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

Mortifer · #1 September 20th, 2003, 11:38 AM

Dom I. was a very good game, and very unique on the strategy market. Dom II. looks very good as well, but I am very disappointed, that there will be no diplomacy again.
Diplomacy adds a lot to all strategy games, making alliances, exchange troops and territories resources etc, are a major part of all strategy games.
The question is: WHY there wont be diplomacy in Dom II? It would be awesome to have it...dont tell me that Illwinter cannot script a good diplomacy AI!

[ September 21, 2003, 15:00: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

Nerfix · #2 September 20th, 2003, 11:41 AM

Because it's all about holy war.

Mortifer · #3 September 20th, 2003, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nerfix:
Because it's all about holy war.

That is rendering diplomacy non existant? Perhaps they should change the concept a little, add diplomacy as well? That would raise the quality of the game a lot, trust me. Take a look at civ3 for example. 3 out of 10 are playing civ3 because of the awesome diplomatic options. Its a fact, there was a huge poll about it.

Pocus · #4 September 20th, 2003, 02:12 PM

There is a little chunk of diplomacy in Doms II : you can define in scenarios which nations are friends. This will prevent the AI of striking at a supposed ally, and for the player, until they attack (if they choose too) the given AI, they will have not to fear any attack.

I dont know aside that if something else has been done, perhaps you can end a war against an AI by sending a high enough bribe. Can be coded in a patch I suppose (if they want!)

MythicalMino · #5 September 20th, 2003, 03:38 PM

I too thought that there should be diplomacy (alliance making), but then I got to thinking...with every nation being led by a Pretender to Godhood, and only one can become God, then that does make it a holy war....there is no room for alliances....

Really if you think about it, it does make sense....I wouldn't make an alliance with someone I KNEW wanted me dead....sure, the "alliance of common enemies" may be valid, but still....when that person wants me dead, no matter what...and then throw in the affects of religion....it makes sense that there is only total war....

The mixing of religion with alliances shouldn't work...and in multiplayer, you can make your alliances...just nothing formal...

PDF · #6 September 20th, 2003, 03:47 PM

Cpbeller,
I disagree with you : even if on "Holy" war and with only 1 "god" to be left, you can prefer ally with some to fight others, in order to be able to defeat thereafter your former ally ! ;evilgrin:
No, the absence of a diplomatic model in Dominions is just a "we got no resources for that" effect - and it's only lacking in SP.
But I only play SP for the moment, so I miss it !

Pocus · #7 September 20th, 2003, 05:47 PM

not quite PDF... the problem of having no diplomacy rules in MP is that you cant move thru your allies territories. This can be circumvented with various means, but still it is a bit a pain in the rea...

realm

lack of diplomacy is partly a problem of IW resources, and partly a design decision from the authors. I dont think we will ever get something on this topic

Mortifer · #8 September 21st, 2003, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cpbeller:
I too thought that there should be diplomacy (alliance making), but then I got to thinking...with every nation being led by a Pretender to Godhood, and only one can become God, then that does make it a holy war....there is no room for alliances....

Really if you think about it, it does make sense....I wouldn't make an alliance with someone I KNEW wanted me dead....sure, the "alliance of common enemies" may be valid, but still....when that person wants me dead, no matter what...and then throw in the affects of religion....it makes sense that there is only total war....

The mixing of religion with alliances shouldn't work...and in multiplayer, you can make your alliances...just nothing formal...

I do not agree. In civ3 for example, you are trying to get AI allies to accomplish your goals. [Either conquer all of them, or diplo victory.]
Here you should be able to make alliances, also the AI should be able to make AI-AI alliances, that would make the game lot more interesting.

QuarianRex · #9 September 21st, 2003, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mortifer:
I do not agree. In civ3 for example, you are trying to get AI allies to accomplish your goals. [Either conquer all of them, or diplo victory.]
Here you should be able to make alliances, also the AI should be able to make AI-AI alliances, that would make the game lot more interesting.

Yes but in civ3 you have the chioce of conquering or diplomacy. In Dominions you don't, and in fact you shouldn't. Diplomacy in Dom is hobbled by the addition of dominion. If you can make treaties with other pretenders then they can potentially spread their divine influence through your lands without you being able to do anything (and vice-versa). This can weaken your troops morale, weaken both your prophet and pretender, and generally make you easier to slaughter. It's even worse when your neighbor has an incompatible dominion (abysia and caelum, ermor amd anyone...) and can turn a supposedly benign peace treaty into an offensive weapon.

If you are in a race for godhood you are not willing to risk subVersion of you divinity. For any reason. Ergo, no diplomacy.

PDF · #10 September 21st, 2003, 08:22 PM

I think that a minimal dose of diplomacy would be nice, all those reasons some of you invent against "any" diplomacy aren't that convincing..
What for example would do a sensible god

against Ermorian threat ? Ally with some other to deal with it...
If this in turn cause new problems, he can always change side and declare war on his former ally !