Diplomacy needs to be fixed as priority

[SenseiJT92]

Playing with the Beta patch, and still diplomacy is broken.

I just can't play the campaign knowing this problem still exists- it makes no sense that a faction with a balance of power pre-diplomacy 9:1, should resist my offer for peace or vassal status just because the diplomacy balance is permanently stuck on 1:1 (50/50 what have you). It also makes factions over-confident, especially with breaking alliances or declaring war - as their mind is saying, "Yeah, we can take them", but their actual situation is comparable to a kid with a conker taking on Leonidas.

I believe that this needs to be addressed in the patch next week, as to me it throws away any realism that was intended. I'm not sure if CA are even aware of this issue, (which just shows how much they tested their Campaign)?

Has anyone else noticed this?

[Kenios]

So every one-region faction should kneel and bow to my 10-region faction just because?

[SenseiJT92]

So every one-region faction should kneel and bow to my 10-region faction just because?

The point is that the diplomacy does not take into account balance of power as it should - it shows on the faction selection the different levels of power, but when engaging in diplomacy it reverts to 50:50.

And it works both ways; let's say you're having a tough campaign and are at war with Carthage, whom for arguments sake have a huge empire; you're down to your last region and are one turn away from being crushed by Hannibal - but wait.. offer them peace! ... Surely they won't accept though? No, wait.. they think that we are as equally powerful as them!

... and you get the idea.

[Kenios]

The point is that the diplomacy does not take into account balance of power as it should - it shows on the faction selection the different levels of power, but when engaging in diplomacy it reverts to 50:50. And it works both ways; let's say you're having a tough campaign and are at war with Carthage, whom for arguments sake have a huge empire; you're down to your last region and are one turn away from being crushed by Hannibal - but wait.. offer them peace! ... Surely they won't accept though? No, wait.. they think that we are as equally powerful as them! ... and you get the idea.

Diplomacy does take into consideration the balance of power, even if it is not shown in the bar. Just because you suck at diplomacy does not mean it doesn't work. I attach a screenshot of an AI faction throwing money at me in order for me to accept peace.

[vnth]

they dont bow to you just because. they should bow to you because u have 10 regions. if you want to test that theory just go outside and pick a fight with 10 guys. this bug is well known and it does ruin diplomacy entirely. there're several other posts about this problem but CA apparently have even bigger things to fix. either that or they can't fix it at all.

[Ironhorse]

They dont bow to you just because. they should bow to you because u have 10 regions. if you want to test that theory just go outside and pick a fight with 10 guys. this bug is well known and it does ruin diplomacy entirely. there're several other posts about this problem but CA apparently have even bigger things to fix. either that or they can't fix it at all.

Not everyone bows, no matter what the odds. Especially in those times, there's a reason Rome was one of the most genocidal empires in the history of earth.

[Doom M.D.]

So every one-region faction should kneel and bow to my 10-region faction just because?

this quote sums up TWC as a whole pretty accurately

[Hisahide Matsunaga]

They won't bow to you if you have 10 regions which is a good thing IMO, you can't vassalize your way through, also is how diplomacy necessarily broken? I've been experimenting with join other's people I had no intention to just just to get into that factions good graces, and my self some trade. Most of the time I don't have to worry, unless it's stupidly declaring war on Sparta for trade with Epirus, their always keen to invade. I have noticed that some factions will pay you off so they focus on more pressing matters, some will ignore you. My only peeve is how frequently countries may ask for money for a deal that they offer, nice to see that it's smart.

[sgthunter]

is Kenios actually defending a bug?

[karamazovmm]

is Kenios actually defending a bug?

you mean a graphical bug? because diplomacy is actually working quite fine.

people often think in terms of game, but this series tries to emulate reality with several degrees of success and failure

[vnth]

yes. trying to emulate realty. by making AI completely oblivious to your power and thereby making absolutely retarded descisions, such as literally threaten you as you laying waste to their very last settlement, or blackmail you to trade with them. you have absolutely no control over your vassals. if they declare war on someone else, you have to fight with them, or else you'll lose your vassal and lost diplomacy points for "betraying the treaty." i'm sorry but isn't the opposite suppose to be the case? isnt me, as overlord, suppose to dragging them into war instead of the other way around? i'm not saying that everyone should immediately bow to me when i got 10 regions, but the AI need to regconized when they are goddamn defeated. you know what is realistic? when vercingetorix ing SURRENDERED to caesar when he lost instead of making stupid insults.

[daelin4]

It is inconsistent. You will get the rare chance that a faction will be willing to become your client state, and not because you've reduce them to rubble and at the gates of their last settlement: I got an offer to become a client state out of nowhere, and they were on the other side of the campaign map.

IF diplomacy is working as promise, the game doe a horrible job telling you or explaining why.

[karamazovmm]

to beat one to the ground doesn't mean that the said one is willing to accept you as their ruler, pay attention to reality.

what you guys want is, I have the power, so everyone should bow down to me, that doesn't work, if that happened I would say that the diplomacy is broken and lenient, actually its quite easy to make diplomacy like that, make a check with a bunch of conditionals and its done

regarding the client states proposal that is tied to the personality that is attributed to each faction along with their predisposition to you

[vnth]

yes even if you beat someone doesn't mean that the person will surrender. well then, over the course of the entire game, has anyone you've beaten ever surrendered to you? no? not even one? because i can think of at least one place that surrendered to rome to maintain its minimal autonomy. it's called egypt. and i'm not really saying that diplomacy is broken. i'm saying that it's nonexistent. there's simply no diplomacy whatsoever. Ai hardly ever trade with you unless you bribe them (wont you gimme alittle gold) even though it's a mutually beneficial thing. when you beat the crap of someone, they will not surrender. ever. the only way you can get a buffer/vassal state is when AI is at war with a common enemy, and they offer you by freak chance. the second is to raze their last settlement but not take it. assuming the second option is diplomatic surrender working as it should, it still doesnt change anything. you can't make them do anything. they wont even trade with you. they constantly dragging you into war. they fight with your other vassals. because, you know, those are the sort of things that vassals do. alliances, despite their variants, are unneccesary at best and useless as most. why would you need an ally when AI never declare war on you? even when you and an ally fighting a common enemy, there's no coordination whatsoever between the two. they would still do their thing and you would still fight by yourself. if the ally fought with your enemy, it's simply because the 2 are happened to be neighbors. so yes, very realistic indeed.

[Hisahide Matsunaga]

yes even if you beat someone doesn't mean that the person will surrender. well then, over the course of the entire game, has anyone you've beaten ever surrendered to you? no? not even one? because i can think of at least one place that surrendered to rome to maintain its minimal autonomy. it's called egypt. and i'm not really saying that diplomacy is broken. i'm saying that it's nonexistent. there's simply no diplomacy whatsoever. Ai hardly ever trade with you unless you bribe them (wont you gimme alittle gold) even though it's a mutually beneficial thing. when you beat the crap of someone, they will not surrender. ever. the only way you can get a buffer/vassal state is when AI is at war with a common enemy, and they offer you by freak chance. the second is to raze their last settlement but not take it. assuming the second option is diplomatic surrender working as it should, it still doesnt change anything. you can't make them do anything. they wont even trade with you. they constantly dragging you into war. they fight with your other vassals. because, you know, those are the sort of things that vassals do. alliances, despite their variants, are unneccesary at best and useless as most. why would you need an ally when AI never declare war on you? even when you and an ally fighting a common enemy, there's no coordination whatsoever between the two. they would still do their thing and you would still fight by yourself. if the ally fought with your enemy, it's simply because the 2 are happened to be neighbors. so yes, very realistic indeed.

Are you even trying to butter them up with non aggression pacts or joining their wars? It's easy to get trade, you just have to be proactive and look at why they may or may not like you and try to rectify that at your leisure. The AI does ask for trade, do they want some money sometimes, but you can haggle if you have to. Is sometimes depends what faction are you playing as and what bonuses or maluses to diplomacy does it have?

[Hisahide Matsunaga]

I did have the Liguri ask to be my client state as Rome, because where fearful, I guess it may vary by game. Sometimes there hatred of you won't let them accept being a client state/satrap.

[karamazovmm]

trade? its the easiest thing to get, you don't even have to go out and ask, they came to you. off course, you have to have something that they want.

peace agreements? got plenty, started the beating, my usual blitz incursion with 2+ armies capturing equally 2+ cities, next turn a lot of the faction sue for peace, it doesn't matter the size of the faction they can and sometimes will sue for peace.

client states were never ever worth in any tw game, absolutely never. they still are useless, I don't know why people bother with it, create a buffer? at least its possible in warscape, before they would betray you instantly, that is if you managed to get them to be your client state, which was impossible.

[vnth]

trade? its the easiest thing to get, you don't even have to go out and ask, they came to you. off course, you have to have something that they want.

peace agreements? got plenty, started the beating, my usual blitz incursion with 2+ armies capturing equally 2+ cities, next turn a lot of the faction sue for peace, it doesn't matter the size of the faction they can and sometimes will sue for peace.

client states were never ever worth in any tw game, absolutely never. they still are useless, I don't know why people bother with it, create a buffer? at least its possible in warscape, before they would betray you instantly, that is if you managed to get them to be your client state, which was impossible.

the fact that AI fails to recognize your power is a bug. this need to be fix. i dont understand why people are still defending it. the difference of power is the most important thing in diplomacy, in realife or otherwise. being strong doesnt make ppl automatically surrender to you, but being beaten to death by 1 guy is different than being beaten to death by a hundred guys. but no matter. let's just talking about the current diplomacy system being "realistic." how does something that bear no resemblance to real life, that you have to ignored all of its features, either because they dont work or because they're useless, can be realistic? in fact, pls name one thing about this whole diplomacy thing that actually worked for you.

[Cathedralsquares]

The BoP is broken on the player's turn, but it functions fine on the AI's turn from what I've noticed. It's why they'll deny a trade agreements when you're paying them a lump sum on top then come back on their turn and make the same offer for nothing despite nothing having changed with them.

[karamazovmm]

everything worked for me, aside the client state, that never worked and probably never will. and I have countered those before.

lets go for real history examples

hows iraq going? afghanistan? vietnam? granada? ruanda? thats enough for modern ones

how was the conquest of gaul? syracuse? nabatean rebellions? darius invasions?

as I said, things don't work the way you want because then they would be very very bugged and very unrealistic, just because you conquered some territory doesn't mean that they will sign a peace treaty and sell themselves to you

how long do you think one has to work for a trade agreement in real life? how were the meetings of the several trade summits that were done by the WTO? I can tell you that the trade agreements between countries in average are usually 5+ years of negotiation, and they are bare bones at the start to see how their respective economies will fare, then they build up on what was agreed. then we have the implementation period with safe guards and other issues

I do think that the diplomacy for the romans is unrealistic, from the ancient civvies they were the worst in terms of diplomacy, while greek based cultures were much better, with relatable figures to what we call now the diplomats and sometimes even official state representation, that is on the limits of what a state was at that time. Well I had to study ancient diplomacy for a year in uni.