor]

Yes I was talking about surplus vs. surplus trades. Of course if I'm asking for their only resource they should demand a lot for that.

The same problem now also is with research agreements. I shall give you open borders + 100g in addition to the RA price? No thank you.

This needs to be corrected IMO.

 

[Clammo]

Agreed OP, I'm finding in situations where previously I'd get a 1:1 deal on mutual spare resources they're now demanding 2:1 at minimum. On some occasions they're after 3:1, or a combination of 2:1 and money/one sided in their favour open borders.

This kind of gimps diplomacy even further, as it's impossible to maintain those levels of deals and keep your empire happy, which inevitably means war is even more likely, in an effort to capture the resources you can't trade for due to lopsided deals. Also deals where spare resources are traded for cash I'm finding I'm at maximum getting about half the money I was previously.

This isn't at all what the game needed, it was far too war oriented already, so I'm hoping this is some kind of bug rather than deliberate.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

I suspect that's Firaxs way, as always, to manage belancing of the game. Probably it only affects the human player, AI trades maybe are still 1-1.

They can't manage to make the game better, only give bonus to AI to compensate...
I'm growing tired of that...

 

[Aldor]

Actually, this could improve diplomacy quite a bit. For example, if you have a pact of cooperation, you could get the fair, equal deals. If you are neutral or worse to an AI, it would ask for more. THAT would make sense, but afaik its not how it works right now.

 

[eris]

It looks to me like the AI is aware that I will get more gain out of the trade than they will, or that they want to make a profit. Both sound to me like an improvement in the AI, not an introduction of a bug.

 

[Fariic]

I've had AI ask for research agreements with no strings.

Have you tried trading with an AI you have a PoC with?

 

[DaveGold]

It looks to me like the AI is aware that I will get more gain out of the trade than they will, or that they want to make a profit. Both sound to me like an improvement in the AI, not an introduction of a bug.

It still makes the game unpleasurable as players don't like being cheated on deals. The AI won't be giving you a 2:1 deal in your favour even if they work out they're doing well out of it.

 

[Clement]

After the patch no leader will make a straight one to one deal with me on any luxury resource anymore, they all want two for my one, as if the game needed any more unsatisfying aspects added to it, it must be to make the game harder without tinkering with the AI, great.

 

[Creepy Old Man]

It still makes the game unpleasurable as players don't like being cheated on deals. The AI won't be giving you a 2:1 deal in your favour even if they work out they're doing well out of it.

I agree. It feels wrong to have to give out 2 for 1, just because I'm the non-AI. Personally, I'd much rather the AI received *hidden* bonuses when trading with me. So, I could trade my spare ivory for Catherine's spare spice, but (unknown to me), she also gets a free 100g out of the deal. I wouldn't complain about that (much).

But yah, I've stopped trading, and now I just take. Diplomacy has gone from crap to non-existent.

 

[Clement]

But yah, I've stopped trading, and now I just take. Diplomacy has gone from crap to non-existent.

it's sad i'm laughing about the game but i have to agree with you.

 

[MinutiaRules]

Yes I was talking about surplus vs. surplus trades. Of course if I'm asking for their only resource they should demand a lot for that.

The same problem now also is with research agreements. I shall give you open borders + 100g in addition to the RA price? No thank you.

This needs to be corrected IMO.

The first thing I noticed after the patch was that RAs were offered where I had to pony up the RA cost plus something extra. What's up with that? How can RAs not be considered completely equal in gain on each side of the deal? Is there to be no RAs with the human? Deals should be based upon the situation at hand. If the AI is getting beat at war it should offer something to get out of it. OTOH if it is ahead in the conflict it should be more demanding. I shouldn't be taking one city after another then be faced with a peace offer where I have to pay out. It sort of requires me to just slog on and finish them off. No other choices are available. One dimensional play possibilities.

 

[zub]

When you got an unfair RA was the AI behind in tech?