Diplomacy AI

[hollth]

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.

That could be done through what I'm suggesting. I liked Prodigal Son's continual tribute idea of X% of resources gathered.

So far I'm thinking these treaties would cover everything

• Resources (once off / x% gathered)
• Pop/units (Not sure this would work tbh)
• Support/trade units not attackable (till ended/ for X amount of time)
• No units/buildings attackable
• Territory agreements (No territory takeover- Possibly others? )

I think as long as both parties offer at least one thing it would work. You can still bully people/AI into accepting treaties that are unfavourable to them like vassal or tribute states.

[Romulus]

Well atm I'm engaged with python and perl.

When I venture into C++ and what not ill also like to contribute

[Sighvatr]

Vassals seem like a cool idea, but it seems more of something that belongs in a civ game setting. In a civ game setting, you have the time to micro manage your politics, military, and economy. In a game like Age of Empires, its a race to kill off your opponents. The more effective and quick decisions you make in 0 A.D. is the more closer you may be into getting past ahead of your opponent.

An idea for this may be to have an automatic vassal option. If an opponent kills off a large number points of a player, the player may be given a yes or no option to becoming a vassal. If clicked yes, the player becomes an ally that cannot change his/her diplomacy and a percentage of each gathered resource deposited to a dropsite will go to the ruling civ.

[Romulus]

Yeah it is a city builder type genre the vassal thing.

I just seem to see it as much more. All these facets is what can and will make 0 A.D. Great. It certainly has the potential.

But RTS as a genre like what you and I know it as, in the old days was quite raw and bare. RTS is in truth a civ city builder too. But is more free than a standard civ builder game. Only reason why aoe and RTS games don't have it, is because the age they were made and no effort was put in, in implementing umpteen facets of game play. Also they don't exist now because corporate game developers don't have a big enough market for it anymore.

So all in all, I see 0AD as an RTS that can give what AOE could not, and that's the beauty of this game. I think it may become an hybrid RTS which is truly unique in every respect in its own right. What wish for in AOE... 0AD is that genie in the bottle that grants that wish and creates something amaizing

[hollth]

Vassals seem like a cool idea, but it seems more of something that belongs in a civ game setting. In a civ game setting, you have the time to micro manage your politics, military, and economy. In a game like Age of Empires, its a race to kill off your opponents. The more effective and quick decisions you make in 0 A.D. is the more closer you may be into getting past ahead of your opponent.

An idea for this may be to have an automatic vassal option. If an opponent kills off a large number points of a player, the player may be given a yes or no option to becoming a vassal. If clicked yes, the player becomes an ally that cannot change his/her diplomacy and a percentage of each gathered resource deposited to a dropsite will go to the ruling civ.

That was the original concept I had in mind. I felt like there were too many inherent problems to that approach and not enough difference between vassals and allies (particularly when there is no AI). I do agree that it might be more suited to a different game type, but I still think it would be worth investigating to see if it can work in this game. I agree that there is the risk of becoming to micro intensive so there needs to be restrictions of some sort on it. Theres a lot that can be done here so thats not a major concern for me.

To me the biggest issue for the way I'm suggesting is one of communication and UI. How does the player know about and act out these actions etc. Is there some kind of chancery/embassy building? Emissary units? Expansion of the diplomacy window? How is the player notified of a request or accept it?

[Romulus]

Right

It definitely can work in the game. But isn't that what options are for? If you as a player don't want micro managing game then option menus need to specify such game types regulating the intensity at which you manage. I disagree with limiting the game with exclusions.

Now about the AI will act upon these choices can either be by sending the human player a notification like AOK which .... is seriously outdated... Or it can dispatch as you say emissary units which I think that's a cool idea.

An emissary party once dispatched includes trade officials to open up trade between empires and ambassadors for border squabbles or the demanding of resources if the AI is an uptight lprd and master -- the classical political drama I can help in creating an AI like this.

With that said it adds a lot of realism to it. Holy cow my mind is going over this now. You don't even get this in any micro managing game I've played, and that's precisely the point, having them as units carrying out the objectives is an RTS trait.

[Romulus]

Like wuth regards to an ambassador....

The AI works like this

For example, if borders are close and their happens to be iron in your border, AI sends an objective out to negotiate on extending or gaining permission to mine etc etc very complex scripting here as politics isn't simple and to code an AI like this to work properly is labour.

What's the point of this you ask?

Probably a political game mode? With a vastly sophisticated AI?

Instead of going gungho all out war, we play the AI in a type of politically chess like fashion and in the random sequence of events on behalf the AI or if the human decides to disagree with the AI's proposals or whatever then the teddybears go to war.

Its certainly an appealing suggestion probably a probability

[Romulus]

You'd need a special building...

Example, the Roman senate.

Why I say this is because these emissary parties dispatched by the AI need to go somewhere. Once they arrive at the "government building" a menu interface kicks up where you receive the proposals and manage the political aspects. Probably a portrait of the emissary on the side or whoever is dealing with. Just a simple user interface.

This is the same building where you create such units btw.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Ok for now we accept loyalty and the Ai handle with Diplomacy system, this implies too have more interactive GUI to exchanges troops and buildings, and propose traits like Total War system, Empire Earth II and Finally the most simple advanced Rise of Nations.

[Romulus]

Yes definitely need an interactive gui for troops and provision management.

[leper]

Romolous: You do know of the edit button? Three posts in one topic within 30 minutes is a bit much.

[hollth]

I don't think a pop out window is a good method to have. Its very intrusive to have a pop out in a game like this. If a building is the way to go then I think having the interactive GUI where you would normally train units would be best. Basically like the market. It may be that expanding the current diplomacy window is the best option, but if it can be avoided it should.

Despite the realism of having emissaries I suspect they will cause too much hassle to have. They will normally be killed before reaching the destination by towers etc, preventing a treaty.

[Lion.Kanzen]

I don't think a pop out window is a good method to have. Its very intrusive to have a pop out in a game like this. If a building is the way to go then I think having the interactive GUI where you would normally train units would be best. Basically like the market. It may be that expanding the current diplomacy window is the best option, but if it can be avoided it should.

Despite the realism of having emissaries I suspect they will cause too much hassle to have. They will normally be killed before reaching the destination by towers etc, preventing a treaty.

I agree, the pop out Window can be work better in campaing mode.

[GunChleoc]

Having emissaries will only work if they are non-attackable, or they will never reach their destination.

[Romulus]

Yeah.

What should also happen, is every faction starts the game neutral. Not like in aoe where neutral only protected villagers, but essentially, just 1 down from being an ally.

Like Rise of Nations "peace time" concept.

[Stan`]

Yeah.

What should also happen, is every faction starts the game neutral. Not like in aoe where neutral only protected villagers, but essentially, just 1 down from being an ally.

Like Rise of Nations "peace time" concept.

I'll add a little thing to this. Maybe make buttons for the host. Like peace time 15 min 30 min 45 min. And 0 if they want to do something quick. That't would be a little more elaborated IMO =)

[Romulus]

I'll add a little thing to this. Maybe make buttons for the host. Like peace time 15 min 30 min 45 min. And 0 if they want to do something quick. That't would be a little more elaborated IMO =)

No.

There should be no time limit for peace.

Reason being is cause its not realistic.

What this beautiful RTS needs is something Skyrim has

The AI's relations is strictly dependent on your actions and will be effected in every way. Skyrim has this but not like the intensity I'm referring.

Ill be coding an AI for my mod sometime as it will definitely need one. But what I'm doing now is putting all my ideas on paper how I want this AI to be, how it should act and how it relates to moves you as a player makes which then either from a random set of sequences issues an effect... Either happy or angry, etc, etc. Difficult to explain now as I have not really compiled it all in my head yet.

My first procedure with this is... Delving deep into the psychology of the times and perceive it as it was then.... " How would I act if was an enemy?? What would I do if you sent your soldiers into my region??? Or how happy I am that aided me battle with some of your soldiers. I'm thinking about a meter level for this... A measure of loyalty... But its effected at what you as the player does.

Creating a good AI is not an easy thing. Its as diverse as psychology.... Because is psychology....

Our brains trigger thought patters much the same way of how binary is created and processed. The only thing we has humans have is the ability to program ourselves... Machines have to be told first, then it does, but at what level its sophistication is at depends how well and how much you tell it

Edited January 21, 2014 by Romulus

[idanwin]

I think what stanislas meant is a period of peace at the start of the game so that you can first build your base before getting attacked (like plenty or RTS's do). The 0 timer being one which allows you to attack players from the start of the game.

[Lion.Kanzen]

I think what stanislas meant is a period of peace at the start of the game so that you can first build your base before getting attacked (like plenty or RTS's do). The 0 timer being one which allows you to attack players from the start of the game.

yeah like that, but and if we add to diplomacy a truce in order regrouping your units and improves your economy before the engagement again?

[Anubis1011]

This is a very interesting topic and I am excited that this is being discussed.

One distinction that could make "Vassalhood" unique (compared to an Alliance) would be limiting this to AI controlled players only. This makes sense especially if there are only two human players battling in a map with an additional number of AI players. I very much like the "Taxation" plan for resource gathering (a tithe, or 10%) and perhaps a further "Auxiliary" tax on created units (where one of every ten military units created is under the Human Player's control). The Auxiliary Idea is probably too complex in terms of coding at this time, but an interesting Idea nonetheless.

I also liked the idea of a dedicated "Consulate" building with emissaries or diplomats. I do think that AOE2  would have had much more depth with better AI diplomacy, so I am encouraged that we are discussing the Idea.