The new diplomacy

[charon2112]

I agree with this. Maybe they should change it to "We fear you are pursuing global domination.", or something.

Personally, I think that this info should be left out. Feels like the AI is playing a game rather than simulating the building of a civilization.

When I play a game, I like to pretend to be whatever leader I chose: Augustus, Isabella whatever, building my very own civilization. Yes, as a human player, I like objectives to be reached in a game: Space, Dominion, just so that I can end one session feeling accomplished.

But the AI should be designed to suck the player into a game world, not pretend he is in the real world competing with you, I go to Multiplayer for that, keep it out of Singleplayer please.

Just my 2 cents!

 

[PAnz3r]

on "i wanna ya land" matter: well, as human player, in all my game starting from Civ 2 , i consider a really huge chunk of land as mine till the dawn of the game, when i find some new civ i immediatly think where i want our borders and if i can stop them to expand toward me, for example puting a city on a narrow penisula for stoping their settlers or guarding the spot that i want for me.....yes , my thought dont influence the diplomacy but i can accept this form the AI because it's similar to my "rush tattics"

 

[krunsh]

Some of text need to be changed and I have a feeling they soon will be, and that this part was kinda skipped because they were working more on the basics of the rules.

Everything else I think is a HUGE step forward for civ5. I already liked the game, but still I could objectivly see a few big flaw. Now this new game I started is realy fun.

 

[kaltorak]

on "i wanna ya land" matter: well, as human player, in all my game starting from Civ 2 , i consider a really huge chunk of land as mine till the dawn of the game, when i find some new civ i immediatly think where i want our borders and if i can stop them to expand toward me, for example puting a city on a narrow penisula for stoping their settlers or guarding the spot that i want for me.....yes , my thought dont influence the diplomacy but i can accept this form the AI because it's similar to my "rush tattics"

I think exactly as you do. The difference is, I don't want the AI to be influenced by that. I want gandhi to act like gandhi, and montezuma to act like montezuma, not play against AI1 and AI2 trying to (badly) act as a human player.

 

[Stilgar08]

I think exactly as you do. The difference is, I don't want the AI to be influenced by that. I want gandhi to act like gandhi, and montezuma to act like montezuma, not play against AI1 and AI2 trying to (badly) act as a human player.

That's what Civ IV was for...
Concerning the victory-condition-line: That should be changed and it'll be fine; like charon2112 said: "We fear you are pursuing global domination." Or "We are taken aback by your race to space" or "Your SPs are too superior to others"... Then it'll fit nicely into the atmosphere...

 

[Deggial]

I just can second Charon and Stiglar. It's all about wording - and wording only.

It makes perfect sense (and not only game-wise) if there are tensions because of competition on the same goals. Not "winning the game", but being the first to settle Alpha Centauri, or dominating the world by war or politics.

So, just alter the rollovertext and immersion will not be lost.

My only concerns are, that, if they give us concrete reasons, we will know their goals in this game. This might be something, a foreign leader is better advised to keep secret.

So, maybe a text like this would be appropriate: "We have tensions with you, because we seem to be competitors to the same goals." (Or something in better english...)

 

[neilkaz]

LOL..is there really diplomacy in this game? Home late last night, I install the patch and DLC and start my usual small pangaea immortal game, this time as Alex with a goal of seeing if CC can still be effective.

A nice starting position and I start with mining since it will be useful for gems and also to clear a forest for dyes. Then onward towards HBR and horses are discovered with in my capital and also 3 tiles away so I build my 2nd city on them.

I meet Sully to my south and haven't met anyone else and there's many CS nearby. Perhaps we are on a bulb-like part of the map. Anyhow.. ROFL.. Sully soon and right out of the Blue DOW's me and we'd had zero interaction since the initial meeting and the city I built wasn't towards him at all.

The wording of his DOW implied that he didn't think he'd beat me, but that he felt it was his only chance. I haven't seen that wording before and wish that I'd written it down.

I guess I have to load an autosave or two and see if the diplo tool tips can give me a reason for his quick DOW. Perhaps he covets my land? Perhaps he wants my horses? He'll get my horses soon enough running through his land and hopefully a few CC with some support can take his cities (he's allready lost four units in my lands).

Anyhow...I played dozens of games prepatch and have never been DOW'd this early without some previous indication from the AI such as complaining about something. Sully's first comment to me was the usual "hello.. blah blah stuff" and his 2nd was the DOW. It is only turn 67 and his DOW came a few turns prior.

.. neilkaz ..