You broke your promise to move your troops away from the border

Wodan said:

I do not recall ever getting the border demand with any number of troops within my borders adjacent to AI territory. The only times I recall getting the demand is when I have 2 or more troops in neutral territory adjacent to an AI's territory.

Click to expand...

Wodan, I've had this plenty of times when my troops were in my territory and not 'on the border'. That for me is the crux of the matter - it's unilateral. I have no sympathy with the sneak attackers, fair enough if you get found out, but challenging home guard is just a forced peace/war ultimatum.

Amarr Emperor said:

How can anyone take the side of AI on this, I just don't understand. As someone already pointed out, quit with your moral arguments "If you want to declare war then why would you lie about it", because the biggest problem is the war will start on their turn. Don't think this is a big deal? You probably play chieftain or warlord. Anyone who play diety would know you can not afford to be sneak attacked when you're literally outnumbered 20-1

Click to expand...

Yeah, agree there. If you don't pay attention, AI will just bomb your units and you'll lose some of them.

I never move all of my units to his boarders, unless I am sure I WILL attack that turn. One unit to "spy" is ok, because AI doesn't seem to take it as a threat, and you can use it to your advantage to take a peek at his land.

but it seems that if you're already on red diplo, he will be bothered even by that one unit?

Amarr Emperor said:

You probably play chieftain or warlord so STFU. Anyone who play diety would know you can not afford to be sneak attacked when you're literally outnumbered 20-1

Click to expand...

Anyone who "play diety" who has that hard a time at it should probably bump down a level.

That is not a 'fault' or a weakness to the AI. It adds strategic challenge. You have the option to Dow and get it over with or pull back and live with your choice. It's not unrealistic at all.

Click to expand...

Of course it's unrealistic. 50 turns is an immense portion of a game. Nobody sensible would get angry because you broke a "promise" (is the duration clearly indicated in game as to how long this "promise" exists, btw?) by keeping one and protecting a friend/ally. Let's go over a scenario:

1. You have no units immediately bordering AI, but it demands you make this promise or DoW.
2. You don't attack the AI, because you don't have plans to invade.
3. This AI then turns around and attacks a known ally of yours, when you clearly have declared friendship with them, or attacks a city state you've sworn to protect etc.

You now get in trouble for honoring deals by responding to a clear act of war against your friends/allies. This faction gets to force a nightmarishly long NAP on you with a minimum threshold, and if you "violate" it, even the people who you are helping get angry over it!

When the AI commits acts of war, the "just passing through" timer needs to clear instantly, and for each forseeable case (IE a human would see it as an aggressive act abusing a NAP). Only then can you claim it's realistic. Allies getting angry at you for helping them is not realistic.

Does anyone know which AI actions nullify this promise? In a recent game, I got hit with this dumb feature while moving my troops near Atilla's territory to address a barbarian encampment. I responded "just moving through," and the next several turns Atilla drops two GGs in my territory, seizing several salts and an iron. I went to war to reclaim the territory, and no one accused me of bad faith, which I assume means that the promise was rendered null after Atilla seized my land.

holywar said:

The honorable thing to do is to declare war several turns before the units engage in combat. That is how the game is supposed to work. Anything else is a surprise attack, which must be carried out well in order to avoid the diplo penalty. Makes sense to me.

Click to expand...

Yea, I actually wish a DOW took one turn to go into effect so "sneak attacks" weren't part of the game. First of all, it's too easily exploited -- I can wait to declare war on the turn where my enemy's Composite Bowman just happens to be in a hex where I can kill it in one turn. Second of all, the fact that an AI can DOW me and attack after any of my turns means that if I have a hostile neighbor, I feel obliged to micromanage my units to be in optimal defensive positions every turn, even when at peace, which is just fiddly.

On topic, generally speaking, I love this mechanic. The first time post-expansion an AI said "we are concerned about your troops massing outside our borders" and gave me the option "you are right to be concerned, and it's time for you to die (DECLARE WAR)", I giggled with glee! You caught me, and called me out! I was going to spend a couple more turns optimally positioning my invasion force, but, fair play! Let's do this!

I certainly agree with making the promise more transparent and possibly lowering the duration to 30 turns if it's actually longer than that. (The facts aren't in.) One cool improvement would be a decaying diplo penalty. So if you break the promise and DOW one turn later, you get the full global diplo hit. If you DOW 25 turns after the promise, you get half the diplo hit. If you DOW 49 turns later, you get 2% of the diplo hit.

Also, some people here take the Civ 5 diplomacy model a little bit too seriously. When they get a diplo hit for something, they react like a scolded child whose mommy is very disappointed with them. "Bu... but... Napoleon told me I was a bad boy! I have to see those scarlet letters about breaking my promise every time I ask him to trade luxuries! It's not fair!" It's just a diplo hit! It's not even a happiness penalty or anything that affects your civ directly.

The Civ 5 diplomacy AI system still has a lot of flaws and shortcomings (the major ones IMO being the lack of any "casus belli" system and the lack of reciprocity in some demand options), but finally after two expansions and major patches, it's the best the series has ever had.

Major flaws in civ diplomacy in general:

- Player rules are not the same as AI rules.
- Bonuses and penalties last way too long in some cases.
- Diplo modifiers can and do make the AI behave in self-destructive ways. Pragmatism needs to be more of a factor. AI victory condition planning should allow it to trump diplo more often.
- Some things that cause or don't cause ire are nonsensical.

The primary complaint in this case are the first two. The fact that "just moving through" causes a de facto and (very) longstanding Non-Aggression Pact (NAP), and that it's nature and duration are not clearly indicated, is the biggest flaw with this particular mechanic.

Just passing through SHOULD mean exactly that. If you actually remove troops from the borders, you should be good, even if you move them back (which should then prompt the same message again). This mechanic should be preventing sneak attacks, not forcing NAPs with anybody you don't intend to declare on in the next 5-10 turns.

Walter R said:

Wodan, I've had this plenty of times when my troops were in my territory and not 'on the border'. That for me is the crux of the matter - it's unilateral. I have no sympathy with the sneak attackers, fair enough if you get found out, but challenging home guard is just a forced peace/war ultimatum.

Click to expand...

I'll take you word for it, but I'm serious, I haven't. Not once. Maybe it's just that I don't move units like you, perhaps.

I'm almost certain I've had the demand when my troops were in my own territory, but immediately adjacent to AI territory.

Almost every time I've gotten this my troops were within my borders... usually either shuffling along a road from one city to another or adjusting to cover a worker who moved (I don't trust AI when I work near shared borders) and a few times my units never moves, just AI borders expanded to trigger it (still within my territory not unclaimed).

Dogmouth said:

Does anyone know which AI actions nullify this promise? In a recent game, I got hit with this dumb feature while moving my troops near Atilla's territory to address a barbarian encampment. I responded "just moving through," and the next several turns Atilla drops two GGs in my territory, seizing several salts and an iron. I went to war to reclaim the territory, and no one accused me of bad faith, which I assume means that the promise was rendered null after Atilla seized my land.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware anything mitigated it other than waiting out the passage of time... but if that worked the way you describe then I'd assume any "attack" by the AI could cancel it and GG bombing is considered an offensive action.

Barghaest said:

Almost every time I've gotten this my troops were within my borders... usually either shuffling along a road from one city to another or adjusting to cover a worker who moved (I don't trust AI when I work near shared borders) .

Click to expand...

Maybe that's it. I generally don't bother protecting workers, unless they're near neutral borders and at risk from barbs (which shouldn't trigger this issue so is moot). You can pretty much tell when the AI may DOW you, and that's the only time I protect my workers, and usually not even then. I usually steal enough workers that I've got more than I need, so who cares if they take one.

And, strangely, I recall several instances where the AI DOW'ed and avoided my workers for the first turn (giving me time to run back to the protection of a city or out of range of the invasion troops). I think there's some strange prioritization by the AI that it avoids attacking a unit (even a nonmilitary unit) when it is invading. Like it'e beelining to the city and doesn't want to be distracted by fighting.

MarshalN said:

Yeah, it's nicer if we get the option too. At least that way they get diplo hit, whatever it means.

Also, because you have to declare on THEIR turn, you completely lose initiative.

Click to expand...

Of course you have the option. You just have to recognize that it is a voice activated function.

Let's say Siam has too many troops too close to your borders. We don't care what criteria you used to decide that. It's your choice. When you see that, say out loud "Hey you! Get off my lawn!" or whatever works for your emotion and immersion level. You will now get a diplomacy response. Usually, it will be what I call the "silent one finger salute". You will be snubbed and ignored insultingly. They can be very consistent about this.

Take a piece of paper and write down "-1 diplo for border crowding, -1 diplo for one finger salute." Put it right under the "-3 diplo for being in the way", which is a diplomacy function that the AI doesn't really have, but we humans are special. Elsewhere on the paper you might have "-4 diplo for being Greece" or "-5 diplo because I hate everyone". That part is up to you.

You have all the diplomacy options you need to adjust you diplo level against the AI. I do not understand what you are complaining about, other than the detail of harassing them in-game rather than out loud.

Actually, I learned something from this thread. I always thought that you were committed forever to not attacking them, so finding out it is a 50 turn thing is actually an improvement for me.

Thanks!

No one has provided any evidence whatsoever that the promise lasts 50 turns.

Based on what people have posted, there certainly does not seem to be whole-game prohibition against DOWing. It seems to me that the most reasonable conclusion is that the release of the promise is based on the movement away of units.

Unfortunately, it might be a guess as to which units are effected, and how much they must move!

beetle said:

No one has provided any evidence whatsoever that the promise lasts 50 turns.

Based on what people have posted, there certainly does not seem to be whole-game prohibition against DOWing. It seems to me that the most reasonable conclusion is that the release of the promise is based on the movement away of units.

Unfortunately, it might be a guess as to which units are effected, and how much they must move!

Click to expand...

You do all know that Civ is a computer program, and that computer programs have code that people are able to read, right?

Polisurgist said:

You do all know that Civ is a computer program, and that computer programs have code that people are able to read, right?

Click to expand...

It would be nice to draw one of that people into this thread!

In the meantime, the rest of us can only speculate. I hate it when a perfectly good discussion is ended by someone looking up facts...

beetle said:

It would be nice to draw one of that people into this thread!

Click to expand...

Those people may have lost interest somewhere between the ninth and the fiftieth time this question has been repeated.

Okay, so the question has been repeated raised. What is the answer?

If that dialog comes up, and I pick “just passing through”, what must I do prior to DOWing that civ so as to avoid the diplomacy penalty for breaking that promise?

I am guessing that it involves... moving my troops away from the border!

But which troops, and how far away, and for how long? (That last one might not be a factor at all.)

I have been on these boards for a while now. Fairly frequently in terms of lurking, as in nearly every day. I think I can accurately testify that the subject has not come up nine to fifteen times. Either that, or my OCD following of this forum has failed me nine to fifteen times. People who know me will tell you that is unlikely.

What is much more likely is that particular piece of trivia is not actually known yet.

Any code divers out there that can help us?

Please?

eris said:

I have been on these boards for a while now. Fairly frequently in terms of lurking, as in nearly every day. I think I can accurately testify that the subject has not come up nine to fifteen times. Either that, or my OCD following of this forum has failed me nine to fifteen times. People who know me will tell you that is unlikely.

What is much more likely is that particular piece of trivia is not actually known yet.

Any code divers out there that can help us?

Please?

Click to expand...

Someone already posted it in this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12686232&postcount=3

Though the question of what constitutes "fulfilling" the promise might be different. I know I've seen it before, but it might require some heavy googling.