AI double attacks

[Victoria]

Its clearly using it for the bonus just like I am, the rest of what you say is speculation.
What really annoys me is when people say “that’s not how it’s supposed to be used”
You also say they get 0 benefit out of it on one hand and on the other that is should be a reward for hard work, how can it be a reward if you get 0 benefit?

Also if you read my original statement and link joint war offers often fail and you cannot just make them against who you like with who you like.

From here it just turns into an argument and that ruins threads.just put my point of view out there and you have done nothing to convince me that my view is incorrect

 

[Xur]

Its clearly using it for the bonus just like I am, the rest of what you say is speculation.
What really annoys me is when people say “that’s not how it’s supposed to be used”
You also say they get 0 benefit out of it on one hand and on the other that is should be a reward for hard work, how can it be a reward if you get 0 benefit?

Also if you read my original statement and link joint war offers often fail and you cannot just make them against who you like with who you like.

From here it just turns into an argument and that ruins threads.just put my point of view out there and you have done nothing to convince me that my view is incorrect

I’ve had joint wars against me, where one of the AI was someone I had just met the turn before.
I’ve had joint wars against me, where one AI was trading with me and I was about to alliance with them - but nooo...
I’ve had alliances that ended, and boom! Joint war.

The AI simply trades this joint war like candy. I had bad relations with one of the AI, but it doesn’t matter because the 2nd AI never thinks about the war - it declares war and doesn’t send any units. AI to AI trade is not the same as human to AI...

If you think this is working as intended, then I’d like whatever you are drinking.

 

[Victoria]

it may seen insane at the time but there is mechanisms behind it all that no-one really knows. It’s not as simple at they are +9 and I wonder just how much you understand the diplomacy system
No they do not trade it like candy if you look in the logs, one civ is often begging and failing to get a joint war.
Other civs end up taking a small bribe to do so showing it’s just for diplomatic reasons or greed, if you had done some stuff to be nice to that civ it would not take the bribe. Sounds like a diplomatic system.
This could just as easily be a mechanic to polarise civs to an us and them situation which allows you take make friends and have enemies... in fact everything a diplomatic game needs. This is what I believe it is for and considering they have not changed it despite thousands of complainers it just may be the case they designed it this way.

Maybe it is poor implementation but I continue to study diplomacy and things like the hidden kudos number and to me you need mechanics like this for diplomacy to work well
The fact the AI often turns it down would also have been apparent if you joint warred, because you can’t often get what you ask for without bribing or at all. If that truly is the case then I’m just talking to people who do not have all the facts.

You may not like it, I do, it in fact adds more interest to the game for me.

 

[liv]

I read but did not see it covered but I am wondering why do my declared friends sometimes refuse joint war with me?
In my current game I can see Gillibro moving his troops to attack Indonesia whom I also want to attack. I ask for joint war but he refuses and then declare war on them the next turn?
He does not like me enough?

 

[Bitterman]

From here it just turns into an argument and that ruins threads.just put my point of view out there and you have done nothing to convince me that my view is incorrect

Well we are on Civ VI General Discussions and we are having one right now, I don't see how can we ruin a thread this way, but ok.

Btw I read your Joint War post as many of the others also a while ago so I'm not as clueless as you may think. Nonetheless, this system seems to rely a lot more on bribing than in diplomacy. I mean if Germany, who is on a (not declared) friendly status with me, is willing to declare war for some iron and nothing more then we could call it straight up bribing. It is also obvious that this "declare joint war" has some measurable value for the AI's the same way a great work of art or a captured spy would have, since they often declare wars not being in bad terms with you, or refuse to take military action or just make peace after 10 turns. In fact I'm quite sure that if they don't declare joint wars being allies with you is just because the game does not allow it.

This is the reason so many players are complaining about this. The game (and common sense) suggests that diplomacy and status is the main thing acting here behind the scenes when most of the time is "gimme a thing and I declare useless wars". No one would be upset if it were called bribing, but joint war sounds more like two allies fighting a common enemy, wich is almost never the case.

That being said, even if you are right and everything is working properly, declaring war for something as insignificant as some iron and a little bit of gold seems silly, specially if the guy getting attacked has twice the army of the other two combined (and this is happening to me right now in a game). There is a very high chance of them being wiped out, hence I believe the AI trully don't understand what is doing when it declares this kind of wars.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

If you think this is working as intended, then I’d like whatever you are drinking.

This mechanic was designed and implemented by the same people who made roads with 0.75 move cost and the civ 6 civilopedia. Those things are both working as intended and awful.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Yea, it's pretty well known that the AI pretty much accepts Joint War like it would accept some oranges. That's the part that needs to be fixed.

 

[sonicmyst]

I think the AI also sees joint war as trade for gold. They'll try to improve their relation with the civ who offered joint war, get the gold, but do nothing.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Well I'd do it if they'd pay more. If they're not a threat to actually fight back and then it is free gold. The warmonger penalty for declaring war isn't too bad if you don't take cities.

 

[Victoria]

I read but did not see it covered but I am wondering why do my declared friends sometimes refuse joint war with me?
In my current game I can see Gillibro moving his troops to attack Indonesia whom I also want to attack. I ask for joint war but he refuses and then declare war on them the next turn?
He does not like me enough?

I do not know the code and could only comment if I saw a save or better the logs.
I have had this happen with Gilga attacking Pericles before and in that situation Gilga had a tonne of troops and shared a border with me, after fighting Peri he turned on me. Whether he refused a joint with me because he had more than twice Peri’s troops or because he already had ideas of attacking me I am not sure, perhaps both. I do know in that game I had +15 or so with him but the kudos showed +2. This indicates some negatives he held against me.

I’m clearly in the minority in this thread, and I can understand how people can think it does not sound or seem right but primarily I am a gamer not a historian and I am just fine with the mechanic.

 

[PYITE]

This is what I believe it is for and considering they have not changed it despite thousands of complainers it just may be the case they designed it this way.

This logic suggests that the cede system is working as designed as well.

The main problem with joint war is that the AI who accepts the offer is not taking into account the full impact of the action and is not valuing it correctly because there is a major disconnect between AI diplomacy and military actions.

Just another game system that the human player can manipulate to their advantage while the AI stumbles and fumbles with it to their own detriment.

 

[liv]

I’m clearly in the minority in this thread, and I can understand how people can think it does not sound or seem right but primarily I am a gamer not a historian and I am just fine with the mechanic.

I also use the 5+ for joint war a lot. With right civs it helps me get an alliance even when I warmonger . It is a fun little minigame for me
I declare wars as part of an agreement even when I have no intention of fighting for that bonus.

 

[isau]

The biggest issue with joint wars is the AI fails to prepare for them. So they declare but don't actually have any capability to hurt you... or any plans to.

War decs can harm you in one way though, they can result in proxy wars among city states, which is something I suppose. A few times in R&F I've even had a city state wipe out one of my.cities.

 

[Tiger Genocide]

The only way to stop them from doing this that I have found is to declare friendships -> Ally, with all the peaceful (non hateful AIs) . Here is the trick though, you have to time it pretty well. Start early and pretty much bully them into being your friend. If they are friendly with someone else that is their friend, but unfriendly to you, declare with that AI. It puts too much peer pressure on them and they will flip green. Anytime it expires, quickly renew with everyone at the same time. I locks them all into being friendly for the entire game non-stop.

Then as the game goes on, you refuse various promises to them, settle too close, etc. they never break the alliances because everyone is best buddies except for civs like Pericles, Nubia, Gorgo, etc. because their agendas typically make everyone hate them all game long. You can flip civs that have fought before end up being friends because everyone else are friends.

It's gamey and I honestly hate doing it. I can only do this with peaceful games though. I played Vox Populi recently and my God Civ 5 had amazing diplomacy..... I really miss the personality system and the diplomacy of Civ5. Civ6 agenda system is the true issue that causes this. It's unfinished and not well thought out at all. I guess the next expansion will "fix" it. If not, then Civ5 will end up being better than 6 by a country mile....(to me at least) I guess I will know what it feels like to be "Civ4 Fanatic Guy" on this forum...

 

[acluewithout]

I probably am not understanding all the nuances of the arguments here, so sorry about that. But I really don't see the problem with joint wars or diplomacy. I wouldn't say I 'like it', but I like the core of it very much.

I really don't understand the aversion to one AI civ bribing another AI civ. That's not the anthesis of diplomacy; that's exactly what diplomacy is. I'm really not trying to be political here, but bribery - in the sense of 'you give me this, and then I'll give you that' - really is a large part of diplomacy. Perhaps going to war for a unit of iron seems a bit mad, but then iron is actually really quite valuable in Civ.

You really can influence the AI greatly through active diplomacy. Just selling or gifting all your luxes when you first meet a civ makes a huge difference, as does not capturing cities (or only doing it after you've locked in friendship with anyone you want to keep onside). Joint war is another tool to use diplomatically.

I think the real weakness of the diplomacy system is this. First, it's not very visual, or intuitive, so you're often kind of flying blind. e.g. I'm not very good a satisfying agendas because it's just not on my radar - I have to remember to do it, and bother to check the relevant text ( 'diplomacy' for city states is much easier because their quests are displayed on their names - although even then I miss who they're aligned to, getting a rid surprise after I declare war). Some sort of relationship map or something, but covering agendas too, would really help. In the meantime, they're good resources on the forums (particularly from Victoria).

Second, the AI is really really bad at actually waging war, joint or otherwise. It often doesn't build enough troops, or builds the wrong troops, and certainly doesn't use units well anyway. The only solution to this is use AI mods and or wait for Firaxis to incrementally fix it and or avoid wars because India sending one lone suicide varu to crash hopelessly against your ancient walls and die at the hands of a single archer is a little immersion breaking.

 

[Victoria]

The only way to stop them from doing this that I have found is to declare friendships -> Ally, with all the peaceful (non hateful AIs)

To me I work out who I can make friends with and want to. Then form our gang of civs and if their gamg want to joint war me, that’s just part of what gangs do.

 

[newbie2]

I hope they do something about this ASAP. Whats the point of a CB system when joint war is both the CB and the war itself? It's just a free CB. My last game i was gangbanged by two AI tandems last 80 turns before I won (culture). Alexander + aztecs declared, after ten turns I made peace, then Darius and cleopatra went after me. make peace after ten turns, Alexander and monty are back (even though they were friendly nd asked for embassies). Offcours, when I asked Alexander for a joint war he wouldnt do anything.

"make friends" they say. Even scythia, who I had never quarrels with, asked 40gpt for a luxury resource swap at one point. Every relationship you try to build goes out of the window as soon as they get a joint war proposal


I declared 1 war that game, got 15 declarations of war myself. all joint wars except one. it wouldnt be half that bad if the AI actually tried attacking.

 

[iammaxhailme]

Can you see what the AI have traded with each other (or a mod that does this)? I would like to see what the AI are giving each other in exchange for declaring useless, pointless, annoying joint wars against the player all the time. I bet it's just a luxury or two, like it's a normal trade deal. There's no way there are supposed to be this many joint war declarations for no strategic reason whatsoever, it's either a bug in AI trading, or a consequence in poor design of the AI trading algorithm

 

[Victoria]

Can you see what the AI have traded with each other (or a mod that does this)? I would like to see what the AI are giving each other in exchange for declaring useless, pointless, annoying joint wars against the player all the time. I bet it's just a luxury or two, like it's a normal trade deal. There's no way there are supposed to be this many joint war declarations for no strategic reason whatsoever, it's either a bug in AI trading, or a consequence in poor design of the AI trading algorithm

The diplomacy_summary.csv file has the details.
Joint wars happen more when you don’t war so much yourself, also with a weak army. You will see in the file they are just as happy joint warring each other. It’s a game and just a mechanic in the game amd it does not hurt you, it’s just an element people seem to get upset about because it doesn’t seem real. I love them, they make my game more fun because I use them rather than just being a megalomaniac

 

[Rambo919]

Arn't you simple repetitively justifying your own underhandedness? That this mechanic makes it seem better on the surface because that's just the way things get done? You are still a megalomaniac but now you are a more devious one.....

War is war, it makes no sense that joint war completely disregards the normal procedures, ANY war without denouncement and cassias belli is logically a "surprise war" and should carry the same if not higher warmongering costs because it happened as a trade deal and in that way considered war less grievous than "normal" war. It's not that it does not seem real it's that it's completely illogical.

Also the fact that most of the time such an agreement is entered into without the AI making ANY attempt at actually attacking effectively means that it does not actually treat war as war but just some passing thing. In fact half the time it seems like the AI does not actually understand what war is anyway and confuses it with raiding... which it is terrible at in own right.