Absurd peace deals

[Sporally]

Is there still a bug with the peace deals that the AI offer?

I´m currently fighting a war with several other civilizations. I´ve taken a medium sized and large sized russian city and I´m on my war for more with my impressive navy that resembles that of the US in real world (just to make a point that my enemies fear my navy I guess).

When I sue for peace they offer me all of their cities (all 5 non-capital cities - 2 occupied cities and 3 cities of various sizes), 3 ressources (all of their ressource with no spare ressources), 1 sculpture (this is where they deny me the other works of arts), 338 gold pieces (all) and 80 gold pieces a turn (all).

This made me think if there´s (still) a bug with the peace deals or is it really because they see no way to survive my navy? It doesn´t seem reasonable that they offer me this much for just occupying two cities.

 

[Archon_Wing]

It doesn't seem to be related to the cities you take, but rather how many troops you have killed, or more so the ratio of troops you have killed.

If I slug through most of their cities but lose units on the way, I find that they will often not give me anything, and in fact demand I return cities for peace even though if this goes on I will just eliminate them, however, if I just simply destroy all their troops without losing any of mine and take no cities, sometimes they will give cities to me even if I don't actually have the ability to physically capture them.

I suppose it's quite a difficult thing to do to calculate how screwed you are. IMO they really need to factor in threat to their most important lands. And as a side note, it also seems like they value cities based on how big they are rather based on strategical location or value..... but that is just speculation on my part.

 

[Sporally]

Ok, that makes sense to me. However, I´m not too keen on that factor calculator. They should make an army / navy comparison, technology and what cities are occupied. They should look at the situation and what the future might bring rather than what has happened. But happy it´s not a bug, though I think they are way too weak in this negotiation - I would have accepted way less in a peace treaty

I´m pretty sure only size and not strategic importance matters unfortunately. Would be great but probably more difficult to calculate. However, Firaxis should be able to find a way to calculate it.

Rather, as the victor in the negotiation you should be the one setting demands and the defeated civilization should agree or disagree to your proposal. Doesn´t make sence you just ask them what they want to give and they give you virtually everything

 

[bbbt]

That's sort of what it's been like the whole time (it just got even worse with the summer patch).

My guess is that it's a lot to do with war weariness - i.e. the more war weariness they have from the war (from their units being killed etc.), the more they are likely to give in a peace deal to end it (and get their happiness back up).

 

[Archon_Wing]

It does make little sense from a realist point, or a gameplay point that a civ would surrender most of its cities since it'd be inevitably crushed in any future wars. I think they shouldn't give away more than say, 20% of their land. At a certain point it should pay tribute and resources but the rest, fight to the bitter end.

 

[leandrombraz]

It doesn't seem to be related to the cities you take, but rather how many troops you have killed, or more so the ratio of troops you have killed.

If I slug through most of their cities but lose units on the way, I find that they will often not give me anything, and in fact demand I return cities for peace even though if this goes on I will just eliminate them, however, if I just simply destroy all their troops without losing any of mine and take no cities, sometimes they will give cities to me even if I don't actually have the ability to physically capture them.

I suppose it's quite a difficult thing to do to calculate how screwed you are. IMO they really need to factor in threat to their most important lands. And as a side note, it also seems like they value cities based on how big they are rather based on strategical location or value..... but that is just speculation on my part.

If this is how it works, then when Firaxis improve to AI's ability to produce military units, it also make the AI more likely to give you everything in a peace deal as a side effect, since the human player can easily kill everything the AI throw at them with minimal loss.

 

[Archon_Wing]

If this is how it works, then when Firaxis improve to AI's ability to produce military units, it also make the AI more likely to give you everything in a peace deal as a side effect, since the human player can easily kill everything the AI throw at them with minimal loss.

That already sorta happens, and it's not limited to Civ 6 either.

In fact, in Civ 5, to avoid warmongering penalities, the prevailing tactic was not to take cities but pillage everything, destroy troops, and then take cities via peace treaty. Civ 4's AIs would be like that but they'd never give up more than 1 city. They could capitulate to you and become your vassal though.

 

[Sporally]

I get that they look at how strong you are and do everything in order to stop the war. War weariness also makes sense but war (IRL) isn't always about taking all the land you can. Sometimes you just want certain cities for tactical or historical reasons. They may be giving me more than I want.

What I mean is that you should "fight" at the diplomatic table as well as in the war to get to terms with what you demand - or else the war will continue.

But right now the peace treaty system is rediculas and unworthy of such a great game as Civilization is..