Diplomacy woes...again...1.19

Puke · #1 December 28th, 2000, 02:29 AM

quote:
Originally posted by A ASHBERY:
The only problem im getting in diplomacy is when im allied to race a, race a
got a trade treaty with race b, who i am at war with ,i ask race a to stop trade treaty with race b they agree, nothing happens.

Ya know, I hear people complain that there are no penalties for ignoring AI treaty requests, then people say that the AI agrees to their requests and does not follow through. Looks to me like the AI uses the same loopholes, so everythings balanced and nothing needs fixing. whats the problem?

AAshbery76 · #2 December 28th, 2000, 02:39 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
Ya know, I hear people complain that there are no penalties for ignoring AI treaty requests, then people say that the AI agrees to their requests and does not follow through. Looks to me like the AI uses the same loopholes, so everythings balanced and nothing needs fixing. whats the problem?

Im happy for you, you never need to load a patch again because the games perfect in your eyes and doesnt need improving. well done.

Talenn · #3 December 28th, 2000, 07:28 AM

Puke:

Well, I'm assuming you were kidding, but in case you arent...

Its a necessary part of the game IMO. Sure, people should be able to reneg on their agreements if they want, but it SHOULD have a diplomatic effect on other treaty attempts etc. If there is no penalty, then diplomacy is worthless. Why bother having agreements with no enforcement and with the aI having no 'memory' of previous (or current!) treaties? Why have a 'Military Alliance' when there is no military support? It seems to me that all the treaties are simply to generate points and to prevent accidentally fragging each other's ships. They run no deeper than that from what I can tell. That leave the whole interaction with other races feeling a little bit flat.

And, its silly to believe that because the AI 'benefits' from the same loophole as the player that its balanced. Suppose a loophole appeared where you could effective get unlimited resource points from some simple action. Even if the AI can do it to its NOT fun to play and defeats other aspects of the game. Same thing here. No rational diplomacy model=game with nothing but combat. IMO 4X games are supposed to give you the immersive feeling of Empires allying and warring on others etc. If you cant do that, much of the 'flavor' of the game goes out the door IMO.

Seawolf:

Yep, I'm pretty sure that it IS being worked on.

I just want to point out my observations and opinions on the matter. I'd like to see it be covered in the next update if possible and I'm trying to discover if others are seeing the same types of behavior. If they are, and if others consider it an important part of the game as well, then that give MM a bit more guidance as to where to focus their efforts.

Talenn

[This message has been edited by Talenn (edited 28 December 2000).]

Voidhawk · #4 December 28th, 2000, 07:47 AM

My vote is cast: Improved diplomacy for the next patch!

I'm reading through the experiences everyone has had in dealing with the AI, nodding my head the whole way. Been there, done that, got the coffee mug.

Aside from the few minor bugs that I'm sure still need to be rooted out, I would be totally happy if the next patch was dedicated 100% to nothing but diplomacy fixes and more diverse AI personalities. Just the few tweaks MM did on the AI for 1.19 ramped up the fun factor considerably *hint hint*...

Seawolf · #5 December 28th, 2000, 05:50 PM

Void,

There are more pressing issues with SE IV.

------------------
Seawolf on the prowl

AAshbery76 · #6 December 28th, 2000, 06:10 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Seawolf:
Void,

There are more pressing issues with SE IV.

Whats are the more pressing issues then.In my veiw diplomacy is vital to gameplay and roleplaying.

Nyx · #7 December 28th, 2000, 07:12 PM

I think the biggest thing that should be changed in diplomacy is a problem with the whole strategy game genre: Neither the AI nor the human players understand the concept of a limited war.

In TBS games, everything is treated like the frikkin' hundred years war. A constant state of war with no specific goals, just fight, fight, fight. There are no games short of battle recreations where a war has a limited goal and ends when those goals have been met.

Why is it that when I go to war with the Krill, we're not fighting for control over one system, but it's a genocidal conflict? Is it really too much to ask to have just one game that understands the idea of a limited conflict and have the war end when that conflict is resolved?

An interesting problem with the AI and military alliances is that with the new anger files they get angry if you have ships in thier sectors even if you're a miitary ally, so if you try to come to their aid against an enemy they get pissed and break the alliance.