Diplomacy AI

[Romulus]

I don't know about everyone else, but I like diplomacy and the political aspects in an RTS very much. After all this is realism and a very if not the most important aspect of the time and game.

Is there plans to make the current AI more diplomatic?

Things I'd really like include:

Lots and lots of ally commands...

Attack

Defend

Send reinforcements

Man the walls

Build a building or fortification here

Send resources

_____________

And strategy

Command allies in battle with different strategic options like flank or troop movement.

These are very few suggestions but this will be such an integral part of the game

[Romulus]

YES!!

And another thing...

We need a loyalty thing where allies lose or gain loyalty towards you and a script that makes allies respond to most commands when the loyalty is high.

If loyalty is low the script needs random possibilities that either make the ally rebel etc.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Loyalty in matches? Hmmmm. In diplomacy window?.... May be we can add a bar, but the loyalty with allies can be reciprocal.

Unless of course they resign and accept be like a vassal Ai.

[Romulus]

Yes

Vassals. But that's not the same as being an ally.

Vassals are conquered and subdued. But an ally is independent without influence.

But it will be very very nice to have vassals rather than game over. You essentially control conquered enemies and as vassals they pay you monthly or a given time x amount of resources or a menu that you can specify what type and the amount

[Lion.Kanzen]

Yes

Vassals. But that's not the same as being an ally.

Vassals are conquered and subdued. But an ally is independent without influence.

But it will be very very nice to have vassals rather than game over. You essentially control conquered enemies and as vassals they pay you monthly or a given time x amount of resources or a menu that you can specify what type and the amount

yeah the Vassal must be obedient or defeated if is not.

[Prodigal Son]

Vassals are interesting in RTS, always thought about them missing. Their main features could be a percentage of gathered resources going to their overlord, and possibly the ability for him to train or control some of their troops. Or even reducing their pop cap and adding that amound to the overlord's pop cap. However I'm not sure what's the best way to implement them. Instant defeat if they choose to break off like Lion said (did i get it right?), might be ok-ish as gameplay but not realistic. But then if they can break off, what's the purpose of keeping them instead of annihilating them. It could be somehow desired for exploiting the benefits and then maybe crush them before the totally rebuild though. Or, make them totally fixed for the rest of the match. Overall it could be a nice mechanic but needs a lot of work and balancing.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Is a advanced Ai , almost like a human and like the history. This game for first time get the possibly the choice the features for the player without ruin the gameplay.

[hollth]

How would you gain or lose loyalty? Or is it pre-determined?

I'd like to see a few more options for diplomacy non AI related too, like unit gifting or territory treaties.

Vassalage is an interesting one. Might it cause a snowball effect though? And how is the vassal meant to win assuming they're far less powerful?

Or is it only meant for AI?

Edited January 2, 2014 by hollth

[Lion.Kanzen]

You play Starcraft 2 you can give order to your Ai allies, you have panel to give strategies and orders, you can order to explore or early rush or protect your base. The vassal can work in same form. You can ask for tribute.

[hollth]

Don't you want that for all allies? Is the only difference that a vassal must perform what is asked? How would you get a vassal?

The way I was envisioning it, to gain a vassal you would need to be much stronger than the enemy and they would submit in some form. However, having it like this creates inherent issues like snowballing, the vassal being unable to win (assuming it extends beyond AI) and having the win conditions more murky.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Don't you want that for all allies? Is the only difference that a vassal must perform what is asked? How would you get a vassal?

The way I was envisioning it, to gain a vassal you would need to be much stronger than the enemy and they would submit in some form. However, having it like this creates inherent issues like snowballing, the vassal being unable to win (assuming it extends beyond AI) and having the win conditions more murky.

I mean the way to perform orders.

Quoted from SC Forum.

"Additional AI improvements, including the ability to issue specific commands to AI partners, will be coming in Heart of the Swarm"

Edited January 2, 2014 by Lion.Kanzen

[hollth]

I'm just trying to get my head around how vassalage would work and be any different from alliances so I'm thinking on the fly. Its a more complex idea than it seems at first and begs many questions. I certainly think its worth a discussion to try and work out the details and see if it could possibly work in the game in some way.

[Romulus]

Well I believe vassals are very realistic.

Throughout ancient history there have been vassals to conquering empires.

For example after Caesars great conquest over Gaul the Gauls became a vassal. But because they lacked enough numbers after that war to rebel and no weapons and resources (ceased by mighty Roma) they could not rebel.

In 0 A.D. We need an AI that mimics this reality. Where as the "conqueror" you can dictate and control your vassal in some ways by limiting their pop cap limit, including the size of army they make etc etc.

The whole idea with this is, you can use your vassals for added income and army contribution.

Say I want to attack another enemy but I don't want to waste my men, I can just send the vassal's

If if the vassal disobey or defies the might of your empire, you send in your army to stamp down authority and rule and slaughter the troops the vassal gathered to launch a rebellion.

[hollth]

So you only want to be able to do this for single player against AI?

[Lion.Kanzen]

Is hard, ok, start again, the Ai can start be a ally or vassal, then what happen in 2v1?

The vassal can rebels and be Enemy if your enemy is win the battle. Or if them are increases their power(military or economic may be)

And low their loyalty.

The ally can be Neutral or turns a Enemy even much easy to betray you than a vassal. But this don't happens in locked teams.

If you turn an Ai (Enemy) into a Vassal in 1v2 the vassal can't riot or turn enemy it's defeated automactly if the loyalty is low. Obviusly this happens if the Ai. Started as Enemy.

How turn a vassal, if the Ai offer to you resign.

Now the other snow ball can be when are more than two Ai.

So you only want to be able to do this for single player against AI?

for me in all modes. Multiplayer and single.

[hollth]

Im with you Lion in having it in all modes. Im normally against having mechanics solely for playing against AI.

So then another question. Are vassals and allies enough to warrant two different diplomacy settings? If so, how would allies and vassals be different?

[Lion.Kanzen]

Yeah because with this mode in a multiplayer you can have a 2(Ai ally medium, noob player ) vs an regular player human you can balanced its very like to control two factions in same time, one automatic and other is human. I test this in SC it's very enjoy.

But in starcfrat don't exist Vassals or loyalty so can be more fun.

So now we need know what thinks the team. Obviously we are don't ask this for Alphas.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Lion.Kanzen

[Prodigal Son]

Programming-wise it shouldn't be hard. A proper concept and balance should be the main issues.

[Romulus]

Yes in all modes is fine.

But for me single player mode is perfect. Because the majority of us spend time in single player mode so its the primary mode.

And I do like vsing the AI

[Lion.Kanzen]

Obviously the Ai don't quit, (only scarybot)

[Romulus]

You see this is where we need to change a few things here....

Instead of completely destroying an enemy, rather include him as a vassal etc.

We defiantly need a "capture building" option if you going to go the vassal route.

I wished for something like in AoE.....

[Lion.Kanzen]

For me we need have the best features of all great RTS, without destroy AOE essence, AoK is our canon but that no means we need something from blizzards games or Sierra...etc

[Romulus]

For me we need have the best features of all great RTS, without destroy AOE essence, AoK is our canon but that no means we need something from blizzards games or Sierra...etc

I agree with you 100%

AoE is the base, but 0 A.D. Is the ivory tower coated in gold.

Think of it this way... AoE is Greece... 0 A.D is Rome and Rome is more sophisticated and gives many options

[hollth]

I'm not a programmer so I'll try to focus on the concept design and having it balance-able. I'm mainly considering how it would work in a setting with many human players since if it works in that situation it should work in all others. Unfortunately I have a feeling that we won't be able to come up with ways to differentiate vassals from allies enough to warrant having two separate them but its still worth a try. More than likely it'll end up being in a completely different form.

Apparently I didn't click send. Lo and behold I came up with a completely different form lol Might it be a better route to expand diplomacy to include several types of treaties (all mutually beneficial)? That way vassalage can be imposed without actually having a vassal option. i.e. you can almost destroy somebody then offer them a treaty that gives you something you want (territory,units,resources,pop, etc) in exchange for something else.

Edited January 2, 2014 by hollth

[Lion.Kanzen]

I'm not a programmer so I'll try to focus on the concept design and having it balance-able. I'm mainly considering how it would work in a setting with many human players since if it works in that situation it should work in all others. Unfortunately I have a feeling that we won't be able to come up with ways to differentiate vassals from allies enough to warrant having two separate them but its still worth a try. More than likely it'll end up being in a completely different form.

Apparently I didn't click send. Lo and behold I came up with a completely different form lol Might it be a better route to expand diplomacy to include several types of treaties (all mutually beneficial)? That way vassalage can imposed without actually having a vassal option. i.e. you can almost destroy somebody then offer them a treaty that gives you something you want (territory,units,resources,pop, etc) in exchange for something else.

may be they can send tribute regularly thinks in client states. A ally is more conservative. And in a big map with 8 players the vassal can support you all time, and ally don't.