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

The problem with Diplomacy in ciV

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by SalmonSoil, Oct 28, 2010.

  1. SalmonSoil

    SalmonSoil Prince

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    358
    There are definitly problems with diplomacy in ciV, whenever someone declares war on me I just don't know why. It feels random, like the game hates me or something.
    Now I know Firaxis didn't intend for this, and I think they tried really hard to make an AI diplomacy system which felt both realistic and competitive.
    And I actually think that they achieved this. The problem is that the game doesn't show you how great it's diplomacy is. So when someone declares war on you you have no idea why, even if it's through some brilliant and exciting diplomacy mechanic.
    What I would suggest Firaxis do is let you see why a civ is hostile or at war with you, say you mouse over the hostile /at war status and it says "You founded these cities too close to us" or "Geneva is our best friend not yours" or even "Your conquest of Cape Town has upset the balance of power".

    In the words of Duke Leto Atreides; "It is not enough that I govern them well, they must know how well I govern."
     
  2. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    One of the core rules here is what in Civ 5 AI and human opponents have the same interface to work with. I think they did as much as possible to make diplomacy transparent with these constraints:
    - You know when your warmongering worries everyone with their endings of cooperation pacts.
    - There's a good system for insulting opponents, which AI uses to show it's attitude.
    - There's a system to ask opponent about not settling nearby.
    - There's an ability to issue a warning about nearby troops.

    I found the diplomacy quite easy to work with and I don't expect too much more from it.
     
  3. MkLh

    MkLh King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    905
    Location:
    Finland
    There are signals to tell that the AI is unfriendly (offers less from luxuries than normally etc.), but there is no way to see why he is unfriendly. Actually is seems quite arbitrary. It isn't uncommon to see the AI declaring hostility in the very beginning of the game, two turns after you have met.

    But all this is also quite meaningless, since the AI doesn't even need to unfriendly to declare war. It plays for the win and the attitudes mean very little. Some people say it's awesome.
     
  4. Ellada

    Ellada Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    26
    Location:
    EU
    I totally agree, a casus belli system would be fantastic! Someone could start an Oil war or something.
     
  5. D_Toccs

    D_Toccs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    21
    There is no "brilliant and exciting diplocmacy mechanic". The fact is that the ai will always declare war on you it's just a matter of time.
    It doesn't matter if I have been ripping myself off to trade him resources for the last 3000 years, if we have a mutal enemy or any future benefits that would come from our continued alliance.
    The fact is that the very second the ai has the slightest edge on you, it WILL declare war ( and it will more than likely squander it's advantage if said advantage wasn't a statiscal illusion to begin with ). That is not in my opinion a good diplomacy mechanic.
     
  6. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,115
    Location:
    Abroad
    Agreed with the OP. For all the developers' talk about making things "accessible" the diplomacy system IS NOT accessible at all.

    You only get indicators if a civ is "hostile" "at war" (with you) or "afraid," and the first two show up way more than the third, not that the third matters because civs rightly "afraid" of you still refuse to give into your demands. XD

    Furthermore, I have noticed many times where a civ will insult me and now show up as Hostile, and in fact when clicking on them, they seem neutral and greet me "Hello friend. What brings you to court today?" What the heck?
     
  7. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    I could tell you more - there is no attitude. Sometimes AI worry about you, sometimes AI shows it. But there are no +/- like in Civ 4.

    I think people who like Civ 4 diplomacy of "do X receive Y attitude" should really enjoy speaking with city-states in Civ 5. They act exactly like that, completely transparent.

    Personally I found it much more fun to control relationships in Civ 5. Requires a lot of trade planning.
     
  8. Pyrodraulis

    Pyrodraulis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    25
    Isn't the next update supposed to be aimed at the diplomacy system? If I remember correctly they're making a few revisions to the current system but they said they couldn't comment on the changes just yet.
     
  9. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    :confused:

    I think that city state diplomacy is the worst part of diplomacy... But civs diplomacy is not so better...

    First, without a point system, at least, to be a good diplomacy system, you need embassies..

    Second, to make the civ behaviour a little more realistic, it's better not of all them show hostility so easily, and make remarkable defferencies between them about the way to handle diplomacy (now are all the same).

    Third, the devs put in the game some sort of offensive answering system, but it isn't well implemented, because it needs reason to be used... Casus Belli may be a good way to use it, but as it is now, is useless, if someone says otherway, clearly haven't understood the game too well (and i suggest to take a look to the XML and others file to grasp how much they are wrong)...

    And the cooperation and secret pacts need an overhaul to be more active in the diplomacy phase, they are not shown even in the diplo summary, they may be prerequisite to some other pact, they need to have a active role in diplomacy....
     
  10. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,115
    Location:
    Abroad
    Where did they say that? Could you provide a URL?
     
  11. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Could you explain your point more? What should embassies do to make diplomacy better?

    That's exactly opposite to OP :)
    Regarding the differences - I don't expect too much difference in diplomacy, there are other areas for this. For example - if AI wants to attack you, it less likely to make trade deals, there shouldn't be any difference. The difference should be if the AI wants to attack you or not.

    I agree. I'd expect the some sort of global notifications about broken words, so AI (anf human players if they wish) could take them in account. And slightly rework the agreements to make better use of it.

    The idea behind them is good on their own, but I agree with you what it needs more attention, as I mentioned above.
     
  12. whomybuddy

    whomybuddy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    35
    ...............AI will declare war on you when your border is next to them[ like they said "My empire needs room to breath"] . When you attack too many city states. When you attack AI's ally. If you stay away from those situations, you'll have a pretty peaceful life.
     
  13. BobDole

    BobDole American Leader in Civ VI

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Messages:
    811
    I think doing things like this would help, but it wouldn't entirely fix the diplomacy problem completely (not to mention you can sometimes tell war is coming when people start canceling pacts they had with you).

    My biggest problem is that the AI ridiculous standards. They have no problem declaring war on multiple City States and declaring war on other civs over and over, but if you dare to declare war on someone, you get berated and everyone gives you horrible trade deals and only will open borders if you shell out half your gold. I've watched other civs conquer 3 or 4 City States and complain when I decide to invade one, or flip out when I declare war as an act of revenge on a guy who tried to blindside me with a declaration of war earlier. The AI has no problem with warmongering and backstabbing anyone but goes crazy if you do it to other people. They also have no problem dropping cities next to you, and if you complain about it or do the same thing back.....
     
  14. Soro

    Soro Warlord

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Messages:
    193
    Except that they removed that key element of transparency, introduced in Civ IV: a quantitative system to evaluate an AI opponent's feelings toward the player. Whether you like the numerical way it was expressed or not, it was the first and only game to utilize such a system, after years of complaints by players about "The AI seems okay with me, then suddenly turns around, screams about something, and attacks."

    If transparency was the objective, I don't understand why the quantitative system--hailed in many reviews upon Civ IV's release, of course--was removed.
     
  15. elthrasher

    elthrasher Revcaster

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    712
    Not disagreeing with the first statement, but the second is mostly only true when you share a landmass with the AI. If you keep your distance and are on another continent, unexpected dows are rare, in my experience, even when they would make a lot of sense (i.e. your capital(s) is the only thing keeping the AI from winning).

    To me AI behavior often seems random and stupid but occasionally seems about right, which kind of suggests it's random with bursts of dumb luck. Why the heck does Alexander always beat up on city-states? Hates his advantage? Why does the AI sit there with 14k gold when there are unaffiliated city-states around? How can I possibly be 20 techs behind and still winning a space victory? What could possibly possess the AI to build the UN when all remaining city-states are in permanent war with it?
     
  16. DaveGold

    DaveGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,058
    When they insult you they're trying to tell you why they'll declare war on you later. I suspect this was the intention of the programmers but it just seems like antisocial personality disorder.
     
  17. JBConquests

    JBConquests Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    342
    Location:
    North Dakota, US
    I agree with this statement. I prefer island games with lots of water. I played like 5 games where I was on my own island and never once saw a declaration of war in all 5 games. This might also have something to do with I always have a large military force.

    Play on Lakes map or something like that and I end up at war with everyone - every game. Though I think if I am persistent in my diplomacy I can keep an AI as a friend but it is difficult.

    I would like something in between these 2 extremes.
     
  18. isthmus

    isthmus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    229
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    It sounds like "settling near" to an AI civ is a key source of its aggression.
    I've also noticed far away civs don't tend to get annoyed with me as much. The only time it's ever happened is when another civ convinces them to join in.
     
  19. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    The problem is not what the numbers shows the attitude, the problem is what in Civ 4 attitude IS the numbers. The same as city-states in Civ 5. That's nothing about transparency, that's about motives.

    I found the Civ 5 system quite transparent. I know when AI considers attacking me - it decreases value of some trade agreements, I know why AI considers this and I know who to decrease the probability.
     
  20. MkLh

    MkLh King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    905
    Location:
    Finland
    Except that the diplomacy with city states is extremely simple and doesn't need any of the planning Civ4 diplomacy needed. They have no any kind of mutual relationships (one of the mission is to eliminate another cs yes, but you can ally with both and it doesn't matter..). It's basically gifting money, fulfilling their tasks and not trespassing their area until they are friendly. I wouldn't call it diplomacy at all. It certainly isn't nearly enough to replace Civ4 diplomacy, which (even if it was relatively mechanical) gave the game some strategical depth that is missing in Civ5.
     

Share This Page