diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
Here's a nice thread about what people expect the biggest improvement vs biggest dissapointments to be:
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...tart=1&stop=20
What surprised me was how many times the 'improved diplomacy' was cited as one of biggest improvements.... I was under the impression that the general consensus on the topic was that it will actually be somewhat of a dissapointment, since the only comments by CA have been referring to making diplomacy more 'transparent', while anybody who played RTW knows that what is required is simply a completely new diplocatic engine.
So, what are these opinions based on? Did I miss something (hope I did), and has there been other, hopful news about the diplomatic AI?
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
Look this: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Creat...39-30621.shtml
I believe, after reading this, that diplomacy will be a lot, lot lot better ^^ it seens like you can have a realationship with nations ^^ like true allies :) Can you believe that?
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
Quote:
So, what are these opinions based on? Did I miss something (hope I did), and has there been other, hopful news about the diplomatic AI?
Some people at TWC have been able to paly the game early, and one lucky guy at .com actualy has the game, and they've al said the diplomatic ai is better, as is the camapign ai and battlemap ai(the biggest improvement).
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
No matter how much the AI is improved, some people will be disappointed. I know it, I speak from experience.
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eques
Reading that didn't make me more confident. That is exactly the problem. They talk mainly about how diplomacy is more transparent now. But what would be an improvement isn't that the player knows whether his proposal is good or bad but that the AI knows whether the proposal makes sense.
Example: in my Parthian campaign, the Seleucids wanted me to become a protectorate. I accepted in exchange for 15000 denarii. The next turn the Seleucids attacked me, breaking the alliance.
My offer of becoming a protectorate for 15k makes sense to them only if the AI plans to make peace. But the AI seems unable to make peace for long once war broke out. Even if you offer lots of money for a peace the AI desperately needs (and you not), it will decline.
The AI in ROME has absolutely no sense when to keep an alliance and when to attack best.
Since CA have not made a comment from which we could conclude that they assessed this problem, I remain sceptical that of any promise of improvement.
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
I also readed this interview:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ml?sid=6146146
Take a look on this part:
"GS: Is the diplomacy system in Medieval 2 going to be improved? Previously, you could only make alliances with other nations, but alliances kept breaking left and right without any consequence. Will nations remember if you betrayed them this time? Will you be able to trust in your allies?
BS: The diplomacy system has been improved. We're going to give the player a lot more information about how the artificial intelligence feels both about them and about the offer on the table. However, at the same time the AI will take offence at insulting offers and will have a better memory of past dealings. You should be able to trust your allies, but only up to a point. "
It doesnt say much... but it seens like this time we will be able to trust the AI, trust in our aliances. If the AI acts acording to what her "fell" about us, I supose iit wont attack or betray our factions if we are "friendly". I mean, if the AI "feels" and acts acording to "her feelings", whats a logic conclusion.
That wold be so cool... so cool!!! Imagine, have allys, play a role in the game! Not just raise an army, march, siege, starve, enslave, etc etc. Im talking about save the french from the english! Suport the remanescent of the royal line (wich will be rebels) im talkibg about get help ^^ be the pope's right arm... ah... so much thing :)
Re: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
I'm not overly confident about the diplomacy either but we'll see soon enough, I hope that as soon as you become slightly successful that everyone doesn't gang up on you as it's not really that realistic.
More options would be good too, like offering an ally a loan of troops or money.
Sv: diplomacy: improvement or dissapointment?
Well those that have played it so far have stated that diplomacy has gotten improved.
They said they could trust their allies and only attacked when there was a logical reason behind it.
