Negotiating Nonsense

[RazorbackPirate]

Nah it doesn't. And I'd wager most players agree. It's clearly designed to test your patience with how many times you're willing to negotiate or just take the "shortcut" and spend diamonds to successfully complete the encounter. The strategy around negotiating is fairly simple and straight forward. However when the law of averages is constantly defied, well, it gets old.

That lots of players suck at negotiating and would agree with you comes at no surprise to me. Most players suck at fighting too. They can Autobattle, but have no clue how to control units manually.

Negotiating does not test my patience, it tests my skill. Guess my skills are just better than yours. If the law of averages are defied for me, it is in my favor. While like you, I've never tracked, my recollection is doing much better than the 50/50 average commonly stated.

I stand by my original assessment. I've never complained about negotiations being unfair or a money grab as you have. Why? I don't suck at them.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

I don't negotiate at all in my main city but, in my farm towns, I fight the first 8 encounters then nego the remaining 56 each week. I buy the tavern boost and do not use any diamonds. Like the others, I haven't tracked my success rate but, if I had to guess, I'd say that I'm successful on the first attempt over 90% of the time.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

I don't negotiate at all in my main city but, in my farm towns, I fight the first 8 encounters then nego the remaining 56 each week. I buy the tavern boost and do not use any diamonds. Like the others, I haven't tracked my success rate but, if I had to guess, I'd say that I'm successful on the first attempt over 90% of the time.

This is how I completed GE IV early in my cities. I had a CF and did RQs while collecting to get the goods I needed to do it each week. As I built my Attack and Defense %, I slowly fought more and negotiated less. When I would fight, it would be manually, as units were a very precious in those early days. Still are to me.

I don't know the %, but I just finished a DC 12 good negotiation first time. Sure there's a bit of luck at play, but this is not unusual for me. I still negotiate the back half of GE IV some weeks, just for the challenge and to save a few units.

Negotiating and Manual fighting are learned skills. You only get good by doing it. Most folks won't push through the frustration and lack of success in the early days, so they complain. In game or out.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

I just finished a DC 12 good negotiation

Really?!? I mean, you and I are on the same page as far as the subject of negotiations being pretty straightforward, but I don't recall ever seeing more than 10 resources (goods, coins, supplies and/or medals) to choose from.

Meanwhile:
I just realized that there is a definite disconnect from reality here. (Not with you, Razor.) All the players who claim that there is an issue with negotiations are really saying that Inno is actively cheating. And going to quite a bit of trouble to do so. Here's what I mean. Negotiations like this game has (not the C-Map ones, obviously) are pretty straightforward. When each player enters a negotiation, the game is coded to select random resources to be required. Between 2 and 10, in my experience. These do not change once selected. After that, the game is undoubtedly coded to simply tell the player whether each resource they choose for a specific spot is (A) Correct, (B) Wrong Person, or (C) Incorrect. The only way there could be any truth to the complaints is if Inno coded the negotiations so that the correct resource for the remaining slots actually changes from one turn to the next based on what resource the player chooses. That's simply nonsense. This isn't even an RNG issue. There are no percentages involved. The resources required are selected at random at the beginning of the negotiation and they don't change until/unless the negotiation is completed, whether successfully or not. It boggles the mind that some people are so upset at allegedly poor luck in choosing that they have to believe that they have somehow been cheated.

So. First of all, track your 50/50 choices. Actually write down each time you're right and each time you're wrong. For months. What you'll probably see is streaks of good luck and streaks of bad luck. And overall you will see that you're not failing 90% of the time like you all think, but more like 40-60% of the time. Some will be slightly higher, some slightly lower. But over months, the odds are that you will be pretty close to breaking even. There will be rare instances of someone having an extended streak of either good or bad luck, but over time it evens out.

Finally, if you do track your results over months and find that your failure rate is extremely high (75-90%), then fine, come back and tell us. But if you think there is something nefarious going on with negotiations, you're just plain wrong. I'm willing to bet that not one in a thousand will have a failure rate that high.

 

[Dessire]

the 1 player guild who for 7 seasons was able to earn the 2nd and first place in diamond league alone by only negotiating: I am joke to you?

the guilds where all members are sincronized and do 2 to 3 negotiations at the same time to insta get any territory: we are a joke to you?

XD

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

the 1 player guild who for 7 seasons was able to earn the 2nd and first place in diamond league alone by only negotiating: I am joke to you?

the guilds where all members are sincronized and do 2 to 3 negotiations at the same time to insta get any territory: we are a joke to you?

XD

Who are you talking to?
And what are you talking about?
This thread is about players thinking that negotiating is somehow "fixed" by Inno to make us fail and spend Diamonds. It has nothing to do with your 1 player guild that somehow has players who can synchronize negotiations. (I know you're not talking about one person having multiple accounts all in the same guild, because that would be cheating.)

 

[Karen Isaacsdottir]

It has happened several different places where "negotiation" is suggested as a means of resolving whatever. Invariably the "negotiation" process involves THROWING AWAY useful game values on a process which has no definitive positive outcome. The multiplicity of "judges" of "adequacy" of the "negotiation" offerings and the number of game values being demanded make it stastically impossible to predict any outcome OTHER THAN THEFT OF GAME VALUES by a random process. The whole "negotiating" nonsense reminds me of the brutally offensive "joker" intruded into the "Story" process in at least one of the cities where I've chosen to play. There was never any positive outcome for doing any of the absurd things that the "joker" demanded that a player do.

It's a feature not likely to change any time soon. I do agree sometimes the joker suggests an offensive quest (the pipe bomb components and one with a very sexist description of a woman, e.g.) but as we say on the Interwebs, scroll on by...

[QUOTE="DesertRat175, post: 342151, member: 49378" In the case of the Feudal Japan offshoot from the primary game, this negotiating nonsense appears to be the primary explanation for the shutdown of access to essential land areas based on a QUICKNESS CRITERIA for finishing the setup of the subset city. It results in a PAY TO PLAY outcome where only by spending purchased DIAMONDS can the player proceed with the game. Even if the negotiating nonsense wasn't entering into the process, that shutoff of playability seems inherently objectionable to this decrepit old man who has long since had to set aside all notions of being able to satisfy QUICKNESS CRITERIA.
Anyway, I have identified two aspects of the Forget of Empires which it is my opinion should be corrected.
[/QUOTE]

Then do not play the Feudal Japan settlement - problem solved!