Re: Diplomacy

On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christian Knoke wrote:
> > Reasons for:
> > - It was this way in Civ2 (duh).
> > - Diplomats less important.
> > - No longer have to micromanage a diplomat into the land of each enemy
> > to do diplomacy with him.
>
> Well that's part of the fun isn't it? In a multiplayer game, I can hide
> and follow my own strategy, until others send diplomats.

That's debatable ;)

> > - It will be very hard to get diplomats to establish embassies with AIs
> > (and players) with autoattack.
>
> This will be challenging :)

I don't think it should be challenging to get in diplomatic contact with
one of your friends.

> > - AI diplomacy (coming soon) is much more fun this way.
>
> Ok thats a technical reason. I can't comment on this.

It is not (very) technical. It just takes forever for the AI (or you) to
get embassies with each other.

> What exactly do you want to do? Do you mean that I can do treaties with
> everybody, from the very beginning? I wouldn't like that much. This would
> give diplomacy even more importance than it has now.
>
> Or just exchanging info (Intelligence)? What is needed for AI?
>
> Having (embassy OR recent contact) as predicate for Intelligence can be
> a compromise. But then I think it should be always possible to gain
> information from [F3], which is updated on contact, with an indication
> how old it is.

No, I want to be able to do treaties when you have (embassy OR recent
contact).

This makes easier for example a game style where you are supposed to ally
the first other player you find in a two vs two game.

  - Per