New Relations System

More control...

Published on November 8, 2005 By Draginol In GalCiv Journals

The relations system in GalCiv 1 was dynamic but hard to understand. The AI would look at where it currently was in terms of how it felt about you, go through a load of calculations, and then adjust its relations. The problem was that it was often hard to understand.

So this time, I've started making it so that the AI calculates its relations with you from scratch each turn rather than adjusting up and down.

Different situations given different points for and against you. Ironically, a system similar to this is in Civ IV so at least there's others that feel a system like this makes more sense. Here's what I've got so far:

1	You are militarily more powerful
2 to 3	You are significantly more powerful.
4 to 5	You are massively more powerful militarily
1	You are trading with them
2	Trade with you represents a substantial part of their economy
3	Trade with you represents a major part of their economy
1	You are ethically evil and so are they
2	You are ethically neutral and so are they
3	You are ethically good and so are they
1	You have helped them in the past.
2 to 3	You have provided significant help to them.
1	You have recently paid tribute
1	You are natural friends (humans & Altarians)
1 to 3	You are diplomatically more sophisticated
1	They have planets in your influence sphere
1 to 2	They are pacifistic
1 to 4	You are a historic friend (after 2228 + galaxy size) players friendly players become friendlier with 1 point per year)
-2	You are evil and they are neutral
-4	You are evil and they are good
-3	You are good and they are evil
-2	You are good and they are neutral
-1	You are neutral and they are evil
-2	You are neutral and they are good
-1	They are more powerful than you are.
-2 to -3	They are significantly more powerful than you are.
-4 to -5	They are massively more powerful than you are.
-1 to -2	They are militaristic
-1	You are natural enemies (Drengin and Torians)
-1	You are the Yor (or you’re not the Yor)
-1 to -4	You are a historic adversary
-1 to -3	You are diplomatically less sophisticated
-1 to -4	“Unlucky” event affects you (assassination for instance)

Comments (Page 2)

CerebroJD

on Nov 12, 2005

I agree with the suggestions here in the thread, most notably Mke C's.

jeblackstar

on Nov 12, 2005

On the negative scale between evil and good, if both races are good or evil will there be a positive? Or will it balance out to 0? Oops, I was looking at the scale again and found it, must have missed it the first time.

On a slightly unrelated note, my son found an article from sometime back that said Stardock was in negotiation for the title Master of Orion. Having played that back in the college days, I was just wondering if there were any truth to it, or whether it had gone beyond the negotiation stage.

Lowa11

on Nov 13, 2005

Lies! Stardock and whoever had made the MoO series, were in negotation TO COOPERATE not to kill each other besides, Galciv1 survived because Stardock is a more *direct* company and their games have alot options (rather than having the ultimate military)

Peace Phoenix

on Nov 13, 2005

On a slightly unrelated note, my son found an article from sometime back that said Stardock was in negotiation for the title Master of Orion.

Are you sure it wasn't for Master of Magic instead?

Popup Target

on Nov 14, 2005

Let's remember, this is a war game.

One very minor nit. While I agree with your analysis, GC is a game of conquest, not exactly a war game. While MoO3 may have had Senate bills you could put forth, that's the only real area beyond the military I found it even close to the richness of most GC1 games when it comes to the higher levels of conquest.

In MoO2/MoO3/Civ3 most of my games ended with me as sole survivor. AC tended to be an even sole survivor or tech victory split. I'm almost never sole survivor in GC1 or GC2.

I bring this up because while most GC1 players are well aware of this, I've noticed that there are at least some people beta testing or just participating in the forums that don't seem aware of this dimension to the game.

And yes, I do belive it was Masters of Magic, not Master of Orion. I'd be interested in what Stardock would do with the MoO franchise, but I really don't think that would be an appropriate fit.

Lord_StarPilot

on Nov 14, 2005

I consider cultural conquest to be just as valid a form of gaining territory, resources and winning as war. Or a tech victory.

IIRC, it was both MoO and MoM. Brad had mentioned wanting to discuss buying the names/brands. But Atari wanted too much money for them, so that ended that.

Frogboy

on Nov 15, 2005

I updated the table in my comment but for some reason it didn't show up. Essentially I added in the suggestions in this thread.

Mike C

on Nov 15, 2005

good to hear

Lucian Gyiira

on Nov 15, 2005

Just being the Yor brings a negative penalty?

Does this have to do with the Yor being, uh...machines? Sort of an "organics don't completely trust inorganics, and vice versa" thing?

ProudCanadian

on Nov 15, 2005

-1 You are the Yor (or you’re not the Yor)

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh at this one. HAHAHA!

Noghanimus

on Nov 17, 2005

Shouldn't there be a time-related component in these figures? The only one I can see in the list are if you "recently" paid tribute, while some of the effects of course can change per turn if they are recalculated.
However, memory fades over the years and any good or bad effects from past SINGLE events (help in the past, unlucky events) should be reduced over time (1 or 2 years).

How about a declaration of war (by the player) to race X being a permanent -1 (or -2) modifier in relations with X... Even if things are later settled "peacefully", relations will never get back to the original levels (all other influences being equal).

Popup Target

on Nov 29, 2005

I've been thinking about this, and there's a few things that I don't see on the list that I think should be there.

1) penalty for you having a military force/starbase in/very close to their territory. Maybe only computed at construction time for starbases. While I'm sure the AI will take that into consideration in deciding its actions, I think it should color relations as well.

2) same for cultural starbases.

3) Penalty for my voting against you on a United Planets issue (so if I say that the Arceans should have to pay 7% of their income to everyone else, the Arceans should not be happy with me, or at least a little less happy).

4) bonus for my voting in favor of you on a UP issue.

(and no, I don't know how to count multi-answer issues, like "who gets the expo."

As for war not fading, sorry, even that fades, just not as slowly. Do the US and Britain look like they're still upset over that little civil war? More recently, I don't think there's a lot of animosity in the US towards Japan, Germany, or Italy over WWII.

I'm pretty sure that Yor penalty is if one person is the Yor and the other isn't. In other words, the Yor will have lower relations with all other races, and it will be reciprocal.

On a tangentally related note: The AI needs to take a few more things into consideration when deciding when to declare war. Sure, it's easy to say "my military is bigger, my economy isn't too much weaker, I can win." but if you're overlooking the fact that the person you're declaring war on is the technology leader, or even a technology equal with a lot of cash in the bank, you have to be prepared for that person to either have enough cash laying around to BUY a fleet in a single turn that makes you feel quite a bit less secure, or be willing to shake a few techs loose for cash to all the other players, and THEN buy the huge fleet. I often go from having a military a third the size of the attacker when war is declared to a 50-100% advantage the very next turn.

Supreme Shogun

on Dec 05, 2005

Regarding UP - should be able to negotiate for votes then ? So like the Drengin ambassador calls you up and says, me and the Yor ambassador are putting forth this bill at the UP next term about trade and we need you to vote yes. I'll give you x bc and this other tech you wanted if you'll do that.

So basically agree with Popup

Popup Target

on Dec 05, 2005

Agreed, we should know all UP bills one turn before they're voted on so that we can at least know that something important is coming up and buy influence. Being able to buy support on the issue would be better, but might be a stretch this late in the design cycle.

Lowa11

on Dec 06, 2005

Almost every game has had that "strech" period before its finnally completed(less for some some can crippile the end product) i do agree with popup and Shogun. ohy i forgot to mention that the reason why the yor get that -1 point is because they are so different from everyone else it just causes seperation... i also belive it should be negated for
Yor-Iconian relations(unless The Icos still hate the yor for rebellion then its ok). also, The Way the AIs relations Should(Probley do) change throghout the Campagin like somthing hapened between two periods that changed how someone felt about you or someone else.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!