How to defend your afriendly city state from AI attack, without diplo consequences

[Alexfrog]

In a recent game one of the AIs went to war with a couple of my friendly/allied city states. But I didnt want to go to war with that AI.

I was able to easily defend the city state by getting a couple units there first and merely making a wall with them in front of the city state. The AI melee units couldnt easily attack the city, they had to go around me, suffering fire from the city state each turn, and then when they got to the back of the city to attack it they were weak.

A couple of my units guarding the front side of a city state was enough to enable the city state to defend itself from attacks of 6-7 units, and the city state had a mere 1 unit for itself, garrisoned in the city.

 

[Trickster7135]

If you have the troops to spare, why bother? Just attack the invaders, gain a fat ally bonus from the city-state, and use that skirmish to quickly conquer a few border cities, then call it a day with a peace treaty. Hmm, kinda like real life...

 

[Alexfrog]

If you have the troops to spare, why bother? Just attack the invaders, gain a fat ally bonus from the city-state, and use that skirmish to quickly conquer a few border cities, then call it a day with a peace treaty. Hmm, kinda like real life...

This was about how to do it without attackign the AI civ. For example, maybe you have ongoing trade agreements and research agreements with them, and a small military. Dont want to declare war on them in that situation.

 

[chongli]

I think you're missing the point a little bit. One of the main reasons city states were added to the game is to stir the diplomatic pot. They force you to make a tough decision: which relationship is more important to you - the city state or the rival civ?

If you can circumvent this situation, I find that very disappointing. I hope in the future they will patch it so that the other civ can demand that your units move out of the way.

 

[kaltorak]

You can ask the civ to stop attacking the city state. If he doesn't want to, than it is clear you to have either attacking him, or let him attack.

Sounds both logical and fun to me.

 

[chongli]

You can ask the civ to stop attacking the city state. If he doesn't want to, than it is clear you to have either attacking him, or let him attack.

Sounds both logical and fun to me.

That's not what he's doing here. He's effectively making a blockade to keep the other civ away from their enemy and the other civ is not getting angry about this.

 

[kaltorak]

If he just wants it to not be destroyed...
But that won't count like helping the city state, although you are.

 

[chongli]

It's basically an exploit.

 

[kaltorak]

It's basically an exploit.

I don't see it that way. The other day I was watching a tv episode, and a guy that was beeing pursued by the police, entered another countries consulate. The consulate was protecting him, while not at war with the country they are in.
The police couldnt catch the guy without declaring war to the consulates country.

In wars its the same. You can protect somebody with your army without declaring war. So if the other wants to destroy him, he has to declare war on you.

Looks like a mechanic and not an exploit

 

[Cyberian]

Something to do your those scouts in mid-game. Camp near my allied Civs cities.

 

[goodolarchie]

Human-shielding is pretty lame and can be done anywhere, not just to block aggressive city-state takeovers. Case in point: open borders and go Night-the-Roxbury-dancing on their workers/military. I hope they fix it.

 

[kaltorak]

What would you do if another civ did that to you? Declare war.

Maybe the AI isn't programmed to do it, and then it would be an exploit. But if it can recognize your units are hindering them even at peace, they could give a warning telling you to retreat, and if not, declare war.

That would seem better to me than trying to fix it other way.

 

[zac007]

In a recent game one of the AIs went to war with a couple of my friendly/allied city states. But I didnt want to go to war with that AI.

I was able to easily defend the city state by getting a couple units there first and merely making a wall with them in front of the city state. The AI melee units couldnt easily attack the city, they had to go around me, suffering fire from the city state each turn, and then when they got to the back of the city to attack it they were weak.

A couple of my units guarding the front side of a city state was enough to enable the city state to defend itself from attacks of 6-7 units, and the city state had a mere 1 unit for itself, garrisoned in the city.

I had the same situation, all I did was pull up the diplomacy screen for the AI and politely asked him to make peace, he said no problem anything for you. Then he immediately made peace, no coersion or anything. Seems in Civ V if you are at good terms with a civ they will do more for you.

 

[WuphonsReach]

It's one of the flaws with the 1 unit per tile design. Unless you massively increase the number of tiles (cities 10 tiles apart instead of only 5, for instance), blocking tactics become easy.

Not sure what sort of fix this will require. Possibly we'll see more of a "only can put N points worth on a tile", or "enemy units that you're not at war with can coexist", or "workers can coexist with military units on the same tile". So instead of a hard "1 per tile" rule, we'll see the 1UPT only taking effect in combination where it makes sense.

 

[WuphonsReach]

It's one of the flaws with the 1 unit per tile design. Unless you massively increase the number of tiles (cities 10 tiles apart instead of only 5, for instance), blocking tactics become easy.

Not sure what sort of fix this will require. Possibly we'll see more of a "only can put N points worth on a tile", or "enemy units that you're not at war with can coexist", or "workers can coexist with military units on the same tile". So instead of a hard "1 per tile" rule, we'll see the 1UPT only taking effect in combination where it makes sense.

 

[Mannu]

That's cheese.

I asked a friendly civ that attacked one of my city states to make peace with them. He did for free.

He later attacked again and now he won't consider peace at all. I'm going to have to teach him a lesson. That's well designed fun, not cheese.

 

[rah]

Yes, it's an exploit created by 1up. You can choose to use it or not. (just like some that reload to get better hut results or better starting land)
I put a couple of units next to the CS but for a different reason. I actually want the AI to conquer the CS, so I can liberate it. (with the city defense at 50% and no bombardment, it's quite easy) and then they're your friend for a couple hundred turns for free.

 

[Bluetooth]

It's definitely not an exploit, that's how it works with 1UPT and Zone of Control. Blocking units will certainly be a part of my military strategy. In Civ 2 I used Zone of Control to block narrow parts of a map for example.

 

[rah]

If you surround your neighbors first city with enough units, they can't get a settler out. You wouldn't see that as an exploit?

 

[Bluetooth]

In theory yes, but you don't know what they are building in their cities so it won't happen.