Diplomacy woes never solved

[TheDarkside]

I guess we should never expect AI to ever remotely simulate a human as affirmed by Civ3's diplomacy... but that's only a problem when there's no multiplayer support!

Let's face the facts, despite all the promises and all the corporate reviewers who claim diplomacy AI is finally improved- it's not even close. I probably would'nt notice if you swapped Civ3 diplomacy with Civ2 diplomacy. Just now I was playing as a scientific commercial civ, only have been attacked by one other civ in the course of the game (industrial times now) and everything is going great... everyone is a democracy (oh thats another thing- i wish there was a more diverse choice of governments... not that there many to choose form though ) I've been conducting great trade with 4 other races, theres only one race who is annoyed with me (from the previous time they tried killing me.) So im minding my own business and here comes the Germans, who ive been trading saltpeter with, and who is Polite. What's he want? "Give me the secrets of Industrialization or pay the price". Yeah whatever! Of course I refuse, so he declares war! *sigh* As if its not bad enough for a democracy to do that, over the next few turns he allies EVERYONE against me like I'm harboring some terrorists (keep in mind, ive been one of the most peaceful nations, I am not the wealthiest, largest, most powerful nation by far) yet, all the democracies of the world suddenly decided to declare war on me because I didn't bow to Germany's bullying.


I need to play vs. people!

nonetheless I'm still a loyal Civer. Just need to voice my broken heart,...

[Ballz1998]

Let me ask you something... do you think the human response would be more or less vicious and crippling than the computer response???? :-)

[TheDarkside]

I don't know, I never saw a democracy declare war on another nation because they refused to give them some petty technology or money... have you?

[dainbramaged13]

Yeah, but that would be called reality. this is civ!

anyway, just to provide a contrasting opinion, you need more culture. I do quite well in dimplomacy even though im very agressive because i have a lot of culture.

[Ballz1998]

a democracy declare war on another country for not giving them something. Bin laden attacks US. . US says "Taliban, give us bin laden or else"... They refuse, and the US goes to war. Granted you could argue that the "taliban" attacked the US.

Also, maybe its just survival of the fitest showing itself in the game. The computer sees someone it can annihilate, thus acquiring land and more power... so it does so. You've done it before in your games, haven't you :-). I just did it yesterday. Those poor aztecs had incense and lots of hills and grassland... I said "give me all your cities or else"... needles to say they didn't accept and my republic rolled all over them.

I just don't understand how people complain about the computer doing to them what they have done countless times to the computer. Conquering a puny nation for added power is as good a motive as any. Democracy or not.. the computer is still trying to win in its enviroment. And I'm impressed.

[yin26]

Sounds shoddy to me. Of course, I'm thinking of Europa Universalis here ... a game in which you CAN backstab people or bully them around, but there are built-in consequences.

There don't seem to be any in Civ. That's what's so silly.

[Peterk]

Maybe they just didn't have any other way to get their saltpeter. I mean would you have traded it if they asked you nicely?

I've been in the same shoes with horses, iron and whatever else resource is important in the game.

have the tech + don't have the resource = act of desperation

Don't know how you would defend yourself against this other than setting up a few alliances yourself so that the AI can't turn everyone else against you.

[TheDarkside]

Originally posted by Ballz1998
a democracy declare war on another country for not giving them something. Bin laden attacks US. . US says "Taliban, give us bin laden or else"... They refuse, and the US goes to war. Granted you could argue that the "taliban" attacked the US.

Didnt I say vs. another democracy? And your analogy is far from relevant. The Taliban are allegedly protecting an organization responsible for the worst tragedy to a country... It was provoked. Not only that, the Taliban are reportedly oppressive, primitive and militaristic.

All I ever did was refuse to give Germany a meager technology and all of a sudden I got the world against me! All of us are democracies. If that's realistic to you I'm glad I don't live on your planet.

[introvert]

Originally posted by TheDarkside
I don't know, I never saw a democracy declare war on another nation because they refused to give them some petty technology or money... have you?

Hmmm... let me see.

Ah yes. The USA - against any North American Indian nation you care to name.

The Cherokee [please excuse all my poor spelling] even proved they were an
independent nation in the US Supreme Court [IIRC] and then gold was discovered in their territory. Goodbye Cherokee nation, hello expanded USA.

The Opium wars between Britian and China... China refused to let Britian trade opium into China, so the British went to war over the issue, when it was already a democracy. [late 19th century]

Ancient Athens - as a democracy it was highly aggressive, and was brought down by the pellopenesian wars, during which it had several oppertunities to make peace, but the democratic hawks kept refusing.

[Ballz1998]

you didn't say vs another democracy. . . but point taken.


Also I would go on for at least two or three pages about how even though the WTC/Pentagon Attack was a horrible event in human history, it most definately is on the low end of the "worst tradegy to happen to a country" ladder, but I'm not about to open that can of worms.

[TheDarkside]

I meant to say vs. another democracy!

[Ballz1998]

Compared to the Civ that attacked you, were you an inferior culture about even or superior? I would tend to think you must have been either even or inferior, because so far noone has declared war on me when I have a great culture rating

[introvert]

Originally posted by TheDarkside
I meant to say vs. another democracy!

USA vs Great Britian, War of 1812.

Britian refused to leave the New World, and America tried to kick them out.

The USA has also been instrumental in the over throw of several democratically elected governments because they were anti-American. Not a war admitedly, but close.

Unfortunitly I can't think of any other modern democracies as aggressive as the USA...

The Roman Republic rolled over Greece, when some of those cities would have probably been run democratically. [I'm not certain of this, so feel free to do some research and debunk this claim.]

[DonJoel]

I agree on some parts.

1 time I was at peace with the whole world and then i declared war at egypt (they wanted me to move my galley. No way!)
Suddenly all of the 7 nations !(which were also struggling with eachother) of the world made secret alliances and declared war at me!

But im not sure this is something that will happen everytime.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by introvert


USA vs Great Britian, War of 1812.

Britian refused to leave the New World, and America tried to kick them out.

This war started because the British were capturing American Seamen on the high seas and forcing them to serve in the British navy. Quite a good causus belli really. Unfortunately the peace loving people of the U.S. were totally unprepared for war.

Originally posted by introvert
Unfortunitly I can't think of any other modern democracies as aggressive as the USA...

Well I think it was in the 1930s in Central Europe, a certain Democratic Republic elected a government whose leading party used a hindu symbol, a crooked cross I believe. Anyway, that nation started a whole bunch of wars all at once.

You of course ignore colonialism as well. The Brits grabbed a huge chunk of the entire globe while they were a Republic, and were still doing it even as the improved their government to a more Democratic Republic. The U.S. has fought few wars for territorial gain, against very few people (in terms of numbers) in comparison.

[splangy]

Originally posted by yin26
Sounds shoddy to me. Of course, I'm thinking of Europa Universalis here ... a game in which you CAN backstab people or bully them around, but there are built-in consequences.

There don't seem to be any in Civ. That's what's so silly.

BACKSTAB THEM! Your kidding, right?! EU1 (2 isn't out so we cant compare it to anything) would allow you to abuse the system so bad. I meen, look at the Diplo annex, loans, and how you whore out your family to all of europe. If you get EU1 it certainly isn't for the Diplomacy

About civ3 diplomay. From what ive heard the AI can be very diplomaticly aggressive if your smaller than them or dont have a good culture. By diplomaticly aggressive I meen they get kinda ridgid and are insulted very easily. But you seem to want them all to bend over and take it up the... well you got the picture.

[gremalkin]

Originally posted by Sikander


You of course ignore colonialism as well. The Brits grabbed a huge chunk of the entire globe while they were a Republic, and were still doing it even as the improved their government to a more Democratic Republic. The U.S. has fought few wars for territorial gain, against very few people (in terms of numbers) in comparison.

The British have never been a republic..

The USA were involved in more wars in 20th century than any other nation..

However in response to the thread... I don't have the game yet! but I'm gonna get a copy from the States soon..

What you say sounds great - the AI seems to be kicking a$$! It sounds like you still have to get the hang of the importance of culture.. If the opposition feels itself stronger than you then it is not unreasonable to ask for a tech.. Did you try to negotiate?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by gremalkin


The British have never been a republic..

Do you consider the UK a Monarchy even now, just because their head of state is a Monarch? What about the 1600s when rule by Parlaiment eventually devolved into Cromwell's dictatorship? The British have been more and more of a Republic as the years have gone by, having a seperation of powers since the Magna Carta, and the definite thrust has been that the Monarch has lost power while the Parlaiment has gained it. You can quibble about whether there has ever been an official title change, but all big decisions are now made by the representatives of the people acting in concert through parlaiment.

[gremalkin]

You're right in hat that's the way it has worked.. But in fact the Queen still has executive power in certain instances, so your assertion is not accurate.

One assumes that the Queen would never use her executive powers, but she has a enshrined right to do so.

Therefore not a republic.

[dainbramaged13]

actually its a constitutional monarchy

anyway, diploimacy is fine if you hvae god culture. enough said

[Sikander]

Originally posted by gremalkin
You're right in hat that's the way it has worked.. But in fact the Queen still has executive power in certain instances, so your assertion is not accurate.

One assumes that the Queen would never use her executive powers, but she has a enshrined right to do so.

Therefore not a republic.

Well we agree that it functions as a Republic, and there was a lot of talk of getting rid of the Monarchy just a couple of years ago. Without a written constitution and enumerated (as opposed to enshrined) powers I would have to say that whatever little power still resides with the Royal Family is extremely shaky at best.

[Doctor Bob]

Well I think it was in the 1930s in Central Europe, a certain Democratic Republic elected a government whose leading party used a hindu symbol, a crooked cross I believe. Anyway, that nation started a whole bunch of wars all at once.


>Nazi Germany was never a democracy. The Nazis did exploit the free vote to get into powerwhen they had a majority government, but that was before the Nazification. Once Nazis were in power all other political parties were abolished leaving germany in a totalitarian dicatorship. Do you call that democracy? I wouldn't exactly call Hitler a democracy loving person either. My point is, the german democracy did NOT start WWII in europe.


You of course ignore colonialism as well. The Brits grabbed a huge chunk of the entire globe while they were a Republic, and were still doing it even as the improved their government to a more Democratic Republic. The U.S. has fought few wars for territorial gain, against very few people (in terms of numbers) in comparison. [/QUOTE]


>Britain has only been a parliamentary republic of the commonwealth after the monarch King Charles I had his head chopped off after the English Civil war. After Oliver Cromwell died Britain became a monarchy again, and has been a monarchy since then. Britian is still a constitutional monarchy. The only chunk of land Britian grabbed while it was a republic was some of Ireland. You of course ignore your history books.

[mtgillespie]

Britain is a Monarchy in name only. In terms of Civ government types, we are a Republic/Democracy. These governments refer to who wields the power. We have a Monarch, but she makes no decisions, and is a figurehead.

[introvert]

Originally posted by Sikander
This war started because the British were capturing American Seamen on the high seas and forcing them to serve in the British navy. Quite a good causus belli really. Unfortunately the peace loving people of the U.S. were totally unprepared for war.

This is the story Americans tell themselves to feel that they were in the right in that war. The reality is though, if that was the real reason for the war then it would have been over shortly after the news that the British Parliment had recinded the laws that allowed that to happen. Two, maybe three months. Instead the war dragged on for two years. Also, you cannot look at the war of 1812 in isolation. Napolean was at his height and launching his invasion of Russia when America declared war, and the war ended after Napolean had been defeated and exiled.

Basicly America used the pressing of their citizens as the excuse for war (which was actually pretty fair in all truth). But the war was an effort to grab Canada from Britian, while it was tied up in Europe against a seemingly unstoppible opponent. At the time many Americans saw it as a continuation of the Revolutionary War, with the ultimate aim of kicking Britian out of the New World completely.

Luckily for the USA Britian only ever saw the war in North America as a side show to the main event in Europe. Once Napolean had been defeated, and the American capital had been sacked, the British were willing to make peace. Britian probably could have reclaimed it's colonies then, after all they had an army in Europe which had beaten Napolean and his generals. Reinforcing Canada with the whole of that force could have led to the eventual conquest of the USA at that time. But it would have been a major effort and I think the British were suffering from war fatigue, and were just as glad to end it... although America should probably be grateful that Russia took a hand in the peace talks. Apparently they weren't getting anywhere until the Tsar helped progress them.

I can't help thinking that the real first world war was the Napolionic Wars, because there was fighting all around the world in the colonies, in Europe itself, and in North America.

As for the "peace loving people of the U.S." Very amusing.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by TheDarkside
I guess we should never expect AI to ever remotely simulate a human as affirmed by Civ3's diplomacy... but that's only a problem when there's no multiplayer support!

Let's face the facts, despite all the promises and all the corporate reviewers who claim diplomacy AI is finally improved- it's not even close. I probably would'nt notice if you swapped Civ3 diplomacy with Civ2 diplomacy. Just now I was playing as a scientific commercial civ, only have been attacked by one other civ in the course of the game (industrial times now) and everything is going great... everyone is a democracy (oh thats another thing- i wish there was a more diverse choice of governments... not that there many to choose form though ) I've been conducting great trade with 4 other races, theres only one race who is annoyed with me (from the previous time they tried killing me.) So im minding my own business and here comes the Germans, who ive been trading saltpeter with, and who is Polite. What's he want? "Give me the secrets of Industrialization or pay the price". Yeah whatever! Of course I refuse, so he declares war! *sigh* As if its not bad enough for a democracy to do that, over the next few turns he allies EVERYONE against me like I'm harboring some terrorists (keep in mind, ive been one of the most peaceful nations, I am not the wealthiest, largest, most powerful nation by far) yet, all the democracies of the world suddenly decided to declare war on me because I didn't bow to Germany's bullying.


I need to play vs. people!

nonetheless I'm still a loyal Civer. Just need to voice my broken heart,...

How is this bad AI? Do you want a passive and submissive AI that obeys your every request and allows you to sit on your continent and play sim-civ?

He wanted industrialization - quite a major tech - and if I were in his shoes I'd be working on a way to get the tech from who ever had it, aswell.

Playing against other people won't be any different in this regard except for the fact that they'd likely be 10 times as ruthless.

[Ballz1998]

but its good to know that some people still know what happened in the past. Makes for interesting reading material :-)

[Shadowstrife911]

Well, Hitlers party (The National Socialist something) was elected into power with only 33% of the national vote. I'm not sure how, I guess I'll find out tomorrow in history class.

[Setsuna]

I see you're spoon-fed anti-American propaganda over in Australia.

[Leonid]

Well I guess nice guys finish last. I found rome on my border and traded some tech with them. They were polite towards me, I was building a road to one of there frontier cities so I could start trading with them and improve my relations with them.

They contact me and say they are superior and for me to give them contact with the egyptions. I pulled a Nevile Chamberlain and tried to appease them by givign them th econtact they wanted, in an effort to maintain good releations .It was a bad move. That ended up giving them contact with the aztecs on my eastern border. Two turns passed and then they attack...just like Nazi Germany invading the USSR in WW2 is how it felt. I mean waves of troops pour over the border..with settlers..they had been massing that i hadnt seen.

So then the next turn Aztecs are in an alliance with them, Well I made Monarchy and I start chruning out the horses and my trusty hoplites. I just hope they dont start throwing legions at me, then I might be in a world of hurt. Right now its Archers and spearmen. But maybe they're "regulars" might start showing up soon *gasp* BTW I have a nig chunk of land with like 8 cities and have no iron resources..lol so horses are my offense, thank god for my hoplites..I am gonna use combined arms tactics I guess.

Anyway I am amassing quite the armed forces..and battling them pretty good right now within my borders. They already founded 2 cities within my borders which I plan to mount an assault on in short order. Everything will change if Legions start joining then fight then I'm toast.

At any rate, I try to be nice and appease them and the next turn they attack like the treacherous imperilaist Nazi's they really are. Then me giving them contact with the other civs backfired as they formed an alliance with a civ they wouldnt have contact with if i hadn't been trying to be nice. LOL, Nice guys finish last...I know how you feel.

[ProfessorPhobos]

Hitler's party was elected into the Reichstag with 33% of the vote well before 1933. Heck, even before Weimar's economic miracle turned into Weimar's economic nightmare. When the big H was finally elected, it was with 90% of the German population, because he'd managed to destroy or assimilate most of the other political parties, and dupe the German people into thinking he'd set Germany straight.

As for the # of wars America's been involved with this century- your somewhat off. I think we're 3rd or 4th in number of wars participated in- the UK, France, and the Soviet Union are ahead. This of course means nothing, as going to war is not indicative a nation's "evil." (Nation's are evil. Soldiers aren't evil. Armies, cities, religion's aren't evil. Individuals are evil. Evil individuals in positions of power cause problems.)