Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

>I think if we just had an option to give provinces to other players, the game would be much more dynamic.

I'd agree with that.

I'd also like to see some sort of non-aggression stance that would allow armies to travel across non-friendly provinces. Armies can already double occupy a province due to stealth, so the functionality is already in the game.

These two things togther could easily form the foundation of a simple diplomatic system that wouldn't be too complicated to implement and would greatly enhance the players options.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Both of these are good. I especially like the global stock exchange... "Blood slaves! Get your young & saucy blood slaves! Free manacles with every order!"

Hahaha... seriously, I like automated trading systems. The one in Earth 2025 (partner game to Utopia) had such a system, where you could put tanks, planes, technology levels, or whatever on the international market - at any price you chose. Any buyer could place an order for tanks (specifying a certain maximum that he would pay) and then he would automatically buy the lowest-priced tanks currently on the market. Supply and demand worked really well there...

-Cherry

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Lying?
YES!
I want a diplo system where YOU can actualy lie!

The global market idea is also good...

I know this is from old post from usenet, but perhaps having two friendly armies together in same province would cause unrest in the province and detoriate Dominion localy. I can see not-so-few bored soldiers getting themselves drunk and doing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif things... And you aren't so "tough" god if you let the enemies of the faith to stay in your land, even if the "enemies" would be allies.

Perhaps all non-hostile diplomatic actions could give you a sligth Dominion penalty. Afterall, you are dealing with enemies of the faith.

[ October 15, 2003, 17:58: Message edited by: Nerfix ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I knew you would ;-)

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hem, unless these 2 armies are both sneaking, the said province can't be non-friendly - one of them has to control it.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm really in favour of diplomacy, but I think most of these things would add too much . I think it might make the game into a diplomacy game, from being a tactical strategy game.

I do think that being able to allow passage through an area would be ok - but I'd be ok without it too.

The problem behind any game in which you have full-blown diplomacy between human players and the AI is that the AI is always formulaic in it's approach. It's just a matter of figuring out what will satisfy it in order to get it off your back. It goes back to the old standard for any true AI - have a computer dialogue with a human, and another human dialogue with a human, and you have a true AI when the human can't tell which is which. We're just not there. Therefore any full-blown diplomatic system will be shallow and facile.

I voted for diplo being added in the other thread, but what I had in mind was much more simple - having a way of figuring out how much an AI nation likes/loathes you and being able to alter this by giving money/gems etc. I believe that if you want more diplo than this there's a very simple solution: play multiplayer!

p.s. no offense intended to you Taqwus. I am replying to your post just because I think what you wrote is what people have in mind/are agreeing with.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Well if something like 'giving provinces to other players' will be added, there must be further options like scale for the relationship with the AI [-100 is the worst 100 is the best], option for alliance etc.

Giving provinces is only good for MP.. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

If you ask me, that best would be an option like: Turn ON/OFF diplomacy.
Than everyone would be happy.

[ October 15, 2003, 19:05: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">True, but then again I don't feel concerned about SP that much, as long as MP has all the features I want. I'd like a fully functional battle simulator better than a full-fledged AI. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I couldn't agree more

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Instead of a fully functional battle simulator you will recieve no battle simulator at all, less is more. So no simulator at all is a whole lot of simulator.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I couldn't agree more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thanks for the doublethink, Big Brother. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually I can think of ways to abuse the ability to give provinces in a solo game. :evilgrin:

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's OK. In that kind of game testbeds are the best simulators you can get.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">True, but then again I don't feel concerned about SP that much, as long as MP has all the features I want. I'd like a fully functional battle simulator better than a full-fledged AI. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Well depends what you like. I prefer single so... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">True, but then again I don't feel concerned about SP that much, as long as MP has all the features I want. I'd like a fully functional battle simulator better than a full-fledged AI. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Well depends what you like. I prefer single so... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I couldn't agree more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I prefer singleplayer as well. MP is already good, perhaps the SP part should be enchanted first of all.
[Do not forget that most of the players are preferring singleplayer here!]
If there will be a diplo sys. ever, it must be added / tweaked for single mainly.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Yup. Singleplayer is #1. for me too.
Thus, I would like to see a decent diplomacy system for singleplayer. I don't really care about MP, so I won't argue about that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Same here.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't forget it, on the contrary - that's an incentive for me to express my own opinions louder. Anyway I believe the IW people are more interested in MP, they should get at least 10 votes each. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh. The funny thing is that it's true, as the old battle simulator was basically worthless. ;-) You were better off simply writing a scenario that setup the battle you wanted to test. Most competitive players in fact did just this. :-(

A simple battle simulator that let you pick any troops, equip them with any items, set each sides research levels, and give orders would go a long way towards minimizing the time needed to play Dominions competitively.

It would also lower the learning curve for new players, and be good for testing and bug finding. I would actually be surprised if Illwinter didn't already have something like this for internal testing purposes...

Would such a tool make the game too well known and thus uninteresting? IMHO no, as you still need to predict what your opponent will do, which is the most interesting part anyway.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I couldn't agree more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">punk. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't forget it, on the contrary - that's an incentive for me to express my own opinions louder. Anyway I believe the IW people are more interested in MP, they should get at least 10 votes each. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Uh well, they should focus on SP than. We have lot more single fans, than MP, so what are we talking about at all?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Singleplayer is preferred by me too.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I would not say *a lot more*. Check previous polls about the habits of players.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

I dunno about the alliance in KoH. As you can see, there are non-agression, passage agreement, trade options already, and the relationship bar.
This looks awesome so far.

The release date of KoH is 2004 Q2 btw.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nice layout but not that new :
Europa Universalis has already all these options and more (alliance, annexations, vassalisation, trade embargo, etc.).

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nice layout but not that new :
Europa Universalis has already all these options and more (alliance, annexations, vassalisation, trade embargo, etc.).</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Oh yeah, that game is decent in diplomacy.
I think this KoH system would be perfect for Doms II. that is why I posted this screenie about the KoH diplo system.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Civilization 3 had the exact same system and I have to say it didn't work too well. I can just guess how non-functional it would be in a game like dominions where the only victory condition is world domination.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You are very wrong. The civ3 diplo system is decent, the diplo AI is crap.
It is a huge difference. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 16, 2003, 13:24: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

IMHO the civ3 diplomatic system is really good, I like it. It is not 'that easy' to abuse the AI, especially not after the latest patches.
In fact, sometimes my butt is kicked by the AI, if some of them gang up against me.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">ACtually Dom2 has more victroy settings than just world domination, though if I remember correctly, they all involve some kind of dominatin (no win by UN for example).

The Diplo system in Civ3 worked well enough, sure it had some flaws with how the AI handled things, but for what it allowed you to do, it was really very good. In fact if you cared about your standing with the other nations, your actions and transactions with them were very important.

As to the SP vs. MP arguement...

Whether or not the majority of players will ever play MP or not is pretty much irrelivant, the majority of actual playing time will be SP, and that's true for probably everyone, whatever they answered in the poll. That said some improvements are beneficial to both sides, but there can also be a misleading amount of verbiage on forums such as this from the MP crowd (who are more likely to post on forums in the first place) that creates the impression to the Devs that MP is more important than SP.

We all know that the Illwinter team is more interested in MP, they've said as much, however, I consider it a disservice to the game as a whole for that to be the only form of game play that gets attention. Now I don't actually think that Illwinter is giving the SP crowd short shrift, but I do think that improvements to SP typically wind up as improvements to MP while the contrary is not nearly as true.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

I also agree that Illwinter should make a robust SP game, whatever they do in MP. But the thing that gets me is that some of the fanatically SP players are wanting Illwinter to add complex diplo with the AI, when if you just play MP you get way better diplo, because it's with an intelligent, sentient person. It just seems to me that if you want to interact with other nations diplomatically, MP is perfect for you! I just don't understand why people would be staunchly against MP, and yet vocal about adding diplo - which at best poorly mimics the MP experience. It makes no sense to me.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Actually I spend a lot more time MP than SP. In SP an average turn takes a fraction of the time spent in a normal MP game and I play more MP games than SP games. SP games tend to be long and tedious with turns made quickly and badly. But thats me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree.
MP diplomacy? Well it is not diplomacy, what we have now, it is only player interaction.
A nice well designed diplomacy system would be a great addition, it is pointless to argue about this.
If IW will be able to add it, well than do not hesitate, start working on it . The majority of the players would like to see a diplomacy system. We all know, that the most important thing is what the customer wants.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes it is you. You prefer MP, that is all.

[ October 16, 2003, 15:54: Message edited by: MStavros ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Regarding my earlier ideas -- yeah, I think it'd be hard for the AI to make use of them. For multi, 'tho, they would tend to either make things easier (e.g. sharing province info without typing hordes of individual Messages, and having it associated with that province) or allowing things that are simply impossible now (free passage).

One simpler, if weird idea for multi would be geographical Messages. For instance, what if somebody could send a message attached to a given province? "I'll be attacking here", "Go ahead, it's yours", et al. Buttons could be used to automatically "type in" (so it could be http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) hm, army estimates; province information; maybe sites and dominion report?

A far more extreme Version would allow players to send mostly-transparent map overlays to each other, but that'd require a paint program!) (Or, allow an easy way to export maps/import overlays for sending).

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">lol - what do you think diplomacy is, if interaction between humans doesn't count?

If what you're wanting is a system wherein you give the AI what it wants and it does what you want, and you just have to figure out the formula for how it works - that's not diplomacy! It's just another way to abuse the AI in SP.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I like this much more. It seems to me that ideally you should be able to send other players anything that you could send in real life warfare - which would include maps, statistics, etc.

Of course, on the other hand, if the other player has to rely on your account of those things, then it brings in the whole element of disinformation, etc., which is an important part of diplomacy.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">lol - what do you think diplomacy is, if interaction between humans doesn't count?

If what you're wanting is a system wherein you give the AI what it wants and it does what you want, and you just have to figure out the formula for how it works - that's not diplomacy! It's just another way to abuse the AI in SP.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Dude we are talking about SP diplomacy. Wake up.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Errrrrrrrr I always tought that were talkin about SP diplomacy! I mean in MP the players can do what they want, but in SP, we need a diplomacy system.
Talking about MP diplomacy making no sense to me.
[We always had player interaction, LOL http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

You can also do diplomacy by sending the maps/whatever you have and some comments, to the one you believe is your ally, outside of the game. And you can lie as much as you want, and even edit the maps' information if you know how to use paint... The only greater problem is that you have to know your co-players e-mail address. E-mail because normal mail might get too expensive, and is quite a bit slower.

About SP diplomacy, it might be good addition but it might be too much.
The AI would have to check how strong your dominion is, what scales you have, might your dominion with quite a few negative scales be pushed towards its lands by stealhy preachers, check your every battle or keep book of its provinces to be sure you don't have a theme that hurts it, and everything else that human player might come up with...
Just try to list everything AI should take into account, and you might have a glimpse about how hard coding a decent AI for DomII is. Not that I have even that, of course.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, if Illwinter can script a good AI for diplomacy....than I don't know that what is the problem with adding a diplo system.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, I won't miss an opportunity to agree with licker. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif You said pretty much all there is to be said about it.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It's touching that you care about where and how does IW spend their time, but if they want to do it, what would be the problem? I think they're capable enough to do it, judging by their products, and that they're capable to decide how to spend their time as well.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Would YOU like to write no one knows how many pages of code to a game to add something you don't think would add much for it? If the coder of IW doesn't like the idea, I think he just doesn't bother to do it, and adds something he would like to see in the game.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Since you all are not reading very carefully I'll trace the flow of this conversation for you:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Claim: MP diplomacy is not diplomacy - just player interaction

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Response: How does player interaction not qualify as diplomacy?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Demonstration of Misunderstanding

-----

I understand that what you want is SP diplo. What I was saying is that SP diplo doesn't come close to MP diplo with actual people . If you want diplo, why not just play MP? I refer you (once again) to my earlier post:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

[ October 16, 2003, 17:56: Message edited by: st.patrik ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Exactly. But it's their decision, isn't it? If they like it, and deem it worthy of their time, they'll do it regardless of how long it takes. Likewise, they won't do it if they don't like it even if it takes a few minutes. So, where's the foundation of the argument that it takes too long to implement it, from your perspective as the end-user? We can talk about whether we would like it or not and what it should look like, but that doesn't have anything to do with the duration of implementation.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Strange question. I mean, why does anybody play SP in the first place? Personal preference, to put it broadly, and differential appeal and aVersion between the two modes of play, along with dozens of other (individual) reasons. Why would that be a thing to wonder about?

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You have no valid points. The majority here won't play MP. IW should give the majority the joy of SP diplomacy.
Yes I am sure that it will be hellish hard to script, but why not? Saying that play MP if you want diplomacy is foolish.
IMHO, a diplo system for SP would raise the overall quality of the game...greatly.
I am sure that lot of players will agree about this.

[ October 16, 2003, 18:28: Message edited by: MStavros ]

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

Please stop this silly bickering about SP and MP dippy. You are acting like IW has announced they are making dippy in the first place, plus that they can only go one way.

I'd like to see some basic dippy/interaction options added to both MP and SP. A simple system should be a breeze considering the complexity of what they have already created. What we need to do is convince IW that the players really do want such functionality.

Re: What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!
 

I think we cannot say what IW should do, at best we can tell what would sell their product most. I don't think they are very interested in getting money from DomII. Of course they would like to get some, but it is more important for them to have a game they enjoy playing. If others enjoy it it's just a plus.

Because of this, we have to let them think themselves what is good for the game. We can offer them ideas, yes, but they have to fit them to the Ascension Wars. Of course, some things simply make the game a lot better, like the command scripts, and are added like they are.
But we can only ask and hope that they do as we want, not say they should do that, or that their game would be better if they did this. How many games publishers ordered do you know that have been good?