AI lying about prophet spam

I haven't played CiV all that much in the last few years, but I don't remember the AI nearly always breaking their promise, when you ask them to stop bothering you with their religion.

Either way, so when they refuse, they'll back off immediately. If they agree, there'll generally be a great prophet heading straight for my capital.

Is this something they introduced in one of the last patches? The AI pretending to be "devious" in this regard? Or are the diplomacy screen strings mixed up?

I've never had that experience. AI always spams with their great prophets and missionaries. And they keep doing it whether I tell them to stop or not.

Besides, the AI always lies.

What sucks is that you get a diplomatic penalty for telling them to stop.

If you're friendly with a civ or have a strong army, once they pop one in your territory, you can tell them to back off. If they don't (or do and quickly break it), denounce them. That way if you go to war to seize the infidels, you won't get as big of a penalty since you asked nicely, then denounced, then warred.

You can always use units to block those civilians. Or keep an Inquisitor handy to prevent the spread of religion to that city outright.

Yup, AI had always broken its promises to NOT spam you with Great Prophets / Missionaries just like its always broken its promises to NOT found new cities close to you.

Agreed, the AI always break their promises and the religion spread is a real pet hate of mine. I almost always go to war with them for refusing to back off

Definitely not complaining, I'm fine with inquisitors having a real defensive use in single player, and there's the AI likeliness to lie xml value iirc.

It's the retreating, after refusing to stop spreading the true religion, that's making me think the game doesn't always display the correct string of text. Is anybody else experiencing this on a regular basis?

joncnunn said:

Yup, AI had always broken its promises to NOT spam you with Great Prophets / Missionaries just like its always broken its promises to NOT found new cities close to you.

Click to expand...

Well, I've actually seen a settler turn around and settle somewhere else, after I asked them to not settle near me and they agreed. Once.

Ai prophet spam is so common. Powerful Ai benefit from this.

Dushku said:

You can always keep an Inquisitor handy to prevent the spread of religion to that city outright.

Click to expand...

Like Dushku mentioned, I always just go the Inquisitor route. I don't like having to spend all my Faith on Inquisitors, but it keeps my civilization "pure". It was too cumbersome to have to maneuver things on my end to keep track of and turn away all of the AI missionaries...just like in real life.

I am okay with the AIs pretending friendly when they plan to DOW you. I am okay that the player faces very harsh diplo penalties for lying. I am even okay that the AI can make some demands to the player that the player cannot make on the AI.

I am not okay that player demands to the AI are (1) quite unpredictable as when they will be agreed to, and (2) the AI lies apparently without consequences.

I would enjoy the game more if the circumstances for making a demand were more reliable. Yes, having friendly status and/or a largish army helps, but still it seems to have a large amount of RNG. Making the demand is a significant diplo hit that lasts all game long -- regardless if the AI gives in, and regardless if the AI breaks their promise later.

Cerilis said:

Well, I've actually seen a settler turn around and settle somewhere else, after I asked them to not settle near me and they agreed. Once.

Click to expand...

Sometimes it works. Sometimes is works for a while. I wish I could make more sense out of the pattern.

Dushku said:

If you're friendly with a civ or have a strong army, once they pop one in your territory, you can tell them to back off. If they don't (or do and quickly break it), denounce them. That way if you go to war to seize the infidels, you won't get as big of a penalty since you asked nicely, then denounced, then warred.

Click to expand...

Can anyone affirm that the warmonger penalty for warn/denounce/DOW is any less than the warmonger penalty for DOW alone? I think that is just RP.

That said, if you tell an AI not spy, they agree, but then they spy again -- the follows-up dialog button options change! The choice to forgive them goes away, and is replaced by an option to DOW.

^^I rarely declare war because of the non-stop spying, but the other night Denmark went too far and stole about 4 techs me within a dozen turns. So I wiped him off the map.

beetle said:

Can anyone affirm that the warmonger penalty for warn/denounce/DOW is any less than the warmonger penalty for DOW alone? I think that is just RP.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the penalty is the same, but in the former situation, the actual effect of the penalty will be less, because it gives any civ that is more friendly to the human than the Denounced AI the chance to agree, or at least resettle its algorithm and confirm that it likes them less than you.

Case in point: I'm playing Domination and have taken 2 capitals, but still maintain 3 DoFs. I know that the 3rd capital I want will make nearly everyone hate me, so I bribe my victim to attack ONLY my DoF (I've learned that you can't sway non-friends) civs, and then denounce, and then DoW. This keeps all friends for at least a while, and all the while that the effect of the 'AI liking your enemy less than you' modifier is greater than the 'This guy is a tyrant' modifier, there won't be a backstab. After 3 capitals though, most everyone has worked it out!

The joys of being a warmonger!

beetle said:

I am okay with the AIs pretending friendly when they plan to DOW you. I am okay that the player faces very harsh diplo penalties for lying. I am even okay that the AI can make some demands to the player that the player cannot make on the AI.

I am not okay that player demands to the AI are (1) quite unpredictable as when they will be agreed to, and (2) the AI lies apparently without consequences.

I would enjoy the game more if the circumstances for making a demand were more reliable. Yes, having friendly status and/or a largish army helps, but still it seems to have a large amount of RNG. Making the demand is a significant diplo hit that lasts all game long -- regardless if the AI gives in, and regardless if the AI breaks their promise later.

Click to expand...

In regards to #2: There are consequences to their actions. They suffer diplo hits from other AIs and major diplo hits from the player playing. Their consequences are completely up to you, and can be quite major. You could, send prophets to their citys. If you GP their cities then they won't be making GPs for a while. You could declare war, which is a pretty major consequence but happens IRL all the time. As in IRL, most of my wars are due to religious tensions. You could even harbor that hatred for a long time, and then nuke their holy city later in the game, see how they like those consequences. Just remember, as consequences for your lying come from the AI, consequences for them lying comes from you. If there are no consequences then you're being to soft.

beetle said:

Sometimes it works. Sometimes is works for a while. I wish I could make more sense out of the pattern.

That said, if you tell an AI not spy, they agree, but then they spy again -- the follows-up dialog button options change! The choice to forgive them goes away, and is replaced by an option to DOW.

Click to expand...

This is the reason I always just forgive them for spying. It gives you a bold green Diplo Plus with that AI and since they aren't going to listen to you saying stop anyways, then what harm does it do to just tell them you forgive them. This can also lead to you getting a couple (if not all) of your spies up to level 3 since there'll be more spies to kill. You then take ur LvL3 spies to their caps, or their CS allies.

consentient said:

I'm pretty sure that the penalty is the same, but in the former situation, the actual effect of the penalty will be less, because it gives any civ that is more friendly to the human than the Denounced AI the chance to agree, or at least resettle its algorithm and confirm that it likes them less than you.

Case in point: I'm playing Domination and have taken 2 capitals, but still maintain 3 DoFs. I know that the 3rd capital I want will make nearly everyone hate me, so I bribe my victim to attack ONLY my DoF (I've learned that you can't sway non-friends) civs, and then denounce, and then DoW. This keeps all friends for at least a while, and all the while that the effect of the 'AI liking your enemy less than you' modifier is greater than the 'This guy is a tyrant' modifier, there won't be a backstab. After 3 capitals though, most everyone has worked it out!

The joys of being a warmonger!

Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying. Sorry for passing along misinformation. Don't recall where I read that, but I seem to remember it being in more than one place.

There is no point of telling the AI to stop doing anything. They usually don't listen, and even if they listen, you suffer a minor diplo hit regardless. Their spying is a very good way to level up spies. It is very easy to block their religious units from converting your holy city, and as long as you keep your holy city, you're fine.

This is just poor game mechanics. Yeah after you know it you will stop using this "feature" to tell AIs to stop doing what they are doing, but why is it there in the first place if it doesn't work at all? The only thing you get out of telling an AI to stop spying on you is a bad diplo modifier, so it is always worth it forgiving them, there is only the illusion that you have 2 options because in fact there is only one option.

This works the same with prophet spam and forward settling, the diplo hits are too high and the results are too unpredictable to even attempt asking. I only do it if I want to break a DoF and try to get the AI to denounce me first so I won't be the one who broke it.

consentient said:

I'm pretty sure that the penalty is the same, but in the former situation, the actual effect of the penalty will be less, because it gives any civ that is more friendly to the human than the Denounced AI the chance to agree, or at least resettle its algorithm and confirm that it likes them less than you.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that is the usual denounce then DOW game mechanic.

I was asking if there is distinct demand -> AI agrees -> AI betrays -> player denounces game mechanic.

You don't think so, and I don't think so, and Dushku seems to have backed off that particular claim.

beetle said:

I am okay with the AIs pretending friendly when they plan to DOW you. I am okay that the player faces very harsh diplo penalties for lying. I am even okay that the AI can make some demands to the player that the player cannot make on the AI.

I am not okay that player demands to the AI are (1) quite unpredictable as when they will be agreed to, and (2) the AI lies apparently without consequences.

I would enjoy the game more if the circumstances for making a demand were more reliable. Yes, having friendly status and/or a largish army helps, but still it seems to have a large amount of RNG. Making the demand is a significant diplo hit that lasts all game long -- regardless if the AI gives in, and regardless if the AI breaks their promise later.

Click to expand...

I notice that the AI tends to Prophet bomb my cities if they are exerting religious pressure on their Holy City. When you take Itinerant Preachers its possible that this aggravates them to convert your cities even more even more. It might be something hardcoded into the AI - to try to remove any passive religious pressure that is hitting their holy city.

On the subject of the AI having advantages the human can manipulate the AI plenty too you know.
I'll give you 2 examples.
1)Its 1 turn before your DoF expires. Take all the gold from the AI and pay for it in GPT (loan) or even luxuries. Next turn declare war. You'll get all your luxuries & GPT back and you'll keep their gold. Doing this to a rich AI can basically win you the game.

2) You want to declare war on an AI you are friends with but don't want to risk the diplomatic penalty. Simple; demand a resource from them, citadel bomb them or do something else that aggravates them like spying/refuse to stop spying, refuse to stop digging artifacts, convert a city & refuse to stop sending them missionaries. Most times they will denounce you (and get the diplomatic/backstab hit). That leaves you free to DoW them without accruing any additional diplomatic penalties.