Sins Forums
A few questions:
I) Does the AI also backstab allies or is it very predictable in the sense that it won't attack allies above a certain relationship level?
II) Can you also bribe players with which you have bad relations in the sense that everyone has his price?
i don't know about the first . I didn't played so many games to say yes or no but i don't think he is capable of such strategies .
ii) You can increase your relation with him by a little you can't max out to 20 . You can increase your relationship up to max 2 points i think by giving him resources . But you can't hold a relation at let's say 15 only by giving him resources . You need to act as the expansion says diplomatic , making pacts , completing missions etc .
I suppose they could just add an algorithym to make the AI turn on its allies sometimes if it perceives them to be weak and easy to conquer. The AI will never be cunning nor even very strategic like a human player, but would you really want it to be a cunning opponent that would backstab you at the most opportune times? My guess is that most people really would not like that.
I think that having real human opponents in an unlocked FFA would result in people bunkering down as they try to prepare to attack on one side and to be attacked by their "ally" on the other side. Unlocked free for all (FFA) is not very popular in online multiplayer, and that is possibly because people don't like getting stabbed in the back or ganged up on. Sometimes people will try to start unlocked FFA games saying that they want to have diplomacy in their game (not the expansion, I mean a game with voluntary and shifting alliances). Those games rarely get filled since people prefer locked teams.
Heh heh, yeah. You could go build starbases at your ally's planets under the guise of offering him "extra protection" while he knocks out another opponent for you and then betray him, allowing you to take his territory and that of the guy he just knocked out.
I'm not sure if people won't like to have the option at least. While, it is not nice to be backstabed by your allies, it can provide a fresh challenge imo. It would also add some depth to diplomacy in the game. It could also work in your advantage if an alliance between two AI players breaks up suddenly.
Wall of Text that is both on and off topic and contains a rant ahead:
The AI, as far as I can tell, only backstabs allies based on how many "allied victors" you set. For instance, if you have 4 people allied, and there can only be three victors - there will be a backstabbing. It will, however, be you 100% of the time. So, no, not really... the AI doesn't backstab, and it will betray you first despite relations.
You will have to be the one doing backstabbing - early and often - to assure that you come out ahead. In a game I had the other day, everyone was allied with everyone else... I just offed the other AI one at a time - no one would attack or defend their allies at all, it became a stagnant boring mess. My only option was to cheese it up (which I did), or just go to war with everyone (I didn't feel like tacking six 1500supply fleets, though).
In short, the diplomacy system, while better than what we used to have... still fails. It may have some potential in MP, but for SP it kind of sucks... I sometimes wonder if their focus on balancing it for the MP factor isn't what's holding it back in the SP factor.
Although frankly... I don't have any desire to really play it MP... I don't want to participate in a race to pacts/dip cruisers. It seems to me (in theory) that pacts/dip cruiser effects just make it even harder to be the odd man out in a game against humans. In Entrenchment... you were pretty well screwed if you got ganged up on, but it was still possible if you were just that much better/luckier than your enemies. With these extra bonuses from diplomacy? I don't know... it almost seems like a buffer of sorts...
Say previously one good player was fighting against two average players. My money would be on the good player. With Diplomacy however, those two can pact up and gain substantial bonuses that make it quite a bit more difficult on the good player. I do not like nor agree with anything that gives people a "handicap"... there should be no "artificial skill" in a game. I don't know if I'm making my opinion clear or not, so I'll just wrap this up.
I'm disappointed w/ the Diplomacy system. The diplomacy system is not realistic, the betrayals are 99% on the human player. And yes, you can bribe enemies with goods. Each race gets a buff to a certain type of donation that makes donating that material give a substantial boost to relations, and in time it can make even an enemy a friend.
-Itharus
Itharus thanks for your insights. I hope my experience with the expansion will be different, but I doubt it is.
Itharus hit it pretty much on the head.
One of the largest improvements that could be done would be to have all positive and negative causes be uncapped.
I know that doesn't make much sense, so let me go into detail.
As it is now, all diplomatic actions are really limited. -1.5/+3 for missions, +2 (I think) for gifts, +10 (at 1.5 per planet) for envoys and so on. I'm unsure how everything else is... but I'm pretty sure it's all just as limited.
It would be simply great if all of these things were uncapped (or caps in the -50/+50 range).
Realistically, I should be able to pay them enough for a cease fire, vision, or anything else really!
I should be able to send them enough envoys to convert to whole population to allying with me.
I should be able to be their whipping boy (mission) so much that they to least agree to stop attacking me!
Sadly, unless I agree to give them resources every couple minutes, have envoys on all their planets, do missions as they wish, research tons, and only fight their enemies... then I will never be on good terms with them.
To top all that off, their +10 starting bonus is silly, there is bound to be a better solution to AI -> Human diplomacy.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
