Nah, alliances aren't broken.

Amen. I think they are finally working right.

I almost cry when someone says something is too hard in a game now days. I PINE for a challenge. A game that wont roll over for me to declare victory. I love that this game has gotten progressively harder, not easier, the longer I have kept playing it on the same difficulty levels. Very few games are actually and naturally 'hard' without massive AI cheating.

I agree that Alliances aren't broken- I just won my first metaverse game with one (patch 1.30)The dregin's decided they wanted to be my friend- it was either that or throw them under the wheels of the bus... So it is possible. Don't ask me how I got to close with them- I paid them some bribes early in the game to stop them from crushing me, then I built up my Military, cut off all trade to them (We where friendly at this time) was preping for war with them, when I was snuck attacked by the Thalan Empire(Whom I turned around and killed in 3 turns - Fools...) After that war, My Empire was ranked number 1 in miltary might and the dregins and I where close- So I decided to go for the Allied win- How I got to close with the Dregins I don't know- I was neutral, probably did less then 1,000 bc in trade, and tribute when they demanded it... Search me... My only gripe is that Allied win oughta be worth more now...

I went back to v1.2 because of this change. With v1.2 I can usually finish a game on Medium or Large galaxy size in an evening (I don't enjoy finishing a game the next day) and have a chance of winning even if I get a poor starting position. Neither is true in v1.3.

The reality case doesn't work for this game. There isn't much in this game that has any basis in reality so that isn't going to fly as an argument. It's a matter of what works for gameplay, not what is realistic or not.

Alliances seem arbitrary now, like a random event based mostly on ethical alignment. In every game I've attempted, races automagically become close when they have the same ethical alignment as me and when my influence and military strength moves significanlty past theirs. The removal of any opportunity for me to sway them to close relations has a negative impact on gameplay for me. It's like they took something away from the game. I want it back.

You want it back??
Well, do what "labatts blue", downgrade to 1.2

Personally , I think it rocks now, is not as easy as it was, and is a lot more of a challenge, wich is what I want  


Monc34  

Yeah, they took a cheap exploit away from the gameplay. Alliances are one of those things that are an outright player advantage. Mechanically, all they do is ensure that another civ won't attack, but there is no such check on you. This means they should either be nerfed in ultimate effect, or, as this patch has done, make them costly and difficult to get. They were absurdly easy to get before 1.3, and the 'gameplay' you were referring to was nothing more than researching a lot of yellow techs + cash.

As it is, you are exagerrating. You need a combination of trade routes, comparable firepower, a good diplomacy bonus, and ethical similarity to attain an alliance. That is much more diverse and puts more of an emphasis on individual descisions if you absolutly need an alliance. Of course, being strong all around makes getting one easy and makes it seem 'automatic', but then at that point you didn't need one anyway, and it serves to speed up play.

I also noticed that alliances were more difficult to form with the advent of 1.3 and at first I was dismayed because I used to rely heavily on diplomacy techs in order to gain allies and then my allies would be willing to trade to me all of their weapons technology or other techs that I had neglected while pursuing the diplomatic line.

Currently, it seems fairly easy to get other races to "friendly" but the jump from there to "close" is quite a bit harder.

I'm fine with this, even though it has caused me to adjust my tactics somewhat, because alliances were too easy to forge previously. I would "eliminate" opponetnts via alliance more often than with conquest.

I'm not arguing that alliances weren't too easy in 1.2. They were very easy to get in 1.2 and I agree that was bad. The problem is that alliances are RANDOM now and not based on anything you can do. I've played with this a lot and can tell you, there is no way you can sway a race to close relations with any certainty at all. If you give them all your trade routes, have all the yellow techs, and are more powerful than they are, they MIGHT form close realtions with you. They may not at all. Maybe most people like that. If so, good for them. That was a good change. For me, it took something away from the game. It's fine if alliances are hard to get, but it should not be a random event. The game already has plenty of those.

The previous statement about downgrading is ridiculous. 1.2 has some intolerable bugs. The bug fixes alone make 1.3 a necessity.

If alliances were so easy to get before, and required so little thought, and had such a huge benefit, what gameplay was taken away? All i saw before was an obvious tactic that was almost always worth doing.

And under my two games with 1.31, it was fairly predictable if resource intensive to get the Alterians to ally with me. Good ethical picks, trade routes, constant bribes, etc. That last peace of the puzzle was when they went to war, putting their power rating below mine. That's when 'friendly' became 'close'.

Because its now impossible to play with no military on anything less then huge, I always wanted a to play a game were I took my starting planets and that was it, I would simply trade and give gifts to the more powerful races in hopes of them allying with me, now if i'm neutral and I want to ally with the Torian. I’m basicly screwed, one game I was playing the Humans and I gave the Torian(Who were friendly with me) one of my planets, all of my techs, my trade goods and like 2/3s of all my money and it was still friendly! Next turn it was down to warm....

Alliances are now imposable, the AI doesn't vaule planets and tech as much as they should, I agree that it was way to easy in 1.2, But really, now its simpily impossable unless you 'force' them into allying with you by having a huge military.

But really, now its simpily impossable unless you 'force' them into allying with you by having a huge military.

You can't even do that. They MIGHT form close relations if you are much more powerful than they are. They might not.

If alliances were so easy to get before, and required so little thought, and had such a huge benefit, what gameplay was taken away?

The ability to have SOME ability to control alliances.

I tend to just trade with races fairly evenly. And say 'sure' when they ask for tech trades. It didn't take long for the trade and overall friendly manner to earn me Close relationships. However, I needed more military might to offer as part of the Alliance deal, which took a bit of work (had an utterly shitty starting point with no habitable systems nearby other than other races' home systems). Once I was strong enough to pull my weight as an ally, they all started letting me be their ally. Was very lucky to end up a Good in a universe of Neutrals (though, at the same time, it was unlucky, considering that being the only race of a certain ethics just removes most of the benefits).

I didn't need the military prowess to actually gain 'close', but it helped once I was 'close' to make me a valuable Alliance partner.

Alterians

Please spell it correctly - It's Altarians. It's confusing, as I call my custom race the Alterans (the Ancients from Stargate - the most advanced race in existence).

EDIT: I tend to pronounce the first two 'a's in 'Altarian' the same, so I don't personally confuse the two race names.

"Some Control" = "Request an alliance in diplo" or "I WIN" button. I.e. there was practically no real strategy in th earlier system. There is actually more now.

And you are exagerrating the difficulty in forming alliances. And its not random.

They now do what they should have always done: provide a way out of having to fight an iffy set of wars and a way to consolidate victory at the expense of your score versus full conquest.

How much 'strategy' is involved when the FRIGGIN DREAD LORDS are raping are planets and trade routes, and I want to ally with them so we can defend each other?

Its way to difficult to ally without having an uber-pwn military and spending trillions of dollars on increasing the rating to 'close' both these things are hard to acquire in small games

I agree that it was way to easy to get alliances in 1.2, but it’s to difficult now and it kills most of the fun interacting peacefully with races

Because its now impossible to play with no military on anything less then huge

Who in their right mind would want to ally with you if you have no military? What do you possibly have to offer them? You're like the ultimate moocher! You want to sit back and rake in big bucks and not foot the bill for your own defense, instead expecting your ally (who HAS sacrificed to maintain a military) to come to your defense in times of need? Seems pretty one-sided to me *shrug*. I sure as heck wouldn't ally with you, and I wouldn't blame the AI for not being interested either!

As soon as they ally with you, you're going to cut off the presents. At that point you're a detriment to them, not a help. It basically gives them twice as many planets to defend, and nothing to show for it.


-Cauldyth

I wish I could get the version of the game you guys are playing that say alliances are not random.

If alliances are not random, then tell me why I've had races form close relations with me that do not have the same ethical alignment, have not received any presents from me, and have not done any trading with me. Conversely, I've had races fail to get close that get all my trade routes, get tons of presents, have the same ethical alignment, and are much weaker than me. If that isn't random, I don't know what the hell is.

BTW, the AI doesn't have any problem forming alliances at will. The whole field was allied by the 10th year of the game I just finished, lame.

I would ask how large your miliatry was relative to their's for starters.

Conversely, I've had races fail to get close that get all my trade routes, get tons of presents, have the same ethical alignment, and are much weaker than me

The bold words are the answer youve been lookin for.

If the AI is stronger, it is more difficult, while if it is WEAKER, they'll be logical   like Spock


\END OF THREAD\
Monc34

Patience.

That's what it takes.

Patience.

I just won my first Alliance Victory with 1.31.

I turned off Research Victory in this game. And after I took the Korx and finished up the research I established the trade routes.

Still, it took a long time, and no one thing seemed to get a close relationship right away. The last to become close were the Terrans. I had established 2 more trade routes to them probably 10 turns previous to their turning close.

The others, I did not do anything really special. I got the trade routes up and running, gave each a few techs and trade goods, and one by one they became close.

But it took a while.

And, it can be done.

... I'd have won my current Metaverse game by Diplomacy... if I had remembered to turn it on. Now I'm wishing I had. A galaxy of all four Neutral races and me as a Research-modded Altarian with just Altaria and Wisp - as I just happened to start in a crappy corner where the only habitable planets in reach beyond Altaris were other race's systems. I'm not even taking the lead technologically. I'm trailing behind. At least I'm starting to gain ground in that area, though.. but it's very hard when all you have is the decent Altaria and the practically useless Wisp (I fit a factory and a starport on it, and now that's all it does- churn out ships. Constructors, namely, for Influence starbases).

I'm finishing the Dread Lords campaign before I continue that, or even just re-roll a new galaxy using another race. I thought the Altarians' inherent Luck and Creativity would be interesting to have. I believe both made their worth known (Four 'Lucky Rangers' in quick succession - I figure techs were gained rapidly, as well), but it's just not working out. I'll see about playing a Tech-spec Drath next time. I kinda liked their inherent stats (the ones not taken away by an Ability reset, I mean). Though, really, it was mostly the starting point. It was just crap. I started right next to a Drath, and we're about in the same boat- they barely wrested a world from Archean space before the galaxy was fully settled. Now the two seem to be in an Influence war- mostly because both have established influence bases near eachothers' borders - for the Archeans, they put it behind their lines and upgraded it so it was along their lines.

I'm just trying to snag one of the Terrans' worlds- he's been growing far stronger than the rest. There was a Pirate incursion in his space and he let it sit there while the other races dealt with it. My ships weren't up to the task. Lost one fleet, decided to stay out of the sector. Best hold onto what military power I have to keep say with the rest of the governments.

Bah... enough of my jabber on this.

Just a thought, but take what you've said here in and compare it to real life. A great example would be Europe during Hitler's rise to power, giving him Poland didn't make him a closer ally, instead it only furthured his militaristic goals. The AI on the higher levels is pretty good, doing something like that to the Drengin may only make them want to take you out more, and that probably isn't your goal.

I haven't played 1.3 enough to say for sure the effects of diplomacy being random or not, but I have seen enough to know that you can't buy off the other species (unlike some other strategy games that come to mind).

My suggestion: Wait out the start as best you can, in the beginning of the game; unless one race really has an advantagous starting location, its not impossible to "fight" back against agressors one way or another (influence, trade, research, military, etc). But once you see the nations really sizing up, and where you stand, start making your decisions (especially when you've picked your alignment) with your end goal in mind. Just play up to that point in as a fair-handed manner as possible so that your options are open to you.

The main deciders seems to come from two aspects of your civilization in particular: military and influence. Unless you're Good and trying to align with the Altarians, being a "weak" neighbor really doesn't cause your neighbors to jump at the chance to ally. So I guess, after a long winded explanation: "Walk softly, and carry a big stick."

It is definitely possible to form alliances in 1.31 but the attitude of other races seems to have an element of randomness, which is not explained in the "report" screen. I've seen races becoming "close" for no apparent reason. Maybe the reason is there but it is not visible. Frankly, I do not like it. I might like it if the report screen explained the reasons, then I could at least try to accept it as the personality of the race.

Just a thought, but take what you've said here in and compare it to real life. A great example would be Europe during Hitler's rise to power, giving him Poland didn't make him a closer ally, instead it only furthured his militaristic goals. The AI on the higher levels is pretty good, doing something like that to the Drengin may only make them want to take you out more, and that probably isn't your goal.

I see your point although the example is not the best one for two reasons. First, the argument is good only for evil races. Second, nobody really gave Poland to Nazi Germany. Hitler and Stalin invaded and occupied the country and the Western Powers declared war on Germany because of this action. Maybe you had Czechs in mind. But their country was not given to Germany either, the occupation was accepted by the West in false hopes that this would avoid further conflict. (So it was not the question of forging alliance but an attempt (of questionable moral worth) to avoid war)

Bribing races for alliances is no good, but neither is the hit/miss. A possible alternative is for a race to approach you saying "do X and we will ally with you". X naturally should be a fairly steep task to accomplish, as alliances are valuable things.

Who in their right mind would want to ally with you if you have no military? What do you possibly have to offer them? You're like the ultimate moocher! You want to sit back and rake in big bucks and not foot the bill for your own defense, instead expecting your ally (who HAS sacrificed to maintain a military) to come to your defense in times of need? Seems pretty one-sided to me *shrug*. I sure as heck wouldn't ally with you, and I wouldn't blame the AI for not being interested either!

if we're going to compare the game to real life situations, consider this:

the US has made plenty of alliances with countries that have little or no military, but have something we want (Oil for an example), also, think about the US and England, Russia, Japan, et al. they have an alliance and relatively equal military strengths, one may be stronger, but certainly not by a huge margin, the reason is because of their shared world views (and probably the fact that war would be disastrous for all parties involved [see: M.A.D.])

to ally with a faction in the game, you should be able to use your strength (military, economic, technologic, diplomatic, or otherwise) to convince them that an alliance with you would mutually benefit you both

it should be possible (but not necessarily easy) to achieve a victory under all four coniditions without dabbling TOO MUCH in the other areas (ignoring the possibility that you get dragged into a war somehow), if you can win a research victory without amassing a huge military, you should be able to win an allied victory without doing so, or else what's the point? you might as well just use that huge military to wipe out anybody that won't ally with you and win by conquest

just my $.02