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

What is your opinion of agendas?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by salty mud, May 31, 2020.

  1. salty mud

    salty mud Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    4,944
    Location:
    die Schweiz
    Do you think agendas are a good addition to Civilization VI? Do you find they impact the gameplay in meaningful ways?
     
  2. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Idea Fountain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,926
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    100% form over function. I like the characterization behind it (aside from the "I am a total neurotic sociopath about this *ONE* thing but otherwise ur fine...x" part of it), but it lacks nuance and is completely meaningless.

    My ability to befriend an AI depends much more on how quickly I can send a delegation, which Government I can adopt and whether I pursue friendship aggressively, than it does on agenda modifiers.

    The most utility that I get out of them is the reminder function that they serve. If Cleopatra yells at me, then I know that I've got a weak army and must prepare myself for possible invasion.
     
  3. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,602
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    The issue is lack of scale. Very few things scale with time/intesnity.

    Qin will either like your o dislike based off the fact that you either have more or less wonders than him. So it's a -12/+12 penalty one way or another

    instead, it should increase per each Wonder difference, so if he builds 6 wonders, then you get +12 (with +2 per wonder), however, for each wonder you built, you lose -2.

    Same should apply to a number of other agendas.

    There's also lack of other aspects, like common religion (which only applies 1 way, and often usually between a founder and follower only). And some agendas are broken (if you declare a Surprise War, you automatyically satisfy Cyrus's agenda for hte rest of the game, though it decays to +1).
     
  4. iammaxhailme

    iammaxhailme Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,716
    I like the idea but you can basically safely ignore them, and the ones you can't are just really irritating ones like Dutch, Kongo, Sparta, Macedon etc
     
    yung.carl.jung likes this.
  5. Chefofrats

    Chefofrats Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2018
    Messages:
    366
    Location:
    The Cardboard Country
    They are an extension of another feature, immortal leaders, who now come with agendas that do not change over millenia, and are completely unrelated to the geopolitics of the game world. The whole idea - immortality of leaders and immutability of agendas - feels extremely forced and artificial, and requires huge amounts of suspension of disbelief for me not to consider it game breaking. Chop a single forest and I'll eternally hate you, even if I could profit from befriending you, trading with you and avoiding getting to know your army, which is three times the strength of mine. Really, Kupe? Really? How does that make any sense? Or Mvemba hating me for not converting him, from halfway across the world. Or Cleopatra loving my huge army which is on its unstoppable way towards her own empire.

    I would very much prefer Civs not having eternal leaders, but rather some starting traits that would evolve over the course of the game, and under the influence of its progress.
     
    agonistes, yung.carl.jung and mitsho like this.
  6. SharTeel

    SharTeel Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    Messages:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    I like most of them, some however are just stupid or clash with other systems...for example Alexander hates when you're at peace, but he'll also hate you if you go on a conquest spree due to warmongering
     
    yung.carl.jung, Thormodr and kaspergm like this.
  7. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    5,131
    I hate them with a vengeance. Most of them are illogical and kill immersion, and on top of that are poorly implemented.
     
    Icicle, yung.carl.jung and Chefofrats like this.
  8. Starwars

    Starwars Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2017
    Messages:
    321
    I really dislike them overall. They are supposed to give character to the leaders but all the agendas manage to do is make the leaders feel... really annoying to deal with. Especially since they're done in a way that interrupts turns or just pops up in the middle of one in some cases.

    Not a fan at all. I mean, I like the fact that you know that some leaders are going to be a pain to deal with in these games, but the agendas just make the leaders feel like petulant children. And like others have pointed out, the logic of them just goes completely against what should make sense in some cases.
     
  9. CrabHelmet

    CrabHelmet King

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2017
    Messages:
    732
    I'm not a big fan. They're so arbitrary and do so little for pushing the AI towards a win. Civ V's leader traits made all the AI feel really varied and rarely made the AI stupider, just tilted how risk averse the AI was or what sort of victory condition they went for. Civ VI's leaders are identical outside of their agendas, and their agendas make no sense for them to have or often for the player to even bother with.
     
    yung.carl.jung and kaspergm like this.
  10. Prima Italia

    Prima Italia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2017
    Messages:
    95
    Gender:
    Female
    I have only played a few games and I have to say they are completely stupid. For example I conquered Gilgamesh's capital and most of his empire save one city on another island. I make a peace deal with him and as soon as I did that I could become declared friends with him. That makes absolutely no sense.
     
    yung.carl.jung likes this.
  11. Mr Jon of Cheam

    Mr Jon of Cheam Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    521
    I don't mind the idea but the execution is poor, probably one of the worst aspects of the game for me because instead of giving the leaders a personality it just makes them appear illogical and thus exposes them as AI.
     
    Civrinn, Kjimmet, kaspergm and 3 others like this.
  12. MrRadar

    MrRadar Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,674
    I think agendas are very interesting as an idea, but they could be something more similar to policy trees of Civ5. They could start small and then later, with every era, the leaders could pick from diverging paths to go deeper and deeper into some extremist, medium or moderate leaves. That could bring some variety from game to game.
     
  13. Zaarin

    Zaarin Chief Medical Officer, DS9

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    8,944
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    I understand the idea was to give the AI more personality, but I think it failed in that regard. It makes them feel monodimensional. I think it would work better if it were on top of a personality system like Civ5's and if it were more about governing the way the AI leader behaves and less about how it wants you to behave. So, for example, maybe Gorgo has to be pressed really hard before she'll sign a truce, but she doesn't expect you to be in a perpetual state of warfare just to satisfy her agenda.
     
  14. AriochIV

    AriochIV Colonial Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,959
    Location:
    Nehwon
    I think they're a good concept, to try to add complexity to AI behavior... but the simplistic way they're implemented makes them feel very artificial. Those agendas which drive AI behavior are probably fine, though from a player's point of view, they're hard to notice. Those aspects of agendas that lead the AI to incessantly parrot the same nonsensical line, or behave in illogical ways (like Alexander or Gorgo complaining that I'm not at war and then denouncing me as a warmonger), make the game worse rather than better.
     
    Kmart_Elvis, Civrinn, Kjimmet and 4 others like this.
  15. steveg700

    steveg700 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    3,549
    One problem with agendas is that they are weighted towards other civs' behavior, rather than dictate their own. There are some exceptions, like Tomyris never declaring surprise wars or Gorgo never ceding cities, but few and far between.

    Another is that the AI doesn't care about anyone else's civs' agendas. They just do what they're going to do, and if it generates penalties then oh well.

    A bigger problem than those is that agendas rarely lead to a narrative where there are ideological dividing lines. I think around the time tier-3 governments show up, we should start to see something take place that goes beyond one-to-one allegiances.

    But most of all, the diplomatic modifiers for agendas are too easily eclipsed by positive modifiers for building a relationship. Once you're an ally, anything goes.

    And then there's the exploitability of giving gifts for positive diplo modifiers.
     
  16. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Idea Fountain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,926
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    Master of Orion had one of the best AI personality systems in place: each race had a personality (pacifistic, erratic, ruthless) which determined how they behaved towards the other players and a strategy (expansionist, technologist, militarist, diplomat) that determined their playstyle. Each race had a default personality and strategy that they would roll 60% of the time, with a 20% of rolling a predetermined alternative set instead. An agenda system to determine flavour/preferences/approval on top of this would make the diplomatic experience a lot better.

    On its own? eh, we all agree with that it's kind of a failure. I agree with Marshmellow that the lack of scaling is the real killer here, as well as the lack of other modifers (which should Seondeok just look whether your science/turn is bigger than hers? Let her compare your output with that of other players she's met, or let het look at the amount of campuses you have, the amount of Eureka's you've earned, etc). Adding Hidden Agenda's can only do so much...
     
    steveg700, Kmart_Elvis and Zaarin like this.
  17. ADHansa

    ADHansa Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    Not good at all.
    Let the AI play to win and give it the best toolsto do so.
    The starnet mod of stellaris is good example of how AI should handle diplomacy, be active and be ruthless but honour agreements make allianses where it is in ones intrest to do so. Someone who stands in your way is an enemy. An enemy of an enemy is a friend.
     
    yung.carl.jung likes this.
  18. Pfeffersack

    Pfeffersack Deity

    Joined:
    May 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,935
    Location:
    Germany
    I like the basic idea behind, but the implementation is lacking: The 0/1 logic is a problem and they should effect the behaviour of the "agends owner" (or if there, it could be stronger). Also, which "random" agendas a leader should get should more weighted towards the personality and the historical agendas. There should be still randomness involved, but IMO it would sharpen the AI personalities, if you can say that leader X usually cares about Y (Lord Lakely is right about the coolness of the MoO2 mechanic)
     
  19. Chefofrats

    Chefofrats Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2018
    Messages:
    366
    Location:
    The Cardboard Country
    The random agendas are bonkers. "I hate you because you have a different government" always ticks me off. The penatly is so huge (-20) that it negates the bonuses from trade and satisfying other agendas. It's simply crazy. When two countries are in conflict, it is generally over their actions, not their regimes as such. Many dictatorships get along just fine with the democratic USA, yet the democratic UK does everything it can to annoy the rest of democratic Europe (yeah, I know I'm simplifying this, but the general argument holds).

    So what if my government is Theocracy while yours is Monarchy, if I don't go on a conversion spree in your cities? Why do you care, AI? Why do you value it more than anything else? It does not bring flavour to the gameplay, it is annoying lunacy.
     
  20. yung.carl.jung

    yung.carl.jung Hey Bird! I'm Morose & Lugubrious

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,161
    Location:
    The Twilight Zone
    sounds neat, what alternate history fanfic is that one from?

    :satan:
     
    Kmart_Elvis likes this.

Share This Page