I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a pattern of some sort, even if that were simply emergent behaviour, so I will concede that using 'random' in that light is incorrect. What I'm alluding to is that diplomacy where it exists is so opaque that the player is quite, in my opinion, justified in considering the AI to be effectively acting semi-randomly with a strong bias towards bloodlust at all times. And that little can be achieved in attempting to influence that behaviour. And you've simply handwaved away any examples to the contrary. And one very important point. Perhaps players should be straining hard to distil out some sort of pattern from the AI's conduct. But, you know, this is a game. And that just isn't fun, like so much of Civ5.