The Great Suckness Of Diplomacy

PapaLenin · November 13, 2001, 05:21

Hi!

I am playing first game with regent and that is enough to understand that diplomacy sucks like hell. I mean have the civ team changed since civ2 or ac??? Like someone said before it really seems that firaxis is investing more in graphichs and cool looking leader faces than in the "game" itself. Civ2 diplomacy sucked thats ok but Diplomacy in ac was much more advanced than in civ3. For exapmle if u start a war with an allie aganist some civ and then decide to stop you actually cant because your allie will fight till the end, crush the opposing civ, get big load of territory/cities and become much more powerful than you. In ac you could be able to ask other civ to stop war with other. Then ofcource you should be able to trade military units.

LaRusso · November 13, 2001, 05:29

Quote:

Originally posted by PapaLenin
Civ2 diplomacy sucked thats ok but Diplomacy in ac was much more advanced than in civ3. For exapmle if u start a war with an allie aganist some civ and then decide to stop you actually cant because your allie will fight till the end, crush the opposing civ, get big load of territory/cities and become much more powerful than you.

yeah, firaxis bastards! you cannot swindle AI out of the mutual protection pact anymore and then claim that 'AI sucks' so instead 'diplo sucks'

i suggest you honor your alliance like a man for those remaning turns and get a chunk of other civ yourself

Robert Plomp · November 13, 2001, 05:44

The great suckness of diplomacy only because you can't stop a militair alliance during wartime ?
What if you play the game some more often and think about diplomacy again.

Or what if you start to play civ2 again and compare the limited diplomatic possibilities you have in civ2 with civ3.

As long as you can't invite the AI to come to your house and negotiate with you like you would with a human (Like bush and putin are doing right now) there will always be limitations.
it's a game.

PapaLenin · November 14, 2001, 02:58

Yes this is a game... But the game, I would say, is divided in three general segments. One is war, two is building your empire and three diplomacy. And compared civ3 diplomacy to civ2 it is just not different at all. The only new thing is that u can decide what to trade. THATS IT!!! And I am saynig that ALPHA CENTAURI has better diplomacy so why the heck cant civ3:s be at least as good? I mean comoon it is not a big deal to make trading military units and asking other civ to stop a war options possible.

Imran Siddiqui · November 14, 2001, 03:14

Well, I quite like diplomacy and all the options available with it, but:

Quote:

I mean have the civ team changed since civ2 or ac???

Actually, yes.

PapaLenin · November 14, 2001, 10:08

Yes the options in diplomacy are great at the moment but the "suckness" is in that there could be much much much and once more hell of a lot more options including Alpha Centauris.