AI sharing other CIVs plotting is useless

[El Caballerion]

Ok. I have played a ton of games since BNW, and 99% of the time, whenever CIV A shares with me that CIV B or C is threatening to attack me, it NEVER happens. I don't even recall it happening once. I would understand the attack not taking place if the moment after CIV A informs me, that I start purchasing units like a madman, thereby causing CIV B to no longer attack, but even when I'm weak, the attacks never happen.

I really wanted this system of espionage to work, but it's broken. Does anyone else experience this? Is it because I play on Immortal, and therefore, the AI is purposely trying to mislead?

 

[darden]

yeah, (blank) is plotting against you seems to be a useless warning (and it's usually obvious which Civs would love for an excuse to stab you in the back and take over those lands they've been coveting anyways).

 

[El Caballerion]

I think this should happen. More than likely a CIV that you are in the GREEN with (i.e., when you hover over their FRIENDLY text in diplomacy, EVERYTHING IS GREEN and nothing is red) should give you accurate results because they LOVE YOU.

If it's a CIV that has more RED than GREEN, their advice should go unheeded because they are probably trying to sabotage you.

 

[NinjaGnat]

It's more helpful on water maps since fleets are more mobile, but I keep a spy in london on principle to let me know when Elizabeth's armada of backstabbing is on the way.

 

[phillipwyllie]

Plotting against you doesn't necessarily mean war. It could be that that particular civ will vote against you in the WC for instance, regardless if it benefits them or not.

 

[DemonMaster]

If A is plotting against B and your spy founds out about it and tell B. B probably moves some units to their borders just in case. B has no changed the scenario, something that can make A skipping this plan and go for another plan (and another target).

 

[Lord Yanaek]

Besides, some civs are always plotting against others. Try planting a spy in Shaka's capitol for a laugh. Every 10 turns or so, you'll get a message that he's plotting against a different civ. Great for gaining green diplo with all other civs BTW
Other than that, plotting just means they are looking for an opportunity to annoy you. They might DoW you, but rarely will, they might denounce you, try to steal some techs or coup your CS allies, or maybe never get a chance to act against you.

If you want some real warnings, only the sneak attacks are. If someone tells you Civ X has launched a sneak attack, than the attack will come.

 

[Matjillam]

I've seen it happen in my games

Someone warned me about Assyria (which I kinda guessed my self). 5 turns later, war

And later in the game, someone warned me about Napoleon. Did NOT see it coming, 10 turns later - massive invasion

 

[Xiao Xiong]

Seen it in mine though I already knew it. Nebby was shuffling a lot of units around my border when I got the notice that he was plotting to attack me. I was already preparing for it, and he did attack a few turns later.

 

[Yzman]

There is 3 stages of intrigue if I remember correctly. The first 2 don't necessarily mean war

plotting against you
building up an army
marching an army towards

3rd is the only guarantee of war.

 

[isau]

Plotting against you just means they are in the mood to backstab, not that they actually will. It's your first warning.

Specifically I think it may mean they think they might be able to try an invasion and they are building units. They still evaluate whether to attack, later on.

 

[Aristos]

There is 3 stages of intrigue if I remember correctly. The first 2 don't necessarily mean war

plotting against you
building up an army
marching an army towards

3rd is the only guarantee of war.

Not even the third one is a guarantee for war. They can still change strategies midway if any of the multitude of checked conditions changes before the attack.

The rest of your analysis is correct. I don't know where people got the idea that the first peep from the AI means War. It's not coded that way. As you said, it's more a system of intrigues (but the AI never lies, when it comes to shared intrigues I mean) than a system of complete-information espionage. Let's say a peek into the AI processes...

 

[Peng Qi]

Both of these warnings have VERY SPECIFIC meanings that, just because you do not understand them, does not mean they don't exist.

"Plotting against you" means "willing to do things that would make an AI angry if it feels like it." Stealing your ancient ruins, converting your cities, stealing your land with Great Generals, etc.

If an AI warns you about an invasion force, it IS coming, they may just change their minds before it arrives.

 

[MarshalN]

Plotting is really pretty useless in the sense that it doesn't translate much into concrete gameplay things. If the AI is marching an army towards you, which I got a few weeks ago in a game from another Civ, you can bet it's coming - and came it did about half a dozen turns later. I was well prepared and socked it to the Polynesians.

The AI can also march and army to civ A and plot against civ B at the same time - as my spy reported just yesterday in a game. The AI civ was plotting against me and marching an army against someone else, and it did DOW that someone else a few turns later.

 

[DemonMaster]

If the "intrigues" where true every single time, that would be a very boring game.
As it is now, the AI do plot against you and do march against you, but it is easily distracted and often has a change of hearts. In my games these intrigues are "true enough" and adds and thus adds flavour to the game.

 

[JustinianIV]

Not useless, just not obvious or dramatic, as others have said.

It can come in handy when you are trying to sow the seeds of discontent between two civs who are a threat to you, but don't want to go to war with each other.

 

[Aristos]

If the "intrigues" where true every single time, that would be a very boring game.
As it is now, the AI do plot against you and do march against you, but it is easily distracted and often has a change of hearts. In my games these intrigues are "true enough" and adds and thus adds flavour to the game.

The shared intrigues are true in the sense that when the AI catches them, they are real ongoing AI processes (I checked the code). I mentioned that because I know some people are worried about an AI "inventing" intrigues (which, ironically, would be the real definition of intriguing ).

So, NO, the AI does not invent false information, it sometimes finds out about real Ai processes and decides to share it (or not). The real processes then may become action, or not, depending on many factors that may affect the dynamic strategies of the AI.