Is war the BEST strategy?

[Catt]

The influence of AI attitude on trading is a bit mysterious, but it definitley is very small (IMHO -- "very small" is obviously a subjective comment ). I say it is mysterious because sometimes it has no effect whatsoever, but sometimes it does. In my most recent test (just a few days ago, in response to another issue), taking a civ from Gracious to Furious never resulted in even a 2% variation in price, for any of strategic or luxury resources, or technology, and only just over 2% in the case of a proposed alliance.

An easy test to run is to find an old saved game where a potential trading partner is gracious to you. Establish the rock-bottom price that partner is willing to accept to sell you a resource or a tech, or to enter into an alliance. Then demand a core city from the partner repeatedly until his attitude is furious. Then go back and compare the new rock-bottom prices for the same trades. I have experienced examples where there was no difference, and I have experienced examples where there is a small difference.

IMHO, getting a source of saltpeter from a Gracious Hiawatha for 864 gold (or 48 gpt) versus getting a source of saltpeter from a Furious Hiawatha for 880 gold (or 50 gpt) is a very small difference. And though I enjoy Civ's attitude and reputation concepts, I will never take any specific action solely or even primarily intended to influence attitude for any reason other than a UN vote -- the consequences, positive or negative, of AI attitudes are simply not that great (again, outside of a UN vote).

Catt

[joncnunn]

Larger differences are found tech buying.

I find I can buy a tech 5 to 10% cheaper from a Gracious civ than a Polite civ.

And as for having a Furious AI as the other one you know in the ancient era: The ratios are so bad you are better off reseraching what they already have yourself than reseraching something new and trading.

[Catt]

Originally posted by joncnunn
Larger differences are found tech buying.

I find I can buy a tech 5 to 10% cheaper from a Gracious civ than a Polite civ.

And as for having a Furious AI as the other one you know in the ancient era: The ratios are so bad you are better off reseraching what they already have yourself than reseraching something new and trading.

Are your comparisons with the same civ? i.e., a "gracious" egypt offers tech A at 100 gold but a "polite" egypt (during the same turn) offers tech A at 100 plus 5% or 10%? There are definitely more variables at play, and if the price differences you're seeing are between different civs then I would say it is very difficult to attribute such price differences to attitude - there could be a whole host of other variables playing on one civ but not another (tech advancement, civ culture grouping, current governements, etc.).

My point is simply that in the 4 or 5 times I've run the experiment using a random saved game to compare prcies from a gracious versus a furious civ -- all other variables being the same -- the largest price difference I've ever seen was my most recent test under PTW 1.14f, and it was less than 2% in most cases. I don't profess to having tested it in a wide variety of games or settings, but I have just never seen it vary 5%, let alone 10%.

As an example from my latest test, a gracious Hiawatha offers me Military Tradition for 811 gold. The same turn, a furious Hiawatha wants 826 gold. Less than 2% and that's going from gracoious to furious!

Catt