Why, if they want peace, will they not make a deal?

[The_Quasar]

So many times I've had civs saying, when I click on them, "isn't it about time we made peace" or something similar... trouble is, you click to negotiate the peace, and they say, "there is no way that this is fair", so you click on what would make this agreement work, and they say, "there is no way to make this work" (or similar words)...

What is the point of saying they want peace when they won't do peace under any circumstances?

[TravisATWA]

Just because they want peace doesnt mean they're gonna take a bum deal. The way they see it they've got you beat and you need to pay up.

[The_Quasar]

Originally Posted by TravisATWA

Just because they want peace doesnt mean they're gonna take a bum deal. The way they see it they've got you beat and you need to pay up.

even after saying that THEY wanted peace, and being asked what deal would work?

[Ravellion]

It could be that they calculate they need to pay you more than they have for the peace treaty to have a chance of succedding. Try proposing (not "how would this deal work" but "propose") a simple no-frills peace treaty, they might accept that.

[jonny5300394]

I find this annoying too, I'm at war with Greece, they declared war on me, they are the richest most powerful Civ out there in my game. I'm only ahead on technology which is fine by me. They declared war on my few troops and three cities. I held them off, decimated them is a better word...

And they STILL want an unfair deal.

[Morningcalm]

They don't even show you their unfair deal when you ask. You have to click your cities and add them to the list before they reveal their demands. How annoying. At least in Civ IV they instantly replied to you, and told you exactly what they wanted in a second. Pfeh.

[crashcrush]

The only upside to the current model is there is an indication that peace is possible in the future, assuming you accrue more gold etc. in the next couple rounds. But I agree, that's kind of a "silver lining" view and it feels like there should be a better way for the game to convey that information (assuming that's what the developers were after to begin with). Something like - "We'll negotiate peace with you in the future if you get the following things..." sort of button.

[elprofesor]

The AI sometimes makes weird calculations for trades. Sometimes they consider they can't offer you enough, sometimes the opposite, and sometimes they don't even know what would work, and you have to find it yourself. I have this problem when trying to sell a luxury resource, and they don't have a spare one, some spare strategical resources, nor 300 gold, and I have to propose myself a 143g + 5 gpt.
Plus, for some reason, they consider that 5gpt is as good as 157 gold when they are the ones that have to pay; they don't seem to understand the notion of "loan".
So yeah, just wait a couple of turns, and they should show up with a proposal; you can also get a couple of units next to their capital, and they will surely offer you a better deal!

[Revoran]

If they won't offer you anything it's because they believe why give you anything if you've proven you're willing to attack as soon as ten turns is up?

If they won't make PEACE at all then I dunno. Normal AI craziness.

[Keejus]

Originally Posted by jonny5300394

I find this annoying too, I'm at war with Greece, they declared war on me, they are the richest most powerful Civ out there in my game. I'm only ahead on technology which is fine by me. They declared war on my few troops and three cities. I held them off, decimated them is a better word...

And they STILL want an unfair deal.

Maybe if you fought off the other 90% of their units, they'd be more agreeable!

[TheMeInTeam]

Originally Posted by The_Quasar

So many times I've had civs saying, when I click on them, "isn't it about time we made peace" or something similar... trouble is, you click to negotiate the peace, and they say, "there is no way that this is fair", so you click on what would make this agreement work, and they say, "there is no way to make this work" (or similar words)...

What is the point of saying they want peace when they won't do peace under any circumstances?

game ai is bad one moment they wont peace then give 2 cities! LOL

[DudeBoyz]

I have this problem too. The AI in this game is very frustrating at times.

BUT, I have found that a wide variety of different offers can illicit a good response sometimes. For example, they say "No way I can make this work", if I add gold per turn or a minor city (a 1 or 2 number, for example) or some strategic resources, sometimes it triggers a compromise flag or something and the next thing you know they accept and we move on. Not sure what the best combination is or if there is a specific pattern to follow yet, but I try over and over and if they don't go for it I give up and build up more troops.

[Teperi Blaze]

I had Alex wasting my time yesterday. He took 3 Mongol cities and became pretty big and declares on me for no reason.

His 6 Greek cities are now mine and he wants straight up peace. I try to put some of his gold into the deal and he just says no. Turns later I killed anything visible of his forces and took Old Sarai, his biggest city and check again.

Nope, he won't give one penny for peace this turn or the turn after and beyond.

Now he is a 2-city state with a fair bit of money, no soldiers but won't give up?

It wasn't like this before the last patch.

[TheMeInTeam]

Originally Posted by Teperi Blaze

I had Alex wasting my time yesterday. He took 3 Mongol cities and became pretty big and declares on me for no reason.

His 6 Greek cities are now mine and he wants straight up peace. I try to put some of his gold into the deal and he just says no. Turns later I killed anything visible of his forces and took Old Sarai, his biggest city and check again.

Nope, he won't give one penny for peace this turn or the turn after and beyond.

Now he is a 2-city state with a fair bit of money, no soldiers but won't give up?

It wasn't like this before the last patch.

how much ai give somewhat depends on xml values. alex isnt the type to give in easily lol. probably developers felt it too easy to fleece goods from ais and patched it to make them more resilient. probably better for the game than when they give lots of cities to humans after minimal conflict

[DudeBoyz]

Originally Posted by Teperi Blaze

Now he is a 2-city state with a fair bit of money, no soldiers but won't give up?

It wasn't like this before the last patch.

I've played more games since the patch and the last one ended in sort of a standoff with Egypt owning half the map and me the other half and he wouldn't trade, wouldn't do agreements, nothing. Just kept telling my my army was too small and I should watch my back. I finally just bailed and started a new map.

I am probably going back to version 217 tomorrow. It was much more fun to play. Not just because I could win, but because of they way the AI players played.

[TheMeInTeam]

Originally Posted by DudeBoyz

I've played more games since the patch and the last one ended in sort of a standoff with Egypt owning half the map and me the other half and he wouldn't trade, wouldn't do agreements, nothing. Just kept telling my my army was too small and I should watch my back. I finally just bailed and started a new map.

I am probably going back to version 217 tomorrow. It was much more fun to play. Not just because I could win, but because of they way the AI players played.

in a 2 way race not trading with the opponent unless favorable makes sense so if egypt didn't trade it's probably a good thing strategically.