Ai doesnt take into account military strenght

[pietro1990]

the Ai doesn't take into account military strenght when making diplomatic decisions.


This is japan demanding that i give him stuff:



this is his military strenght :



As you can see i am the number 1 military and he is almost last. I am america in this screenshot i have number 1 military

Why would he demand stuff? Is the AI not smart enough to realise this?


I allready stated this in a other topic watch this:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/formal-war-bug.616454/

in that topic i noticed the AI Will accept a joint war even though there military is weak or non existing

 

[civtrader6]

Sloppy programming?
I believe the 'demand' system is tied only to the diplomatic modifiers you've got with the AI. If you've got lots of warmonger penalties, they kick in with the demands, even in cases like this, and even in cases where you are actually the one to leave them with no city and no units.
This was especially pronounced after that patch that broke the Alliance system - and AI was superagressive with (unfounded demands).
Similarly - the diplo modifiers (and the hidden modifiers) affect AI willingness to declare war on you - without taking into account neither the army nor the distance.
All this should be easy to fix - but the question is - do the playtesters really even bother to report these things.
Cheers.

 

[pietro1990]

Sloppy programming?
I believe the 'demand' system is tied only to the diplomatic modifiers you've got with the AI. If you've got lots of warmonger penalties, they kick in with the demands, even in cases like this, and even in cases where you are actually the one to leave them with no city and no units.
This was especially pronounced after that patch that broke the Alliance system - and AI was superagressive with (unfounded demands).
Similarly - the diplo modifiers (and the hidden modifiers) affect AI willingness to declare war on you - without taking into account neither the army nor the distance.
All this should be easy to fix - but the question is - do the playtesters really even bother to report these things.
Cheers.

They make the same mistake with joint wars they just accept the trade deal and don't take military strenght or even relationship in to account.

Like you mentioned why don't the playtesters noticed that?

 

[leandrombraz]

Both in Civ V and VI, the AI always demanded gold from me when I have a lot, I never felt like there`s a correlation with diplomatic status or strength, only amount of gold. In Civ V, the AI usually demanded stuff from me when they was planning to DoW or backstabb me, I don`t see the same happening in Civ VI. I think he just need gold and amenities, he saw that you have it and decided to demand, based on nothing but his need and the fact that you have it.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

In my game yesterday, I had Norway join a joint war with Indonesia against me. Norway had borders with me, Indonesia was far away on a separate continent. I had mechanized infantry and modern armor and Norway was still using catapults, crossbowman and a even a couple warriors. Clearly, the AI did not take into military strength when accepting the joint war. There is no way that Norway should have ever accepted a joint war against me.

 

[pietro1990]

In my game yesterday, I had Norway join a joint war with Indonesia against me. Norway had borders with me, Indonesia was far away on a separate continent. I had mechanized infantry and modern armor and Norway was still using catapults, crossbowman and a even a couple warriors. Clearly, the AI did not take into military strength when accepting the joint war. There is no way that Norway should have ever accepted a joint war against me.

They also don't take relationships in to account i've had AI who are my declared friend declare war at the moment our decleration of friendship ends. they declare a joint war. And after 10 turns withouth combat they ask for peace. Then when we are at peace they ask for a decleration of friendship.

The AI just sees a joint war not as a war but as a trade deal this BUG needs to be changed.

Watch this topic :
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/formal-war-bug.616454/

I just liberated ghandi and he declares war on me with no military and friendly relationship

 

[Cagarustus]

Really? I've found that if the AI sends warriors to my city, and I then bring additional units to that city, they'll retreat soon after; but if I don't reinforce then they declare war.

Also, the demanding by the AI is more of desperation than anything else.

 

[spfun]

An early patch introduced the joint war issue which i called a bug back then, AI just easily accepts joint wars for you and against you. Needed to be fixed 6 months+ ago, like many other things! Completely immersion breaking to have your ally 1 turn ago suddenly join a war against you.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It works right how it should. Proof of contradiction: let's say AI takes military strength into account in diplomacy. In this case:
1. On low difficulty levels it's too easy for player to keep military stronger than AI. So, player will never be attacked, missing half of the game.
2. On high difficulty levels, players start with handicap, so AI would always attack player on sight. So this will either make higher difficulty level unplayable, or force developers to make handicap lower, which would result in higher difficulty levels to be too easy later on.
3. AI will attack weakest players (both AI and human) while trading with stronger ones. This would make runaway players to run away even more, while drowning those behind.

 

[Victoria]

it seems the Ai doesn't take into account your relationship with them when deciding to join a formal war(joint war)

Watch this topic :
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/formal-war-bug.616454/

I really do not want to post in a necro thread like that.
So the main issue at the moment (if you consider it an issue) is that a joint war is considered a trade deal and deals get little modification from the files.
So below is an extraction that shows how the AI civs value and treat trade... basically no difference unless denounced
I agree a trade deal should not alter in this way. but what this all means is the worth and cost is not changed via these modifiers but sits at 0. There is a worth/cost calculation on joint wars, I can go to Gorgo and pay me to joint war someone, and someone else I have to pay here and a third civ I cannot even convince her to joint war with me against even if they are not declared friends or above.
What I have experienced lately which I am now getting my head on is there does seem to be an additional hidden consideration about how good you have been with deals lately. Lots of trade deals and promises and you can stay allied with someone regardless of -150 for spying on them... and also they just do not want to declare war on you.
GPT deals get more money and seem to encourage more long lasting deals.
There is an RND in there and life would be dull if you were not occasionally back stabbed but it very very very rarely happens to me, so maybe my sycophantic approach works.

 

[pietro1990]

I really do not want to post in a necro thread like that.
So the main issue at the moment (if you consider it an issue) is that a joint war is considered a trade deal and deals get little modification from the files.
So below is an extraction that shows how the AI civs value and treat trade... basically no difference unless denounced
I agree a trade deal should not alter in this way. but what this all means is the worth and cost is not changed via these modifiers but sits at 0. There is a worth/cost calculation on joint wars, I can go to Gorgo and pay me to joint war someone, and someone else I have to pay here and a third civ I cannot even convince her to joint war with me against even if they are not declared friends or above.
What I have experienced lately which I am now getting my head on is there does seem to be an additional hidden consideration about how good you have been with deals lately. Lots of trade deals and promises and you can stay allied with someone regardless of -150 for spying on them... and also they just do not want to declare war on you.
GPT deals get more money and seem to encourage more long lasting deals.
There is an RND in there and life would be dull if you were not occasionally back stabbed but it very very very rarely happens to me, so maybe my sycophantic approach works.

View attachment 486067

joint war still doesn't make sence the fact that you bring a budy doesn't make it a formal war its still a suprise war when you don't denounced the target for 5 turns.

 

[Victoria]

joint war still doesn't make sence the fact that you bring a budy doesn't make it a formal war its still a suprise war when you don't denounced the target for 5 turns.

Agreed, its a cheats way of declaring a surprise war without waiting. There should be an agreement to attack in 5 turns and auto denunciation if there has not been one.

 

[pietro1990]

Agreed, its a cheats way of declaring a surprise war without waiting. There should be an agreement to attack in 5 turns and auto denunciation if there has not been one.

Just make joint war only available if BOTH TARGETS DENOUNCED THE TARGET FOR 5 TURNS.

For example i am playing as greece and i denounced Rome.
china my neigbour also denounced rome

i ask china for a joint war i can only select rome because we both denouced them .

 

[Stringer1313]

the Ai doesn't take into account military strenght when making diplomatic decisions.


This is japan demanding that i give him stuff:
View attachment 485210


this is his military strenght :

View attachment 485209

As you can see i am the number 1 military and he is almost last. I am america in this screenshot i have number 1 military

Why would he demand stuff? Is the AI not smart enough to realise this?


I allready stated this in a other topic watch this:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/formal-war-bug.616454/

in that topic i noticed the AI Will accept a joint war even though there military is weak or non existing

YOU CAN SEE MILITARY STRENGTH??? never seen that before

 

[pietro1990]

YOU CAN SEE MILITARY STRENGTH??? never seen that before

Go to victory screen and then go to domination victory and you will see who is leeding in military strenght

 

[pgm123]

Agreed, its a cheats way of declaring a surprise war without waiting. There should be an agreement to attack in 5 turns and auto denunciation if there has not been one.

I don't remember whose idea I'm stealing, but it should be based on one of the partners having the option for a Joint War. If Cleopatra has denounced Trajan, Hojo can join in the war even if he's on good terms. But if she hasn't, then it's a joint-surprise war. Perhaps it should be a slightly-reduced penalty, but not that reduced.

 

[Returning Lurker]

the Ai doesn't take into account military strenght when making diplomatic decisions.


This is japan demanding that i give him stuff:
View attachment 485210


this is his military strenght :

View attachment 485209

As you can see i am the number 1 military and he is almost last. I am america in this screenshot i have number 1 military

Why would he demand stuff? Is the AI not smart enough to realise this?


I allready stated this in a other topic watch this:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/formal-war-bug.616454/

in that topic i noticed the AI Will accept a joint war even though there military is weak or non existing

Because if there is one thing Japan is well known for, it's making realistic demands of the United States in relation to its current military position.

 

[orasis]

The A.I in this game is really, really dumb. There are a few mods that help. Hopefully this is one of the things that is fixed in rise and fall.

 

[DeutschDachs]

Really? Somehow I think I've only ever had one opponent demand anything from me in all of my games. In Civ V though it was like every 5 turns

 

[orasis]

It works right how it should. Proof of contradiction: let's say AI takes military strength into account in diplomacy. In this case:
1. On low difficulty levels it's too easy for player to keep military stronger than AI. So, player will never be attacked, missing half of the game.
2. On high difficulty levels, players start with handicap, so AI would always attack player on sight. So this will either make higher difficulty level unplayable, or force developers to make handicap lower, which would result in higher difficulty levels to be too easy later on.
3. AI will attack weakest players (both AI and human) while trading with stronger ones. This would make runaway players to run away even more, while drowning those behind.

Is that not the point of a game? Challenge? I forgot just how bad the AI (sans mods) in this game was until I fired up IV this week and got repeatedly destroyed. In IV The AI realizes when you're becoming a threat to it's victory and takes measures to try to prevent that from happening... it would be nice if VI did the same and presented, yeah, a challenge.

Oh, and I was only playing on 'Noble' ..