If you think bloodthirsty hurts the AI too much, THINK AGAIN!

[jpinard]

I created a new culture just to alleviate the bloodthirsty vs. peaceful concern. Since all races are peaceful for their happiness type, I looked at why bloodthristy is so bad for the AI. Well it's the lack of trade they can receive from peaceful alliances. Well, what if we eliminate trade? So I created this new culture called ANARCHISTS. They have a -40 to trade, but a +8 modifier in Production, Resource, Space Combat, Happiness, and Space Yard Rate.

[dmm]

I ALWAYS set my trade as low as I can, and do the same for AI races that I make up. I don't see the benefit. Trade only helps if you're trading with other economic powerhouses. But I don't want to trade with them -- that helps them! More importantly, trade agreements allow enemy fleets to fly right up to your homeworld. Then they can break the treaty, and you're hosed! Even the dumb AI does this -- I'm not just worrying for nothing. And even if they don't turn on you, they come settle planets in your systems, taking away your Lebensraum, interfering with your Manifest Destiny, diminishing your Imperial splendor, etc.

Diplomacy needs improvement. A trade agreement should not give automatic passage through minefields, permission to bring fleets into your systems, etc. That should be reserved for military alliances or maybe even partnerships. Treaties are based on clearly defined boundaries. Good fences make good neighbors.

[Taqwus]

Agreed. Diplomacy is pretty good compared to many older games (which often boiled down to, "You're in the lead, so bribe us every other turn -- and don't lie, we know exactly how what you have! No? Then die!"), but could be improved.

Perhaps checkboxes/toggles, like (in no particular order)

a) production trade
b) research trade
c) intersettlement allowed
d) resupply/refit/repair allowed
e) cargo transfer (for, eventually, giving immobile units w/o giving the transport)
f) star charts shared
g) full line-of-sight shared
h) aggression / non-aggression / cooperation
(e.g. agree to trade, but don't mingle)

Complicated, probably excessively so. Probably also nasty for an AI to deal with, or for a human player (UI issues), although the existing treaties are basically pre-set combinations of these choices. But it's granular.

One other aspect of diplomacy -- I don't recall the AI ever offering trade / gifts of any kind (Why would it ever offer a gift? To placate the player, or alternately to demonstrate contempt -- e.g. "You primitives don't have Foo yet? Have some of our obsolete primers. They're for mentally-challenged children; hopefully your brighter scientists will understand them."). Allies don't ask for tech, either, do they?

I practically always have to make the first move, except for its ubiquitous treaty offers. It rarely even makes counter-offers when it rejects a trade.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

[Talenn]

Taqwus et al:

IMO, messing with the treaty system like that is a bad idea. That allows the players too much freedom to pick and choose the effects. I personally like having to weigh the good with the bad...you want the money, you gotta pay the cost in letting the 'alien influence' into your area.

Remember that the econ and research ponits provided are abstracted and represent ships and units 'too small to be tracked'. These guys are coming in and trading with your worlds...so of course the other government wants to send in 'police ships' and other vessels to 'safeguard their nationals' etc. Also, "while we're at it, we should expand and have a colony in there to help with our trade mission...after all YOU aren't using that world and shouldnt object to your good and dear friends moving in."

In all seriousness, I think the diplomacy could use a little work. But, IMO, removing all the 'baggage' that goes with the treaties is not only unbalancing in game terms, but unrealistic. You have to be willing to tolerate a certain amount of interference and influence if you want to have an ally/trading partner.

Talenn

[Tomgs]

Actually the problem with bloodthirsty AI is that since they still make treaties (unless you eliminate that in the politics.txt files) they will lose happiness with every trade and above treaty. The amount they get in trades isn't the issue. I do like your idea of using cultures to lower some racial traits below 100. Since you can't do that in the general.txt files I will have to try that. I wanted to reduce Physical Strength on some empires because since they never invade me anyway they should put those points into something usefull.

[This message has been edited by Tomgs (edited 12 January 2001).]

[jpinard]

Tomgs, that is an interesting idea. Take the ground strendth and lower it to pile up more advantabes to them as a well.

However, think od this: If the bloodthristy race (I made an insect one), now has a cumulative trade rate or -90. The race Loves war, and they are only happy at it. They hate everyone else. Will they really try to form alliances and trade that much with these characeristics?

[Trachmyr]

Unfortuantely, culture selection only modifies how god a race is at something... not what they will try to do...

So if you really want to create this "bloodthirsty anarchist" culture, you will have to modify the xxx_AI_Politics.txt file in the AI folder (probally the "Aggressive" one") so that it will not offer those kind of treaties.... I would also follow it up by creating a new "happiness" profile for it in the Happiness.txt file

good idea though, I wonder does anyone know if you can make other types of AI's other than Aggressive/Defensive/Neutral?

[jpinard]

Tracymer, good idea about editing the races options to wanting to form treaties, this has already been done a little bit, but the new culture I created and its modifiers are all prevalent throughout the game, so it isn't entirely necessary. If you want the race let me know and I'll send it.