March 12, 2002, 12:02
|
#1
|
|
Emperor
Local Time: 21:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: of poor english grammar
Posts: 4,307
|
More than one kind of Domestic Moron...
I think it would be cool to have more than one kind of Domestic Moron. You know, with each civ the Moron should have a different caracter.
Let me start this way;
Everytime I start trading with another civ, I always fine tune and slowly adjust my offer up and up just until my advisor tells me the deal will be acceptable. And so far he has been 100% accurate.
How about this ...
Have the advisor somewhat accurate, but give or take 10%.
And everytime you make an offer to the other civ that is not acceptable to them, there default 'acceptable' deal increases in their favor by just a bit.
SO you could play safe and offer a bit better of a deal than what your advisor suggests, or if time are tough you could take a chance that your advisor is being a bit too conservative and try to offer a deal under what he thinks is acceptable. And seeing how he is not 100% accurate anymore, you just may get away with it ...
Or, they do not accept your offer, and their idea of acceptable just went up a bit, and you still do not know how far off you are.
And the percentage could change accordingly to the type of civ you have, aggressive or not aggressive. And also, if you have an aggressive civ, the Moron could pop-up and tell you:" You know master, the french have a really small army and they are very advanced scientificly, maybe we could extorque one or two techs from them!" or a non-agressive civ the Moron could tell you:" You know, the Germans have been Blackmailing the english for quite some time now, maybe we could help the english ppl against them for a considerable lump sum!"
Spec.
__________________
-Never argue with an idiot; He will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 14:58
|
#2
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 22:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 67
|
Yeah. good idea about the accuracy of the Domestic Advisor. I always find it a bit annoying in diplomacy now because I feel like I'm bargaining with my foreign advisor for what he thinks is a good deal, not the other civ!
So, I'd certainly like to see him being slightly less accurate than his current 100%, perhaps 75% of the time he's accurate, but for that 25% hes a bit off perhaps?
Good idea that, Spectator
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 15:11
|
#3
|
|
Settler
Local Time: 21:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Subway
Posts: 8
|
Yea, great idea. But I think that it would help if we had like 3 advisors with different opinions.
What I mean is this.
If you make a deal, you get the opinion of the 3 Morons and you then you decide to propose it or not to the civ considering how much your Morons agree with you or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 15:11
|
#4
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 13:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Igloo
Posts: 59
|
I think the idea with the 100% accuracy is in some ways very helpful. It certainly speeds up negotiations since players, especially with the 1.17 patch, have no freakin idea where the AI stands in tech or map valuation. In a sense, it is practically useful to get the negotiation over with and move on the the rest of the game.
OTOH, the idea of a 'smart ass' advisor is cute as well. One can imagine the interesting things than can happen when advised by a 'moronic' advisor or one with a personal agenda:
Sir, our military is the strongest in the world. Let us repay the Germans for earlier transgressions. And 10 turns later we see not the 2 cavalry our advisor suggests will be at our border, but 30 panzers.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 15:15
|
#5
|
|
Prince
Local Time: 15:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: because I'm the son of the King of Kings.
Posts: 661
|
I like the 100% ...
__________________
Traigo sueños, tristezas, alegrías, mansedumbres, democracias quebradas como cántaros,
religiones mohosas hasta el alma...
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 15:19
|
#6
|
|
Deity
Local Time: 00:36
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Latvia, Riga
Posts: 18,355
|
Had the same idea. I agree, the advisor should sometimes be mistaken, otherwise the AI actually never rejects your deal! If it doesn't suit you, you just don't click the Will you accept button.
__________________
Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 19:59
|
#7
|
Local Time: 16:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: ACK!! PPHHHHTTBBBTTTT!!!
Posts: 7,022
|
A bit embarassing for me to admit, but it took me probably 20 games to even notice the advisor, I never really paid much attention to them before. But they are 100% accurate. However while not noticing the advisor i would offer something and ask what they other civ would pay EXAMPLE: silks they are willing to pay 5 per turn, if you up that to six per turn not only will they reject it but they also will reject the 5 per turn. So I think they do adjust ther offer based on what your offer. If they don't find your offer acceptable then you will pay more or receive less...depend.
__________________
"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. There's a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside. Look out, he's fuzzy, let's get out of here."
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 20:33
|
#8
|
|
Settler
Local Time: 16:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by muppet
I think the idea with the 100% accuracy is in some ways very helpful. It certainly speeds up negotiations since players, especially with the 1.17 patch, have no freakin idea where the AI stands in tech or map valuation. In a sense, it is practically useful to get the negotiation over with and move on the the rest of the game.
|
True, but I do wish that they could make the game move along even faster and just get straight to the point. I freaking hate tweaking the numbers until I can get the perfect deal.
154 lump sum? Close to a deal.
155 lump sum? Close to a deal.
156 lump sum? Close to a deal.
157 lump sum? Close to a deal.
158 lump sum? Close to a deal.
159 lump sum? Close to a deal.
160 lump sum? Close to a deal.
161 lump sum? That's acceptable!
It's such a waste of time and one of the top causes of easily preventable metacarpal syndrome in this game. Any moron can get the optimal deal with enough clicking. Why torture us? Just cut to the chase.
Rimpy
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 12, 2002, 21:46
|
#9
|
|
Emperor
Local Time: 21:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: of poor english grammar
Posts: 4,307
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Rimpy
True, but I do wish that they could make the game move along even faster and just get straight to the point. I freaking hate tweaking the numbers until I can get the perfect deal.
154 lump sum? Close to a deal.
155 lump sum? Close to a deal.
156 lump sum? Close to a deal.
157 lump sum? Close to a deal.
158 lump sum? Close to a deal.
159 lump sum? Close to a deal.
160 lump sum? Close to a deal.
161 lump sum? That's acceptable!
It's such a waste of time and one of the top causes of easily preventable metacarpal syndrome in this game. Any moron can get the optimal deal with enough clicking. Why torture us? Just cut to the chase.
Rimpy
|
I totally agree. It would be a lot better if the Moron told us:" I think 150 gold would be acceptable" then we could try to guess if hes right or wrong cuz he could be off by 20%, more or less in gold I mean.
Well...atleast tell us for god's sake!! 
Spec. 
__________________
-Never argue with an idiot; He will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 13, 2002, 11:14
|
#10
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 22:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Nijmegen, Netherlands
Posts: 89
|
I totally agree. Negotiating could and should be more automated. The advisor should tell me instantly what deal would be acceptable. It would save me a lot of tedious mouse clicking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 13, 2002, 11:31
|
#11
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 16:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 208
|
I like the not-always accurate Advisor idea, esp. the part about the other civ's offer getting slightly worse. (That is what's meant by "going up a bit"?)
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Martinus Magnificus
I totally agree. Negotiating could and should be more automated. The advisor should tell me instantly what deal would be acceptable. It would save me a lot of tedious mouse clicking.
|
Don't the AI civ's like you less if you tend to go for the "best" (for you) deal, rather than the one the AI first offers?
How about having the advisor just tell you what the "best" version of the AI's deal is. (Maybe with 100% accuracy, maybe not.) If you aren't feeling generous, and are willing to have the AI think less of you, you can go immedietly for the best deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 13, 2002, 11:43
|
#12
|
|
Prince
Local Time: 22:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Antwerp (the pearl of Flanders) Belgium
Posts: 444
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Rimpy
True, but I do wish that they could make the game move along even faster and just get straight to the point. I freaking hate tweaking the numbers until I can get the perfect deal.
154 lump sum? Close to a deal.
155 lump sum? Close to a deal.
156 lump sum? Close to a deal.
157 lump sum? Close to a deal.
158 lump sum? Close to a deal.
159 lump sum? Close to a deal.
160 lump sum? Close to a deal.
161 lump sum? That's acceptable!
It's such a waste of time and one of the top causes of easily preventable metacarpal syndrome in this game. Any moron can get the optimal deal with enough clicking. Why torture us? Just cut to the chase.
Rimpy
|
FULLY AGREED !
Too much a waste of (game)time.
AJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 13, 2002, 11:59
|
#13
|
|
Civ4: Colonization Content Editor
Local Time: 22:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 11,117
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Rimpy
154 lump sum? Close to a deal.
155 lump sum? Close to a deal.
156 lump sum? Close to a deal.
157 lump sum? Close to a deal.
158 lump sum? Close to a deal.
159 lump sum? Close to a deal.
160 lump sum? Close to a deal.
161 lump sum? That's acceptable!
|
My approach would be a bit more "binary"  :
- ask for the AI's proposal. Let's assume it demands 180
- subtract about 20%, if that's still acceptable, subtract another 20% etc., till the answer is "insulted" or "close". Let's assume they said "close" on 150. Now increase/lower your proposal by about half of the previous step, depending on if it's still "close" or "acceptable". Current step is 180-150=30 So now would follow
165? acceptable
157? close
161? acceptable
159? close
160? close <-- must be 161.
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 13, 2002, 18:49
|
#14
|
|
King
Local Time: 17:36
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Rimpy
154 lump sum? Close to a deal.
155 lump sum? Close to a deal.
156 lump sum? Close to a deal.
157 lump sum? Close to a deal.
158 lump sum? Close to a deal.
159 lump sum? Close to a deal.
160 lump sum? Close to a deal.
161 lump sum? That's acceptable!
|
I use a binary search. Oh what fun!
Anyway, can we call the morons Moe, Curly and Larry?
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:36.
|
|
