We didn't start the fire...

I know this has been covered before, both by myself and others who have brought it up. But it showed its ugly face again in a game I started recently to test a couple ideas and I became irritated by it as I saw it coming as soon as it was initiated. So here is the story.

I decided I wanted to test out a new strategy for early game economy strengthening. Everything was going extremely well. As Greece I had founded Hinduism. My closest neighbors were India to the far north and Japan and Persia who I saw were right next to one another with a bit of exploring. One of those bad start things, this is when I figured I probably wouldn't ride this game out as I don't like when 2 capitols are next door to one another. Anyways, I kept going checking out what I wanted to see and it happened. Japan had been annoyed with me since we first met. As in "Do you wish for peace with Japan?" (Annoyed). Trumpets sound and Tokugawa declares war on Cyrus.

I took a screenshot for an illustration here on the board as I already knew what was going to happen and I think this aspect of the game is stupid and poorly done. (First pic) - Tokugawa declares war.

As I said Japan was annoyed with me from like 3700sum BC when I first met them, they were the first people I met and they stayed annoyed with me. (Agg AI) I go to the advisor screen to see if this move he is about to do makes since. To his west is Cyrus's capitol, beyond it - England. To the other side of him Ghandi. And these 2 nations were within 20 tiles of his capitol. My empire is about 35-40 tiles south of him across a jungle. (Pic 2) is the diplomacy screen the turn he declared war. He doesnt like me, but sees a possible potential in Ghandi and Elizabeth, two more valuable allies in this war. (Considering positions)

Then it happens just as I thought. (Pic 3) He wants me to go to war with Cyrus. Even though Ghandi or Elizabeth are much better allies in this war, the AI does not know how to ask a computer to join them. (Pic 4) My power is below Japans at this time he asks me to help. And India/Englands power is well over his own. There is no reason for him to ask me to join in other than the fact the computer is uncapable of asking another AI for aid. But this is a crutch for the AI as they will never harm their relations with one another.

Basically, I refused. Got -1. Cyrus soon came by asked, I refused. -1 with him too. Japan asked again, I refused so -2 total. Then Cyrus took Kyoto! Woohoo! I thought, kill that ******* off! Then Cyrus comes to me and asks me to join. I figure, well Japan is soon to be dead anyways so I may as well join Cyrus and improve relations with him since he'll be around for a while. I declare war on Tokugawa and hear trumpets sound. Cyrus has made peace with Tokugawa. WTF! He just pushed this war off on me! That is BS in and of itself but that isnt my point.

My point is whenever I see an AI declare war on another, I know as the player I am going to HAVE to take hits to my diplomacy automatically because the AI can never leave you (the player) out of it. They constantly invite you and get pissed if you dont join. But then they never ask any AIs. This is a rediculous aspect to civ 4 diplomacy.

I think passing a war over to you is brilliant work by the AI (and I never thought I would have such an opinion of AI diplomacy). But the player is not always drawn into inter-AI wars: in my current game, Caesar has been at war with Hatshepsut for some thirty turns (she is losing) without involving me. They are both "cautious" towards me - justifiably, since I am well ahead of them - and mostly on another continent, though Caesar has a couple of new cities on mine. Neither of them has approached me for aid, nor made demands on me.

It does seem like this happens a lot. And, I'm pretty sure that AIs treat us differently. Maybe someone who's rummaged about in the SDK can enlighten us. My pet peeve is that AIs seem to be able to settle wars sooner than I can. Not fair! I have to wait 10 or 15 turns to get the AI to talk. Howcum the AIs settle in 5 turns or whatever?

I think that there should be an early out when declaring war. If you are declared on by the AI, there should be a choice "Can't we work something out" which drops you into a trade window and you can give in to demands so the AI doesn't declare. Likewise, when you declare on the AI, it could try to negotiate out of war by letting you offer a take-it-or-else deal.

Happened to me quite a few time when you delay your intervention, the AI leave you to the wolves more often than not.... when you get in I guess they gain some sort of leverage over the weaker one.... and get whatever they want to get over diplomacy! Not that dumb... frustrating but not dumb!!!

Just remember it.... and do it back in a well placed moment!!! Just figure a hidden -99 in relation... but dont tell them... hit them when it hurt the most...

In GOTM, I brought Japan into war after THOUSAND of years of diplomacy too makes them loves me(Not always an easy thing to do) and as soon as I saw weakness, in this case one of their city fall... I turned on them... and kill them more easily... so it works both ways!!!

Revenge's sweet!

Yeah I have no real problem with the AI pushing the war off on me so to speak. It was some cheap BS but whatever, Japan was significantly weaker at that stage. It was no real threat, as also by this time Japan was grasping at staying in the game. I stayed at war with him for the remainder of my time playing and never once seen him make an attempt at attacking.

But my main concern is that everytime an AI war gets started, I know I will be pulled into it eventually. Sooner or later I will be asked to join. I think the AI should be able to invite other AIs to war and have them be able to react or not. As it stands, the AIs only real potential war ally is a human. Otherwise, it is merely by chance that another AI will declare war on the same enemy. This story shows the real dangerous ally that should have been considered was England. But she simply has war 'auto red-outted' and recieves no penalty if in fact the AI even bothers to check. England could have turned the tides of this war but was never asked to join. For some reason Persia and Japan decided I was the deciding factor... half across the continent ... and almost the weakest nation.

Yes i'm agreed the game would be a lot more enjoyable if AIs will form aliances against one civ or ask another AI to enter war.Personally i have never seen in CIV4 two great cohalition fight against each other and this is a bad point for diplomacy in the game.

Here is as good a minimap on positions as I can get for you. I should have taken one of positions to show this better. Hopefully, this whole issue will be addressed in warlords.

...It was always burning since the worlds been turning

Yea i agree completely. It's irratating that you can't even ask an AI for somethings (becuase they're red on the trade screen) but the ai can ask you for anything and then get annoyed when you refuse.

Personally if there's an aggressive personality like that who doesn't like me from the start i try to get rid of them asap, even if it means paying a friendlier AI to do it for me.

on anotther thread, a poster said he'd build a statue to the person who posts a screenshot with an AI-AI "you refused to help us". i'd chip in my chisel to the effort, because it drives me nuts! i used to turn off tech trading for this reason alone. then i found that it basically crippled the AI's research, so now i just deal with the fact that i'm not going to be very popular in my civ games generally.

A few turns later, did Cyrus then declare war on you??

The AI loves 2v1 and HATES 1v2.

Nah Cyrus never declared on me. I did find it odd actually that Japan declared on this war though. And funny that he was the first person wanting to bring in a war ally. It was only 7 turns later too. He wanted a war ally in under 10 turns, the usual minimum for the AI to "refuse to talk" in war conditions.

naterator - I think I remember seeing that same post. I will throw in another chisel. If fried ice cream is a reality, maybe this could be too... no it couldn't, what am I saying?

I have experienced this alot, but not all the time. I think it is ok...however, I don't like it when I get pushed into declaring war and then another civ gives me a -1 for declaring war on a friend which puts them at furious and then they declare on me too. My last game it happened several times. But I have to say that there were wars in my last game I wasn't invited to, also.

I never ever join the AI in a war against a third party precisely because of this reason. I have, however, done this myself but only after I have nothing more to benefit from the war and my "ally" doesn't seem to want to stop. I would never d/w unless I am the most powerful civ - the s**t in the situation can hit the fan very quickly.

Ditto here. The AI as I can see it in the SDK is not very well balanced. When the AI wants to have a deal with another AI, the deal is implemented right off the bat, there is no "negotiations". So AI vs. AI "you refuse to help me" can not happen.

The idea that Cyrus immediately made peace with Japan is just a arbitary dice roll, not that Cyrus was ever thinking "I will make it hard for this poor civilization, which first refused, hahaha". The AI can get in help for wars, but it is more not the Join War options as for human players, but more a "trade war".

If you are interested look into the SDK, function AI_doDiplo.

i think there should be a diplomatic modifier +1 if you refuse to declare war on someone, so if you refuse to declare war on someone, you get +1 with them

That is actually a good idea TopDog!

i think there should be a diplomatic modifier +1 if you refuse to declare war on someone, so if you refuse to declare war on someone, you get +1 with them

Click to expand...

also if you refuse to stop trading with them

+1 - you stuck up for us.

I just wanted to say that in my last couple of games, I can't even count the number of times that an AI at war has asked me to join, and after my refusal, has declared peace on the very next turn. I guess you could look at it as the AI trying to pass a war off on somebody else when you actually accept, but when you refuse, it seems to me to be a way to either purposely worsen your relations or maybe the AI just came to his senses. I'm going to go with purposely worsening relations, because it is clear the AI has no senses.

WOw - that is bad. that would be like, say, France getting things started in SE Asia, then when things got serious handing the war off to the Americans. Can't imagine that happening.

TopDog said:

i think there should be a diplomatic modifier +1 if you refuse to declare war on someone, so if you refuse to declare war on someone, you get +1 with them

Click to expand...

This is a really good idea. I 3rd it.