When the AI refuses a deal that is too good

[etj4Eagle]

Some people have raised issues where they have noticed that the AI will go from accepting a deal to rejecting it, because you sweetened the pot too much (eg they would trade their world map for yours but not for yours and a tech of yours). Seems kind of strange and couterintuitive doesn't it?

However, if the same reasonability routine is used on AI-human deals as AI-AI deal then maybe not. What I am getting at is that the AI is checking whether both sides would accept the deal if they were AI, even though one of the parites is human. Hence making the deal too good for you or the AI has the exact same effect on the deal. The routine determines that the deal is unbalanced and causes it to be rejected. Now this code line saving shortcut would rarely be visible to the human player, since we generally want to get the best of a deal.

On a side note does anyone have an idea of how much the AI values one beaker of research in terms of gold. Or the rate that tech is devalued when it is known by mulitple civs. I am thinking of working out a simple formula to determine approximate wealth of techs in trades. Of course except of Regeant the techs are not equivelent in value if offered by a human or AI, since they appear to be valued on their value to the buyer (reasonable capitalism), hence at the high levels the AI will give you practically nothing for your tech while extorting an arm an a leg if you want to buy theirs.

 

[Immortal]

Why would someone "sweeten the pot too much"? seems counter-productive for the human player. Give them tribute instead if you want to improve relations, trading won't help.

As for the post, I haven't noticed the opponent refusing a deal that's too good for them, Bismark loves it when I have to kiss his boots on trade deals.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Immortal
Why would someone "sweeten the pot too much"? seems counter-productive for the human player. . .

ANSWER: to test the "intelligence" of the AI. There is also another instance described below:

I have had extremely generous deals turned down by Polite civs, AND I have had some occasions when the deal I offered was refused - but when I asked the other civ what they wanted for the deal it was LESS for him than my original deal!

That is not logical.

 

[Random Passerby]

This seems a bit odd... I know there are some things that can cause the AI to simply not consider a deal (demanding more gold per turn than they can pay, offering more gold per turn than you can pay [I think both of these are based off of income, so if you're breaking even with 10000 gold in the bank, I still don't think they'd accept per-turn payments], requesting or offering per-turn benefits in exchange for one-time benefits when you have a history of breaking deals, etc.), but does it ever occur that simply adding more of the same, unqualified concession will cause a deal to go bust?

Example: Say you and an AI civ are each making 50 gold per turn, you have 50000 gold in the bank (don't ask me how you got this much at a rate of 50 gold per turn), and the AI has an important tech you want. You offer the AI 1000 gold for the tech, and it's an OK deal. If you change that to 100 gold per turn, the AI should, I think, refuse to consider it, because you're offering to pay more than 100% of your budget. But are you saying that it's actually possible that entering a lump-sum payment of 50000 could trigger this behavior? That's news to me...

 

[IronicWarrior19]

It's a quirk of the AI, when it offers a deal, of course it will consider it acceptable. But sometimes you can offer a deal which is better than what the AI would ask for, but because IT didn't offer the deal it 'values' it as less. This shows that part of the value of a deal for the AI is who is offering the deal. Doesn't happen too often to be a major issue though, just a bit annoying sometimes.

 

[Ironikinit]

If the AI really only offers deals it considers acceptable, that might explain how backward, poor AI civs will catch up in tech.

We have all experienced times when a civ that won't offer gold per turn, that has an empty treasury, and that is several techs behind the current state of the art, will, over the course of several turns, mysteriously catch up in tech. Maybe what has happened, among more conventional deals, is that it has offered some of those worthless world map for world map + tech trades that it offers the human player.

 

[wervdon]

Something I can't figure out that Ive only noticed under 1.17 (but it may of been there before) is how sometimes adding a luxury _hurts_ your deal

I dont remember the specific deal but lets say:
They have conscription, I want conscription.

I offer all my gold per turn, world map, all my gold, and an old tech like lets say banking. Advisor: We almost have a deal here.

Fine, fine, Ill throw in wines (last thing I can offer)

Advisor: They would never accept such a deal!


It happened like 5+ times in the last game I was playing.....adding in any luxury changed to instant "They would never accept". It also wasn't consistant, sometimes it would hurt the deal sometimes it wouldn't.

Maybe its cause I had broke an alliance against the zulu with them in the past? (to avoid my own impending doom) and they just didnt want a trade deal with me?

 

[Zouave]

Yes, that happens a lot also - "They would never accept such a deal" after you ADDED something to the offer.

I once wanted 50 gold for a tech - "we are close to a deal".
But when I dropped the 50 and asked for "2 gold PER TURN" (a total of 40) I received a "never accept". Which is stupid since I in fact asked for less. (Don't tell me they could scrounge up 2 gold per turn).

 

[tmai]

It's a quirk of the AI, when it offers a deal, of course it will consider it acceptable.

and

If the AI really only offers deals it considers acceptable, that might explain how backward, poor AI civs will catch up in tech.

The AI even offers deals it _doesn't_ consider acceptable! I have often been confronted with the wonderful situation where the AI will come with an offer, but when I go to the table the original deal (as offered by the AI) is not considered acceptable!

I think there's some hidden 'crack' luxury in the game and the negotiators are not only sitting on it.

 

[IronicWarrior19]

If you change the deal at all, it won't consider it it's deal I think.

As for the refusal of better offers, this is always because a city is offered or a per turn agreement is offered. If the AI doesn't trust you, they won't accept a luxury or per turn gold trade, as you could declare war next turn and avoid most of the payment. Of course you could also trade an empty city and take it over next turn. Either way, an easy way to rip the AI off, which it tries to recognise in advance and prevent.

 

[Magnus]

Originally posted by Zouave
Yes, that happens a lot also - "They would never accept such a deal" after you ADDED something to the offer.

I once wanted 50 gold for a tech - "we are close to a deal".
But when I dropped the 50 and asked for "2 gold PER TURN" (a total of 40) I received a "never accept". Which is stupid since I in fact asked for less. (Don't tell me they could scrounge up 2 gold per turn).

I know why they rejected that deal. Obviously they were only making a maximum of 1 gold per turn themselves, and they couldn't conceive having a negative income, despite the fact they had enough gold on hand to cover it. When they say 'they would never accept a deal' it means the deal isn't necessarily a bad one, it just means its impossible.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Zouave


ANSWER: to test the "intelligence" of the AI. There is also another instance described below:

I have had extremely generous deals turned down by Polite civs, AND I have had some occasions when the deal I offered was refused - but when I asked the other civ what they wanted for the deal it was LESS for him than my original deal!

That is not logical.

yeah, the AI needs to leran that 100 gold + 10 gpt is better then 100 gold + nothing, even if you`re a known warmonger and it doesnt trust you. After all, if you stick to the deal for only 1 turn, it`s 110 vs. 100 gold!

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

sorry, double post. can`t delete

 

[loki]

Originally posted by wervdon
Something I can't figure out that Ive only noticed under 1.17 (but it may of been there before) is how sometimes adding a luxury _hurts_ your deal
Fine, fine, Ill throw in wines (last thing I can offer)

Advisor: They would never accept such a deal!
Maybe its cause I had broke an alliance against the zulu with them in the past? (to avoid my own impending doom) and they just didnt want a trade deal with me?

Exactly. If you betrayed the AI, they will be reluctant to accept a "per turn" good (wether it's gold or a luxury): your added luxury has no value for them because they don't trust you.
Would you accept to sell a tech for a luxury when you suspect your opponent will break the deal the next turn? No. The AI will react the same way.

loki