RTW: Diplomacy - A waste of time?

[Doug-Thompson]

Something I still don't understand is factions who don't know when they're whupped.

The noble armies of Carthage smashed the Egyptian forces, killed all but one of their heirs and took all of their cities except Jerusalem. In a moment of mercy, they sent an emissary to offer a ceasefire. The Egyptians rejected the offer.

Let's make this clear -- Carthage had a full army within viewing distance of Jersualem, and the Egyptians had an heir and one unit of axemen in their city. Their doom was writ large. Refusing the offer was pure, simple suicide.

Why on earth would they do it? What nation would really behave that way? Why can't a faction figure out that it's beaten? If the diplomatic AI is really so good, why can't it cower in (appropriate) fear? Why not live to fight another day?

This sort of thing really bugs me.

Sometimes, you'd just rather die than make peace with the ones who killed your dad and all your brothers and enslaved your sister.

[Lemur]

Sometimes, you'd just rather die than make peace with the ones who killed your dad and all your brothers and enslaved your sister.

That seems kind of ... thin. Unlike a lot of aspects of the beautiful game, I find myself struggling to justify a lot of diplmatic behavior in-game. As your answer demonstrates.

I would really like it if the diplomatic AI showed a little more situational awareness. I know that sort of thing is freakishly hard to program (the old how-the-heck-do-you-code-common-sense conundrum), but I'd like it all the same.

[AngryGerbil]

I would really like it if the diplomatic AI showed a little more situational awareness. I know that sort of thing is freakishly hard to program (the old how-the-heck-do-you-code-common-sense conundrum), but I'd like it all the same.

Civ3, although not perfect, managed to give the AI a decent amount of situational awareness. Enemy civs knew when they were stronger than you, and they knew when they were beat. And alliances meant something in Civ3. Creative Assembly could learn a thing or two from Firaxis about diplomacy IMO.

[Zatoichi]

Yeah, very true. Although, I'm guessing Firaxis could learn a thing or two about 3 dimensional real time battles from CA too!

What would you give to get those 2 sets of devs in a room and not let them out until they'd made the ultimate game!

Well, I'll settle for Rome in the meantime, it may not have the best diplomacy model, but it's an improvement over what came before in the TW series, so it's a move in the right direction.

[Doug-Thompson]

That seems kind of ... thin.

Haven't had a family member murdered or a sister or child raped, have you?

I haven't either, but have interviewed people who have.

[Sociopsychoactive]

What several of you seem to be missing is that factions have a level of like/dislike toward you and others.

Remember in CIV2 and 3, the other factions responces and diplomats stance and expretion told you their feelings toward you, well that holds here, but you only have the responces to go by.

Take an example, you as Julii take all spanish cities but one, and park near the last with a large army and rquest a cease fire. They refuse point blank every time. This is because they hate your guts, every single one of them would rather fight and die than let a single roman citizen live.

Another example, early on you as Brutii request some money from the other roman factions in return for waging war on the greek cities. They all pony up some cash, and then you don't attack, or only make token aggresion against the greeks. next time you want smething, anything, from your mates they will see you as untrustworthy and refuse, and they have very long memories.

But, it can work. If you go to war with someone, repel all their invading armies and then sit your side of the border looking menacing, but not attacking and offer (or even demand) a cease fire, they will most likely accept. You are seen as more trustworthy.

Every time you attack an ally, break a cease fire, demand cash or anything else for a less than fair price your standing with the world goes down, you look bad and untrustworthy. Seen as the bulk of gamers play to win, expand and conquer they will be seen as total gits from early on and have serious trouble getting so much as a trade agreement from diplomacy.

The few who play diplomatically, making friends and giving regular gifts, not making threats and only attacking people they are at war with or buetral with will be able to rake in cash and keep alliances indefinately.

[vyan]

What several of you seem to be missing is that factions have a level of like/dislike toward you and others.

Take an example, you as Julii take all spanish cities but one, and park near the last with a large army and rquest a cease fire. They refuse point blank every time. This is because they hate your guts, every single one of them would rather fight and die than let a single roman citizen live.

It is better to live today, and fight tomorrow..........

Logic suggests that if i had one province and there was a big roman army that would kick my ass easily, and they offered me a ceasefire before they killed me off for good, i would immediately accept it, knowing full well i would be able to attempt to come back at a later stage. But that would be common sense wouldn't it, something the AI will never have.

[Sociopsychoactive]

Ok, hows a modern day example then. Your a small dictatorship, your goverment loses a war with a large superpower and the country is conquered, occupied and a puppet leader put in place, then the superpower starts preaching about peace, unity and goodwill, do you accept and live hapily, or start fight back in whatever way possible?

I won't answer the question, otherwise I might instigate a flame war, but do you see my point? A nation or a culture that hates another nation or culture will NEVER take common sense over violent refusal.

[Lemur]

Your a small dictatorship, your goverment loses a war with a large superpower and the country is conquered, occupied and a puppet leader put in place, then the superpower starts preaching about peace, unity and goodwill, do you accept and live hapily, or start fight back in whatever way possible?

An interesting hypothetical example, but not a precise one. In your purely speculative Messapotamean country, you're talking about resistance after conquest. In RTW we deal with this through enslavement or mass killing, which is sensible all around.

Let's make the analogy more spot-on: You're a small dictatorship, and your gov loses every battle with a superpower, getting smashed and bloodied out of every city except, say, some fictional place called Tikrit. Now, do you accept a ceasefire when offered, and live to defy the Great Satan, or do you hunker down and scream defiance at the obviously overwhelming invaders?

Don't confuse resistance (or "insurgency") with wacky diplomatic non-maneuvering.

[Lemur]

Haven't had a family member murdered or a sister or child raped, have you?

Doug, that's a really dangerous line of rhetoric to take, especially if you happen to be wrong in your assumption. I'll take a No for the rape and Yes for murder. Thanks for asking. (Can I end that with a "wanker," or is that in violation of forum rules?)

So getting back to the issue of AI diplomacy, and away from groundless assumptions about people we haven't met, I haven't tried the diplomacy in Civ 3, largely because I haven't tried Civ 3. Back in the day of Civ 2 I got so disgusted with phalanxes sinking my battleships that I walked away from the entire endeavor. I take it everything's much improved in 3, eh?

Well, again, even though it's incredibly difficult to program common sense, I wish the AI factions had just a tad more of it.

[Colovion]

I never have really taken time to do diplomacy until RTW. It isn't polished, but it's better than MTW's. YOu really have to try to be proactive in the diplomacy and keep your good face up or your allies or those in a ceasefire with you might start to forget your good nature and start looking longingly at that juicy settlement. In 2 years of diplomacy with the Thracians I turned our bitter war into a peaceful Protectorate - nicely skyrocketting their economy in the process.

[Lemur]

In 2 years of diplomacy with the Thracians I turned our bitter war into a peaceful Protectorate - nicely skyrocketting their economy in the process.

Enlighten me here -- what's the onus on you when somebody becomes your protectorate? Are you obligated to defend them? Do you need to station troops on their borders? I haven't tried this yet, and I'm really curious about how it works.

[Longasc]

I usually fill up my money by selling them Map Information every turn.

[The Hun]

Odd behaviour? Definitely.
I have Thrace on the rack and demanded 1100 denarii for 4 turns. No way!
Ok so I decided on a one off payment of 2000. They offered me 1200 which I accepted. I then made another demand, this time for 1500 and they offered me 1000. Just for a laugh I made demand after demand until they had payed me over 4000 denarii. My original demand would have been payable over 4 turns, yet I achieved this in one turn! I am not impressed with this example of negotiation