bluebaron1
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2006
- Messages
- 10
Every time i want to get another leader on side in a war i have to give him something. How come this doesn't work the other way around?
Rewards for giving war Aid
- Thread starter bluebaron1
- Start date
Azander
Fairy
Life's unfair 
I'm siding with bluebaron on this, it's annoying to have the AI ask you to declare war on somebody for free, especially if you wanted to declare war but weren't planning on doing it at that moment. I think there should be a list of "Declare war on X" and "Make peace with X" options on the players side of the trade table so that the AI can propose to give you something in return for war with player X.
Not necessarily so... If you are very powerful and the other civ fears you enough to give tribute, can't you just demand that they go to war like you would demand a tech, or gold?
I always figured this is what AI's are doing when they ask me to go to war for free...
I always figured this is what AI's are doing when they ask me to go to war for free...
madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I think it's meant to give the AI some advantage over the unpredictable human (we all know how the indicidual AIs behave at this point). I would like to see something like this
When the AI asks for military help or an embargo there should be a negotiation option. If you do not want to negotiate, say no and get the -1 normal penalty. If you say yes immediately you the get AIs usualy love and devotion. If you negotiate you get to see what the AI has to offer (could be a few token gold all the way up to a tech, depending on the AIs need and past relations), if you accept it you get no bonus to relations but get payment as a mercenary. Refuse the bride and you get a -3 penalty to relations.
When the AI asks for military help or an embargo there should be a negotiation option. If you do not want to negotiate, say no and get the -1 normal penalty. If you say yes immediately you the get AIs usualy love and devotion. If you negotiate you get to see what the AI has to offer (could be a few token gold all the way up to a tech, depending on the AIs need and past relations), if you accept it you get no bonus to relations but get payment as a mercenary. Refuse the bride and you get a -3 penalty to relations.
Exactly. I concur.
I disagree. Diplomacy in Civ IV is virtually moot, if I'm going to get anything for my trouble of going to war I'd like it to be hard cold cash or, even better, a technology. I've have to give the AI tech/cash if I want him to declare war on somebody I don't like, and I'd like it to be the other way around.
This is a false statement.
It's not debatable. It's very important.
How so? If there's a strategic resource inside your neighbor's borders you'll have to declare war on him no matter what. And if he's your friend, who cares except for the person you're at war with? Rumor has it (I haven't actually seen this for myself) that the AI in BtS is more likely to backstab you, even if you're friends with stabber, if you have something they want or even if you're just plain under-defended. Does diplomacy matter in that case? Nooooo. I've seen a screen shot where Lincoln was Friendly while the player was at war with him and Lincoln told the player to drop dead. Did diplomacy matter there either? Nope.
I maintain my stance that diplomacy is debatable.
I maintain my stance that diplomacy is debatable.
vale
Mathematician
First of all, in that screen shot, it was apparent that the player was the one who declared war on Lincoln. In addition, they were still in the 10 turn cool down period where the AI will not talk after a war starts. So of course the diplomacy doesn't matter there at that exact moment in time. If he vassalizes or makes peace with Lincoln later in the game that relationship will be relevant. So that example is totally irrelevant to this discussion.
Diplomacies importance is not debatable or questionable or anything. It is a facet of the game that can be of utmost importance and one of the key things that I think separates the best players from the rest of them.
Diplomacies importance is not debatable or questionable or anything. It is a facet of the game that can be of utmost importance and one of the key things that I think separates the best players from the rest of them.
What skill level do you generally play on/feel comfortable on?
ratrangerm
Prince
I agree that diplomacy is a key part of the game. aelf in his Emperor/Immortal Challenges proved that diplomacy can be used to your advantage to keep relations good with AI civs to the point that it's easier to get them to agree to your requests, or at the very least, keeps them off your back for a while.
But as aelf demonstrated, diplomacy happens by keeping contact with the AI civs, and not ignoring them. If you ignore them, then of course you are probably going to get stabbed in the back, because while your relations may say "pleased," the AI doesn't see you as doing anything to his/her benefit.
Regular contact with an AI civ, and contact that keeps the AI civ happy, means that civ is more likely to want to keep those relations strong and thus won't declare war on you.
But as aelf demonstrated, diplomacy happens by keeping contact with the AI civs, and not ignoring them. If you ignore them, then of course you are probably going to get stabbed in the back, because while your relations may say "pleased," the AI doesn't see you as doing anything to his/her benefit.
Regular contact with an AI civ, and contact that keeps the AI civ happy, means that civ is more likely to want to keep those relations strong and thus won't declare war on you.
I used to play on Noble, but BtS bumped me down to Warlords.
petey
Prince
What bugs me is that if the AI is already at war with someone else, you can't even ask them because they say they're too busy at the moment. However, when I'm at war, they keep popping up and asking me to attack someone else and I get the diplomatic penalty if I refuse because I'm too busy.
Diplomacy does get more important on higher levels.
