 |
|
Raion
|
|
Ah, I think that's the way it plays.
I like to think of it as, the AI wants this, and only this!
It is like questioning the human player, why it would want to give more?
Maybe reputation or something for the AI Civilization.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Raion
|
|
It may be also trading with someone else, so it can not use the resource. Only the first resource of the same type will keep a Civilization happy. It does not use more than 1 of the resource -- like wine. If you have 4 wines, only the first wine will make your Civilization happy, the others would have to be traded to an AI Civilization that does not have wine.
So if the AI Civ has already one of the wines, yours would be no good to them, and must be an insult to them.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
l.galant
|
 |
Belgium
Nov 2001 time: 05:24
|
|
Thank you for your quick response Raion, but the AI had no WINE !!!
In fact, if he had WINE, it would be impossible for me to propose WINE (grayed) to him.
The same BUG also occured with AI refusing an IRON (that he hadn't) in addition to the things he wanted.
Last edited by l.galant on 03-12-2002 at 16:02
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero-Tau
|
|
Elsewhere
Aug 2002 time: 06:24
|
|
Have you broken a deal involving gpt og resources before? If so, the AI civs will never accept you paying resources or gpt, under any circumstances.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero-Tau
|
|
Elsewhere
Aug 2002 time: 06:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by l.galant
I have declared war to the germans (via diplomacy screen) because they refused to give me something I asked. I was having a deal with them (a FUR for a WINE) when war was declared. Is that a reason for such a strange reaction from all the AIs ??? |
Yes, if less than 20 turns had passed since you made the deal, then that could very well be the reason. The AI no longer trusts that you will keep your deals for the agreed 20 turns.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ozborn
|
|
This is definitely a HUGE diplomacy bug. It does appear to be due to breaking previous agreements, but regardless the AI should never complains when you promise to give them more. Admittedly the AI could believe you are going to break the deal, and they would rather try to get the resource from somebody else a few turns later but this isn't what is going on. I've seen this bug countless times and I don't think any effort has been made to fix it. Maybe now that multiplayer actually works they might get to it?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero-Tau
|
|
Elsewhere
Aug 2002 time: 06:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by l.galant
There is now more than 30 turns that war with the Germans is finished.
A war initiated against me by the Zulus (because I refused to gave them IRON for free) is also finished and I have a peace treaty with them for more than 20 turns. |
I think you misunderstood me. The time that has passed since the end of your wars is absolutely irrelevant. What is relevant is the number of turns from you sign the fur-wine deal with the Germans, till you declare war on them. If this is less than 20, then you are considered a deal breaker.
But I do agree that it's silly to refuse a deal after it's gotten better.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero-Tau
|
|
Elsewhere
Aug 2002 time: 06:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by l.galant
So you mean that :
IF (you have a commercial deal with someone) AND (you declare war against him)
THEN (all the AI civs will always refuse resources and "gold per turn" from you, except against resources of their own).
|
Yes.
I'm not sure about the "always" part, though. And remember: this only happens if:
1: the deal requires you to deliver something every turn (resource or gold) and
2: the deal is cancelled before 20 turns has passed. After 20 turns, you can cancel the deal without any reputation hit. (Declaring war may affect your reputation, but not specifically related to "per turn" deals.)
Oh, and my information is from Civ3 without PtW, but I haven't heard anything about a change of this.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
De Gaulle
|
|
San Diego, CA
Jun 2002 time: 21:24
|
|
Galant,
As mentionned by Zero-Tau this is not a bug but a feature of the diplomacy system. And I like it, even if it makes me suffer some times.
But you can try to work your way around it. Basically, while the AI will refuse most (any?) deal where it gives you something NOW for a payment PER TURN, you will be able to do per turn/per turn deals or sell him something now (tech/map) and get paid per turn (luxury/ressource/gold).
Usually you can still get what you want most of the time. The only problem I can see is that the AI will demand that you pay cash when it sells you a tech.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
De Gaulle
|
|
San Diego, CA
Jun 2002 time: 21:24
|
|
OK, I can see what you mean by saying it's illogical to have the AI accept deal X and refuse deal X + luxury. I agree with you on this.
I am guessing the AI has been coded to behave this way so as not to be fooled again by an opponent. It does seem a bit overboard for me, but the bottom line is that if you have broken treaties/trades you need to suffer consequences of some kind. The hit you take in reputation and the added difficulty in trading are fair consequences I think.
On the issue of trading to avoid war, I think it's commonly acknowledged in this forum that trading brings you friends and enhances your reputation. But more to the point, I often set up deals with AIs looking threatening and always include a gpt component in these trades (even only 1gpt). The purpose for me is to a) dissuade the AI to attack me
b) if it still attacks, it hurts its reputation and creates trading difficulties for my new ennemy.
I am pretty sure to have read this somewhere before, and other people probably use it as well.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Zero-Tau
|
|
Elsewhere
Aug 2002 time: 06:24
|
|
In case Soren is reading this thread, here is an idea:
Suppose your credibility as a trade has been ruined the way we spoke of. Then you might suggest the following deal to the AI:
AI gives: X
You give: Y + luxury and/or gpt
where X and Y are techs, maps, and/or lump sum of gold.
The AI would then accept this only if it would accept this deal:
AI gives: X
You give: Y
that is, the immediate payments are enough to pay for X.
Furthermore, if you keep the deal all 20 turns, the AI will reevaluate your credibility, and might accept per turn deals with you later.
This wouldn't give rise to exploits, because you'd have to spend something extra to convince the AI.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Nakar Gabab
|
|
of Pedantic Nitpicking
May 2001 time: 00:24
|
|
Well, I'm definitely not going to argue with you there. On the other hand, why NOT accept a deal for FIXED QUANTITY + PER-TURN?
I mean, let's look at this from my perspective as a (hopefully) rational human being. I'm willing to take a deal for FIXED QUANTITY. I'll be perfectly happy with FIXED QUANTITY, whatever that happens to be.
Someone comes along and offers me FIXED QUANTITY, which I'm great with. They also offer me PER-TURN. Now, the AI reacts as follows:
"Per-turn deal? Are you KIDDING me? You're going to backstab me and cancel the payment!"
I would react to it as follows:
"Per-turn deal? You're a dirty backstabbing cheat, but I'll take it anyway and avoid you as long as I can. You turn on me, oh well, I still got FIXED QUANTITY, sucker!"
So again, this is an AI matter. It's rational for them not to accept per-turn deals if they've got reason to think you'll break the deal early, but why can't it be equally rational to take MORE than you want, no matter what it is, and just consider it gravy if you actually get to ride the whole deal out? In fact, such deals should, if successful, restore a good deal of trust in the AI's eyes.
What we've got, basically, is diplomatic shortcutting. The AI looks at a per-turn deal as bad if your reputation's been trashed (whether your doing or not), rather than evaluate each situation somewhat differently. I realize you can't do EVERYTHING, but surely you can code the AI to understand (What I Want) + (Anything Else) = (GREAT Deal).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
cyclotron7
|
 |
Drowning in Schnitzel
Jan 2001 time: 21:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nakar Gabab
Well, I'm definitely not going to argue with you there. On the other hand, why NOT accept a deal for FIXED QUANTITY + PER-TURN? |
Elementary, my dear Nakar.
A per turn deal doesn't just mean a per turn deal: really, it's a treaty too. If you break a per-turn treaty, your rep gets a hit. Thus, if the AI signs a per turn deal, it now faces a penalty for breaking it.
Situations change, especially in 20 turns. I have declared peace with a civ jsut to find that 8 turns later, a war with them would be really useful... but I have to wait. In addition, lots of per turn deals means that if I am dragged into a war via MPP or border violation, I'm going to take the rep fall for that incident. Per turn deals take away my room to maneuver.
In my games, the AI tends to be big on MPPs, and even bigger on sudden backstabbing... both of which are quite likely to break per turn deals, and soil reputations. It makes perfect sense that the AI would reject per turn deals in many situations... many times I myself would refuse such a deal. That is, if I cared about my reputation. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|