Why doesn't the AI bribe?

Has anyone noticed that the AI will never bribe you to declare war on some one. They may ask for a joint DOW, but never offer it to you in trade. Does anyone have an explanation?

Probably more trouble than its worth to program this behavior. The human isn't going to DOW someone if s/he doesn't want to just because the AI handed him/her a few luxuries. If you want an AI to fund your war you can go around asking to see how much people are willing to pay.

Because a lot of humans would gladly take the AIs money but not do anything. (Phony-war) A few people even have phony wars in late game now just for Autocracy tourism modifier abuse.
While the AI is programmed when a human bribes them into joining a war to attempt to engage the enemy.

Well I think AI need to request you to do a Phony War meaning I just dow the target.
And actual war which AI bribe me to dow a target and send military forces after them.
Because if AI requested a phony war from me I will be happy to keep it up for 30 turns xD
Actual war will need some preparation.

After preparation period is done, there should be a requirement of me taking at least one city or a # of units slain on field of battle otherwise I have lied to the AI and the world will know of it and my victim will also hate the guy who paid me to attack the victim. There we go, AI bribe problems solved xD

The AI probably can't gauge just how much is required to persuade a player to do a DoW. I think what might work is the AI asking you, "What would it take to make this work?" If what you require more than what it is willing to spend, you get a "Forget it."

joncnunn said:

Because a lot of humans would gladly take the AIs money but not do anything. (Phony-war) A few people even have phony wars in late game now just for Autocracy tourism modifier abuse.
While the AI is programmed when a human bribes them into joining a war to attempt to engage the enemy.

Click to expand...

Hell, I'll do it now just for the diplo bonus for being at war with a common enemy. But this is at least at it's least exploitive.

Callonia said:

After preparation period is done, there should be a requirement of me taking at least one city or a # of units slain on field of battle otherwise I have lied to the AI and the world will know of it and my victim will also hate the guy who paid me to attack the victim. There we go, AI bribe problems solved xD

Click to expand...

FWIW, the criteria shouldn't involve taking cities. They probably want to take cities. If they had to pay you, that should be your compensation, not the cities.* Number of units would work, but I'm not sure how to effectively enforce it. If you have bad luck and don't kill enough, you break your promise to the AI?

* I do think these "military alliances" so to speak should let you decide who gets a city when you capture it. If you give it to your ally, they'll like you more. Keeping it for yourself wouldn't inherently cause any problems, but it would raise the usual "covet territory" and warmonger issues, though. I also miss how Alpha Centauri allowed you to coordinate forces. It was a little simplistic and probably didn't work entirely right, but it was a nice start that could be improved upon for Civ6.

Yea I liked that you could discuss battle plans with the AI in Alpha Centauri. It would make more sense in Civ V since there is 1UPT to deal with and you don't want to be tripping over your war ally. The point of a joint war is to spread the defenders forces too thin to allow both of you to enjoy a bit of the spoils.