Author Topic: Possible diplomacy bug  (Read 5289 times)

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Possible diplomacy bug
« Topic Start: November 19, 2015, 09:02:26 PM »
Ok, Realm A is doing a takeover of realm B's region. Realm C is at peace with Realm A, and at war with Realm B, and are attempting to support Realm A. Realm C's troops are set to Aggressive. What should be the resultant action?

Vita`

  • BM Dev Team
  • Honourable King
  • *
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #1: November 19, 2015, 09:11:38 PM »
Ugh these diplomacy questions. My general advice is...if you want to fight someone, declare war. If you want to defend someone, ally.

I would *think* Realm C would defend Realm A, but the fact they are only at peace leaves ambiguity here. I think Realm A and C would *attack* together, but Realm C may be too confused about what to do about a peace realm's TO being attacked by their (admittedly) enemy. Because why not let A and B kill each other (they're only peace, not your ally after all) and then step in to clean the remains of B after they've been weakened?

I do know there's some oddities between defending a TO, defending your own region, and something else (rebels maybe?), than what would be immediately apparent (as recently experienced between Tara/Suville/Caergoth/Strombran). This is all part of the combat code which is an atrocious mess.

Anaris

  • Administrator
  • Exalted Emperor
  • *
  • Posts: 8525
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #2: November 19, 2015, 09:11:56 PM »
General rules of thumb for these sorts of situations:

If you want to aid a friend in defending, you need to be allied to them.

If you want to fight an enemy by attacking, you need to be at war with them.

For this specific instance, I would say that Realm C will almost certainly stay out of the fight (because they aren't allied with any defenders).

Unless when you say "at peace" you actually mean "neutral to" (which, as a relatively savvy BM player, you probably don't), in which case, being set on aggressive, they'll attack Realm A.
Timothy Collett

"The only thing you can't trade for your heart's desire...is your heart." "You are what you do.  Choose again, and change." "One of these days, someone's gonna plug you, and you're going to die saying, 'What did I say? What did I say?'"  ~ Miles Naismith Vorkosigan

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #3: November 19, 2015, 09:22:25 PM »
General rules of thumb for these sorts of situations:

If you want to aid a friend in defending, you need to be allied to them.

If you want to fight an enemy by attacking, you need to be at war with them.

For this specific instance, I would say that Realm C will almost certainly stay out of the fight (because they aren't allied with any defenders).

Unless when you say "at peace" you actually mean "neutral to" (which, as a relatively savvy BM player, you probably don't), in which case, being set on aggressive, they'll attack Realm A.

This honestly makes little sense. Why would we stay out of a fight, in enemy territory, against a realm we are war at? I'd understand if we were in a region of Realm A, but we're in a region of Realm B. In fact, this makes it more likely for you to attack a neutral realm than the one you're at war with. That is idiocy, it makes no logical sense, from any viewpoint whatsoever.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2015, 09:24:51 PM by GundamMerc »

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #4: November 19, 2015, 10:28:48 PM »
A realm running a TO is the defender, always.

Anyone allied to the defender will assist in the defense

Anyone at war with the defenders, or neutral and aggressive, will join in the attack. Exception: if they are allied to any defender, they will not attack.

Being at war with the attackers will NOT cause you to join the defender. You will watch the battle as a neutral.

Note: all this realm A, realm B stuff is confusing. Use real names.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #5: November 19, 2015, 10:50:12 PM »
A realm running a TO is the defender, always.

Anyone allied to the defender will assist in the defense

Anyone at war with the defenders, or neutral and aggressive, will join in the attack. Exception: if they are allied to any defender, they will not attack.

Being at war with the attackers will NOT cause you to join the defender. You will watch the battle as a neutral.

Note: all this realm A, realm B stuff is confusing. Use real names.

Luria Nova, Astrum, and Helyg Derwyddon for Realm A, B, and C respectively.

Also, tell me a good reason why we would not fight with a realm we are at war with? Not what the current mechanics are. We've sorted that part out apparently, it's the reasoning behind it that confuses the hell out of me.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2015, 10:51:55 PM by GundamMerc »

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #6: November 19, 2015, 11:35:25 PM »
Short answer: You told the game that you are not willing to go to battle to help Luria Nova. That's what Peace means. You don't want to fight then, but you don't want to help them either.


Long answer:

It makes perfect sense, in the context of the actual game mechanics. The game can only go by your declared diplomacy. It cannot interpret your intentions. So you have to learn to speak in game mechanics diplomacy terms, and then set your game mechanics to match your intentions. The game cannot adapt to whatever you think that any particular diplomatic state means. It also can't know that your troops are in the region to help defend unless you tell it with diplomacy. If you want to do that, then set your diplomacy to reflect it. Ally with them.

Being at Peace means you don't want to fight them. It does NOT mean you want to help them in battle. You don't really care that Astrum is attacking Luria Nova. Luria Nova isn't your friend. They're just a casual acquaintance that you've seen around, and don't really want to kill. They are NOT someone you're willing to risk your life to help. Which is why you're not going to join the battle on their side.

It helps if you understand how the game system lines people up for battle.

It works in four easy steps:

First:
=====
Determine who controls the field. This happens even before figuring out whether or not there will be a battle. Any time you have more than one realm in a region, there is a potential for battle, so we have to do this step. There are about 7 different ways the game does this, and they happen in a very specific order. It starts with "Is anyone running a TO?", then proceeds through things like region owner, stationary or moving, and finishing with "Who has the most troops?". The realm in control of field is automatically set as a Defender.

This is the most difficult step in the process, and has the most special cases. I don't remember the exact order of steps, but it's something like this. As soon as you meet one of the conditions, you have your defender and stop there.

a) Anyone running a TO
b) Region owner in the region and not freshly arrived
c) Non-region-owner in the region and not freshly arrived
d) something
e) something
f) something
g) Who ever has the most troops

There's some special conditions in there about peasant mobs and TOs, but I can't remember it. It's there to prevent peasant mobs from being skirmished as attackers.

In your case, someone is running a TO, so they are automatically in control of the field, and the Defender.

Second:
======
Once you have determined the Defender, the game uses things like diplomacy and encounter settings to determine if anyone wants to fight them. If the answer is Yes, then you have a battle. That realm is set as the Attacker. If the answer is No, then no battle.

In your case the region owner is there, who is of course at war with the TO force. Now you have someone who wants to attack. You have a defender and an attacker, so you have a battle.

Third:
=====
The next step is to pick out anyone who wants to help defend the defender. This means anyone who is Allied or Federated with the defender. And *that's it*. There is no "I'm at war with the attacker" check. You're allied to the Defender so you help, or you're not and you don't. Period. (Note that this step does NOT include an "I'm allied with the attacker" check. If you're allied with the Defender, you line up with them. (Unless you're on Murderous. In that case you're an attacker. (Don't you love exceptions?)))

Fourth:
======
The last step is to grab anyone who wants to attack any of the defenders, and line them up with the attackers. This includes anyone allied or federated with the attackers. There is a check in this step to prevent lining up on the Attacker side if you are Allied or Federated with any of the defenders. This is where you get things like "X is confused, and stays out of the battle" or "X has friends on both sides, and stays out of the battle".


That's it. Four easy steps to figuring out who will line up where in a battle. It provides a complete, logical explanation for things like lining up with the defender against your ally who is attacking. (I'm looking at you, Strombran! Grr...)

There is no final step of going back and adding anyone who wants to fight the Attackers onto the Defender side. If we did, then you'd also have to add another Attacker check, but then another Defender Check, etc., etc. We don't do endless recursion.

This sequence is simple and reliable. The reason people get confused is because they run screwed up diplomacy because they don't want to commit to war/alliance, or because they assume that the game knows that they're in Keplerstan in order to assist Evilstani in fighting against Lightistan. "We're at Peace with Evilstani, and Neutral with Lightistan, so why wouldn't we help Evilstani attack those Lightistan jerks?"
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #7: November 20, 2015, 03:37:35 AM »
Short answer: You told the game that you are not willing to go to battle to help Luria Nova. That's what Peace means. You don't want to fight then, but you don't want to help them either.


Long answer:

It makes perfect sense, in the context of the actual game mechanics. The game can only go by your declared diplomacy. It cannot interpret your intentions. So you have to learn to speak in game mechanics diplomacy terms, and then set your game mechanics to match your intentions. The game cannot adapt to whatever you think that any particular diplomatic state means. It also can't know that your troops are in the region to help defend unless you tell it with diplomacy. If you want to do that, then set your diplomacy to reflect it. Ally with them.

I'm sorry, but by the logic of your statements, we should be fighting Astrum, because our declared diplomacy is WAR. Not neutrality, where I could see some diplomacy shenanigans showing up. !@#$ING WAR. It isn't a matter of intent, by simple logic, we should be fighting a realm we are at war with. It isn't defending an a takeover, it's fighting a warring realm that happens to be attacking forces in a region where a takeover is taking place. The only reason your explanation could make any kind of sense is through the extremely convoluted mess that took you several paragraphs to explain. And even then, it only makes sense if you've had to work around the whole archaic system for around a decade. The whole thing is confusing even for relatively experienced players.


Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #8: November 20, 2015, 03:45:52 AM »
Luria is the defender. You are not allied to the defender. You will not defend them. It's that simple.

You want to defend them? Then ally with them.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

Eirikr

  • Guest
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #9: November 20, 2015, 08:12:47 AM »
Maybe I can help by taking it out of the context of game mechanics?

Helyg Derwyddon sees Luria Nova mucking about the area, trying to convince the peasants they're in charge. Astrum is coming to try to stop them. As a third party, you may want to fight Astrum, but they're going after those guys you have decided not to fight, so you may as well watch them tear each other apart. It's exactly like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" before the point at which you choose to formalize that arrangement. (I would argue that the saying could imply parallel, but ultimately different efforts.) As Indirik says, you've decided you don't want to kill them (Peace), but you haven't quite got to the point where you've chosen to expend resources on them (Allied).

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #10: November 20, 2015, 09:02:53 AM »
Maybe I can help by taking it out of the context of game mechanics?

Helyg Derwyddon sees Luria Nova mucking about the area, trying to convince the peasants they're in charge. Astrum is coming to try to stop them. As a third party, you may want to fight Astrum, but they're going after those guys you have decided not to fight, so you may as well watch them tear each other apart. It's exactly like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" before the point at which you choose to formalize that arrangement. (I would argue that the saying could imply parallel, but ultimately different efforts.) As Indirik says, you've decided you don't want to kill them (Peace), but you haven't quite got to the point where you've chosen to expend resources on them (Allied).

That still makes little sense. I'm still at war with Astrum, so Astrum's not a friend, so the "enemy of my enemy" thing falls apart right there. This whole situation is so !@#$ing stupid it's astounding that you guys even put up with it. What's so hard to understand that if I'm at war with a realm, I should fight them? If I wanted to be neutral, I'd !@#$ING CHOOSE NEUTRAL with Astrum and attack with Aggressive/Murderous settings. But no, apparently our idiot soldiers are like "Oh hey, aren't those the guys that want to kill us? Let's sit over here and not fight the realm we're at war with."

Dante Silverfire

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Merlin (AT), Brom(DWI), Proslyn(DWI)
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #11: November 20, 2015, 12:43:15 PM »
The problem is that if just being at war was sufficient, it would create a bunch of situations that contradicted each other. That's why there is a series of If/then statements. There must always be a tie breaker.

While you're correct that it's not exactly the most intuitive, now that you understand it, the situation should be easy to correct in the future.

Also, it's fairly realistic to not always fight someone you're at war with even if in the same location. History is riddled with examples of two armies at war being near each other and never actually engaging with battle because they both had reason not to want to fight at that specific moment. Having bad terrain, insufficient military intelligence, or simply wanting to rest your troops and clean up the leftover enemies. Which is exactly what would have happened if Astrum had attacked and won the first battle. Now that Astrum controls the battlefield, you would attack their much weakened force, and likely win.

Meanwhile, being at peace with Luria Nova means you don't actually care whether their TO succeeds or not, you simply want to kill Astrum. It may mean you want their TO to fail, so you can be the one to TO it yourself.
"This is the face of the man who has worked long and hard for the good of the people without caring much for any of them."

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #12: November 20, 2015, 06:20:41 PM »
Quote
What's so hard to understand that if I'm at war with a realm, I should fight them?
If you wanted to help Luria Nova, then you'd ally with them. Why haven't you?

The only reason you are complaining about this now is that you think that with your help, Luria Nova could have won a battle they will otherwise lose. If Astrum had a big enough force that they would kick Luria's ass, even with your troops there to help, you wouldn't be complaining. And if you did get dragged into the battle, you'd be here complaining that if you had wanted to help LN, you'd have allied with them. Or if you were at war with both, you'd be complaining that the battle system put you on the wrong side, and you really wanted to fight against the other guy. The way the system is now, it's clear and unambiguous so long as you know the four steps of the process.

You have to learn the to play the game according to the way the game understands the rules. It can't read your mind and divine your intentions. The system is very simple. There are only four steps. I only took so long to describe it because I wanted to use examples and make sure it was clear. If that's too much, I'll distill it down to four simple steps:

1) Who's the defender?
2) Does anyone want to attack them?
3) Does anyone want to help the Defender?
4) Does anyone want to help the Attacker?

That's it. In the situation you describe, Helyg Derwyddon doesn't fit in any of those categories. They're only at Peace with the defender, so they aren't willing to join in battle to help them. (If you wanted to risk your life to help, you'd be allies.) They are also not at war with the defender, or allied to the attacker. So they don't join in on that side either. They pop the top off a couple beers, grab some popcorn, and watch the fight.

FWIW - This four-step sequence is why rogue units always side with the attacker and never the defender. And if a rogue unit is defending, no one ever lines up with them. Two realms at war will all line up as attackers against them.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

Eirikr

  • Guest
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #13: November 20, 2015, 07:06:06 PM »
That still makes little sense. I'm still at war with Astrum, so Astrum's not a friend, so the "enemy of my enemy" thing falls apart right there. This whole situation is so !@#$ing stupid it's astounding that you guys even put up with it. What's so hard to understand that if I'm at war with a realm, I should fight them? If I wanted to be neutral, I'd !@#$ING CHOOSE NEUTRAL with Astrum and attack with Aggressive/Murderous settings. But no, apparently our idiot soldiers are like "Oh hey, aren't those the guys that want to kill us? Let's sit over here and not fight the realm we're at war with."

I think you've got that in reverse. (Maybe it was the way I presented it? I was more clear with ABC.) It's Luria (you're at Peace, right?) that is the "enemy of my enemy". Luckily, everyone else here has already explained any further elaboration I would have had.

GundamMerc

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: Possible diplomacy bug
« Reply #14: November 20, 2015, 08:53:30 PM »
The problem is that if just being at war was sufficient, it would create a bunch of situations that contradicted each other. That's why there is a series of If/then statements. There must always be a tie breaker.

While you're correct that it's not exactly the most intuitive, now that you understand it, the situation should be easy to correct in the future.

Also, it's fairly realistic to not always fight someone you're at war with even if in the same location. History is riddled with examples of two armies at war being near each other and never actually engaging with battle because they both had reason not to want to fight at that specific moment. Having bad terrain, insufficient military intelligence, or simply wanting to rest your troops and clean up the leftover enemies. Which is exactly what would have happened if Astrum had attacked and won the first battle. Now that Astrum controls the battlefield, you would attack their much weakened force, and likely win.

Meanwhile, being at peace with Luria Nova means you don't actually care whether their TO succeeds or not, you simply want to kill Astrum. It may mean you want their TO to fail, so you can be the one to TO it yourself.

So diplomacy IS about intent then? I thought it was just declared diplomacy? And your historical examples are horrible analogies for what is going on here. Those involve actually avoiding the army you are fighting until you are ready to face them.

By the way, I've sent an alliance request. So stop giving me !@#$ about "why don't you just ally with them?". I can't ally with them until their ruler gets on and accepts the alliance.

So I'm just going to go with the assumption that you all are !@#$ing retarded imbeciles who are falling over each other in a circle jerk trying to excuse the current diplomacy system for its faults rather than make something that makes any kind of sense.

In short, !@#$ YOU.

Also, Eirikr, kindly go stalk someone else thank you.