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

[Mortifer]

Nerfix, you can NOT abuse a well scripted diplo AI. Do not think about civ3. As I said the diplo system is good there, but the diplo AI is far from good, that is why you can abuse it!
A good diplo AI will 'think' just like the battle AI. AI and AI will sign treaties as well, do not forget about that. I remember when I played with RotK, sometimes I had a huge 4 allied AI team on me, and on my allies. There were lot of options to please the AI, like giving gold, marriage, etc. but lot stuff decreased the value of your relations, example: You attacked an AI A, and AI A was peaceful with the AI B. Than AI B begin to hate you, and you cannot make him friendly just by gold and items, you were forced to stop the war etc.
As I said, it CAN be awesome, and raise the value of the gameplay greatly, if its scripted properly! We all know that the Illwinter team can script very well, so...

[ September 28, 2003, 15:22: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

[MStavros]

I would like to see a nice diplomacy system + AI. If it is possible....if no...oh well.

[ September 28, 2003, 15:43: Message edited by: MStavros ]

[apoger]

I hate chiming in late, but this is a major issue for me as well. I really hope that Illwinter will put some diplomatic functionality into the game eventually.

It is my understanding that in Dom II that gateway and other movement spells now only work between labs. This means that in multi-play you will have to attack the person next to you even if that is a bad idea. In Dom I if there was a clear leader, the smaller nations could negotiate some level of cooperation to further their interests. In Dom II if there is no way to cross anoter nations area, and the movement spells are gone, it will reduce diplomatic options even lower than Dom I.

Even if "there can be only one" it still stands to reason that nations will cooperate when it's in their best interests. By affording no diplomatic options IW is limiting player interaction, and player interaction is half the fun of multi-player.

I like seeing more options, not less. A good diplomatic system would do nothing but enhance the game. Players could always turn it off if they didn't like it.

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by apoger:
It is my understanding that in Dom II that gateway and other movement spells now only work between labs.

Thank goodness... I only had the demo, so never got gating spells, but every time I read about them being used, it sounded like it removed the strategy from the game (other than, research a gating spell ASAP).

I agree about Diplomacy, too... free movement and formal peace treaties would be nice... SP diplomacy would be a huge bonus, too.

-Cherry

[Mortifer]

Originally posted by apoger:
I hate chiming in late, but this is a major issue for me as well. I really hope that Illwinter will put some diplomatic functionality into the game eventually.

It is my understanding that in Dom II that gateway and other movement spells now only work between labs. This means that in multi-play you will have to attack the person next to you even if that is a bad idea. In Dom I if there was a clear leader, the smaller nations could negotiate some level of cooperation to further their interests. In Dom II if there is no way to cross anoter nations area, and the movement spells are gone, it will reduce diplomatic options even lower than Dom I.

Even if "there can be only one" it still stands to reason that nations will cooperate when it's in their best interests. By affording no diplomatic options IW is limiting player interaction, and player interaction is half the fun of multi-player.

I like seeing more options, not less. A good diplomatic system would do nothing but enhance the game. Players could always turn it off if they didn't like it.

What should I say? I agree!

[DominionsFan]

Yer, I love this idea too! Please add some kind of diplomacy with a later patch! Hrm, if the AI will be good enough to work with it perfectly.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by apoger:

It is my understanding that in Dom II that gateway and other movement spells now only work between labs.

I like seeing more options, not less. A good diplomatic system would do nothing but enhance the game. Players could always turn it off if they didn't like it.

I spoke toward diplomacy early, often, and loudly. It doesnt even have to be extensive. How about if the AI could be affected by gifts and bribes? If Ulm is between me and Ermor then I send him the bags of wine and herald lances he needs to defeat Ermor. I do that now. It would be nice if it put a few points on the side of his NOT deciding to start a war with me.

Im also for more instead of limiting options. Im disturbed to hear that about transport spells. ALL transport spells or just the army ones? If its all of them then it does major damage to some of my favorite strategys for some of my favorite races. Not so much in attacking but in setting up multiple hot-spots all over the map. Scouts find a weak corner, call wind or wild there to take the province, setup castle/lab/temple in a good spot in that area. Rinse and repeat. There are ways to get a mage or priest somewhere besides the early transport spells but it will slow things down terribly for races that already have enough problems (or did in Dom 1)

[ October 15, 2003, 13:17: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[Taqwus]

Quite a few uses of diplomacy come to mind.

- Allowing free passage through an area. Perhaps only along a path, 'tho, or in specified provinces?

- Requests for assistance. GalCiv's one of the only PC games that I know of in which an AI ally will ask for help when it's in trouble (in contrast to demanding tribute).

- Demands for tribute. Has to be handled carefully; nations which give tribute should not provoke war, and should be entitled to live without further provocation in turn.

- Sharing of map. Partial or whole, hm? The ability to lie here could be amusing, too.

- Sharing of scouting reports, e.g. current estimates of enemy army sizes. "Our scouts report that... Caelum scouts report that..." et al in the province information. Perhaps should have a "we're lying; exaggerate/minimize by this much" slider.

- Gem trading/item trading. An item/gem exchange might be pushing it, 'tho. ("Fire gems up 0.05 to 1.85 Astral, Caulrons of Broth down to 30 Astral, et al"). Heh.

An ongoing gem-trading treaty could help, e.g. every turn A sends a certain set of gems to B in exchange for a similar allotment.

- Perhaps agreements on future targets? e.g. if two nations could both soon conquer a number of independent provinces between them, deciding who takes who to eliminate the chance of accidentally starting a war. This could be supplemented or enforced by a non-aggression pact which would cause mutual withdrawal rather than a battle if they do both attack the same.

Could also be stated as "sphere of influence".

A lot of this might be fairly hard to do, without resorting to the usual "AIs gang up on Humans/main threat" deal. Some of the mechanics would still be helpful for MP, e.g. not having to manually type out army estimates on a shared foe.

[Mortifer]

AI gang up? maybe. All games are different. I mean when you play a game and starting over, the next game will have a different situation, sometimes you can gang up with other AIs, sometimes the AIs will gang up on you, sometimes you won't notice any gang ups.

You have a nice list there. A good diplo system would be awesome. If Illwinter want to add something new, they must think about 2 things:

1. The weapon / armor system
2. The diplomacy system

PS. there was another game, with this AI request when he is in trouble: The good old Romance of the 3 Kingdoms series by KOEI. As I said those games had the best diplo model ever!

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Originally posted by Mortifer:
A good diplo system would be awesome

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