Wishlist: Capitulation

[chrispedersen]

Actualy, a lot of this could be resolved with an ai switch

Hostile to :X
Hostile to :Y
Allied with Z

So if you could take out randomness of the AI interaction it would be a big improvement.

[Zeldor]

There is no randomness. The AI acts like AI. But it acts like it took over that turn. It will start wars like normal AI would do. And it will fight those that are attacking it.

[Fate]

I have to agree with Vedalken on this one. Why is arbitrarily dividing the territories better than going AI? If the AI is a push-over anyway, can't people just take the provinces? Doesn't that actually INCREASE the strategic interest by forcing players to choose where to commit their forces?

The only other thought I see is to make the AI non-aggressive (or somehow reset them to independants). While interesting, I don't see how it is so bad. Unless the AI has been left a pile of ready-to-use armies I would be surprised if it could mount a capable offensive, so why be worried about attacks which are basically scaled-up random events?

Overall this does not sound like a necessary feature

[Illuminated One]

It's bad imho because starting wars against neutral neighbours doesn't help surviving. Maybe not necessary but it still would be nice.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally Posted by VedalkenBear

thejeff: Precisely. Part of my assumptions have been that everyone _knows_ when a player 'goes AI'. If so, then clearly NAPs will be disbanded at that time. If someone is so foolish as to rely on that NAP to the point that the _AI_ poses a threat on that front... I'm not sure what that means, except that it's not good.

That can be handled by someone taking over the players position. In other words, the devs will feel there is already an option to handle that.

Even if its just the host. The host can roll a dice to choose a random number of turns that he will simply do buildup without any attacks before turning the AI loose on the game.