AI Should Respect Your Territory

[Turner]

The AI is expecting you to do just that, tell them to leave.

What I think is broken is how I can have a worker go into their territory, and I have to leave or declare war. But they can have a spearman and a settler in, and I can't tell them to do the same thing. It's just "Withdraw now."

 

[Goober]

Hehe, I like having a RoP with an AI, and then surround any of their units with troops when they come into my territory. I find that they usually kill their unit, or occaisonally declare war.

But ya, I agree that AIs do not respect your territory, they tend to put units on it regardless of an RoP or not.

 

[TheNiceOne]

Originally posted by Arkaynnus
a few ships aren't a concern, but i'm talking about the enemy sending dozens of units across your territory, or trying to sneak Settlers into your nation to build cities in the gaps in your cultural influence. the Settlers you can usually ask to move without a war -- although often you can't give the ultimatum right away, they'll just assure you they'll be out of your territory soon, which means they'll have reached their destination and screwed you over by that time.

The settlers can be irritating, but it happens in the early game where borders aren't too settled yet, so I find this quite realistic, and an interesting challenge: How to keep the AI settlers away until I have filled the gaps myself. This can be fought with smart city placement, fast culture expansion and with use of units to block AI settlers. Look for the possible solutions instead of just being irritated.

but if you demand that the enemy withdraw its military forces, they'll usually declare war rather than be booted out of your territory.

and in my experience, it doesn't matter whether you're a bigger nation or smaller, or whether you've broken RoPs before or not.

"Usually" is a wrong statement, since it happens much less than half of the time, but if the AI really wants to cross past your territory, it will declare war. You must be prepared for this.

basically, i want the AI to respect players' borders more, 'cuz they're presently being totally hypocritical by never allowing you to violate their territory but not hesitating to violate yours and risk a war. this should be changed so its fair.

I agree that it seems stupid that they tell you to leave with your lone unit while they at the same time have several units inside your territory, but I just ignore them. They follow the same rules as you for when they must leave or declare war, so its nothing that is difficult to overcome.

 

[TheNiceOne]

Originally posted by Turner_727
The AI is expecting you to do just that, tell them to leave.

What I think is broken is how I can have a worker go into their territory, and I have to leave or declare war. But they can have a spearman and a settler in, and I can't tell them to do the same thing. It's just "Withdraw now."

Its good that you write "think", because its a fact that the rules for when an AI can kick you out and when you can kick out an AI are identical.

Your worker can stay in just as long as their workers can stay in your territory before you get the option to kick them out.

I've tested this and started an old thread about the results, but you'll have to take my word for it since the search is disabled.

 

[Turner]

Now that you mention it, I do remember the thread. Not necessarily the details, but I remember you running the test.

Bloody annoying, it is. . .

 

[Arkaynnus]

the odd worker or settler attempting to cross my territory isn't a great concern to me. frankly, i'd encourage both in the early game because i'll probably just conquer the city the build, so i save myself a Settler.

what concerns me more are the military units the unit moves through my territory. this is especially a problem when you increase the AI's aggressiveness, and obviously this makes the AI Civs goto war more often. but i also suspect that the AI becomes more belligerent and totally disregards your borders -- the AI is warmongering and you're just lucky it decided to attack another Civ instead of you, so if you demand they withdraw it'll attack you instead.

there's a simple solution to this problem in that the AI should be tweaked so it requests and accepts Right of Passage agreements more often. and an even better option woudl be the ability to offer a one sided Right of Passage -- which would allay the AI's paranoia regarding a regular RoP and would be more profitable for the Civ whose territory they're trying to move through.

 

[TheNiceOne]

Originally posted by Arkaynnus
there's a simple solution to this problem in that the AI should be tweaked so it requests and accepts Right of Passage agreements more often. and an even better option woudl be the ability to offer a one sided Right of Passage -- which would allay the AI's paranoia regarding a regular RoP and would be more profitable for the Civ whose territory they're trying to move through.

I agree with you, although the solution is probably not so simple to implement. I think much of the problem is that the AI values ROP solely based on terrain size, and ignores the need. Thus it values a ROP from you the same reagrdless of whether it needs to cross your terrain or not. This needs to change to fix it.

There is therefore the problem that if the AI is bigger (in terrain size) than you, then it thinks that you should pay for the ROP even if the AI is the one that needs the AI.

One-sided ROPs may help, but its only when the AI consider need and not only terrain size when calculating ROP value, that we'll get a good solution to this, and that is unfortunately not simple.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Originally posted by TheNiceOne

I've tested this and started an old thread about the results, but you'll have to take my word for it since the search is disabled.

Even though search is disabled, if you remembered the name of the thread or the person who started the thread, you can sort all threads by either of those methods.

Here is TheNiceOne's test

 

[marioh]

Agreed, it is a pain.
I've resorted to playing games with the AI when he moves stacks of units into my territory. I usually only need about 4-8 units to do this. I basically blockade the AI units, but leave a gap for the AI to think he can go though. The AI moves towards the gap, I close the gap, and create another one which causes the AI to move back to where it was in the prior turn. I keep doing this, the AI armies end up going nowhere, they basically end up taking one step forward, one step back continuously.

 

[Arkaynnus]

i've had to blockade units before and i don't bother letting the AI take one step forward, one back. i just blockade them, and usually they'll withdraw (although not always) and i just keep advancing my units toward the border so the AI can't sneak back in.

but like i said, the problem is that the AI will just circumnavigate your blockade line by sending a sea transport.

 

[IglooDame]

Originally posted by RealGoober
Hehe, I like having a RoP with an AI, and then surround any of their units with troops when they come into my territory. I find that they usually kill their unit, or occaisonally declare war.

I haven't tried this yet but it's an interesting thought - if the AI sends a settler/defensive unit pair into your territory and you use eight units to completely surround it, the AI's reaction is to disband both units or to declare war? That sounds really appealing! Assuming you're prepared for a war with that civ (and if you have eight units to spare on surrounding a unit, you probably are prepared) then you are basically either destroying their unit without a rep hit or a war, or you're forcing them to declare war and take a rep hit in the process. You could even use seven units to just herd them around until you are ready for the war. Hehehehehe... . . .

 

[Civslayer4sure]

I agree with Arkaynnus. Surrounding your territories with units is rediculous. Also, that doesn't work if you have split terrritories. Islands and such. Someone mentioned being offered ROP's several times. Lucky you. for me that has NEVER happened in thousands of games. The idea of herding units is a nice one but not realistic iether. Would the US army "herd" a few russian infantry that wanted to travel through Washington? Would China "herd" some US tanks through Hong Kong? It's just not reasonable. And as to the boats... I think it's safe to say that several Japanese destroyers off the coast of pearl harbor would set off alarms in a big way.
It all boils down to this.
ROP's need to be made mandatory. No ROP, no passage. If you or the AI want to send a single spearman and a settler through respective territory, then one must be made. A simple fix for this which would make everyone happy would be to adjust the "declare war or leave" to the 1st incursion. That leaves both you and the AI with a simple choice. Declare war or get a ROP.

 

[TheNiceOne]

I still think you should think about improving your play instead of wishing a simpler game. If the AI manages to send settlers through your territory to build cities in land you wanted, then that's because you failed to build your empire fast/smart enough.

I think that having to work hard to keep the desired land for yourself is an interesting part of the early challenges of this game. Taking it away will make the early game more shallow IMHO.

Also, remember that this mostly takes place early in the game, its not too difficult to imagine that borders are less settled and less respected then, just as was the case in the real world.

 

[Qpdaj]

While I think one-sided RoP's would be nice, and I am generally irritated by the AI's constant forrays into my land, mostly I ignore them, unless I'm looking to start a war with that civ. If they're obviously headed for some land I want, I'll try herding them, but most of the time they're looking to settle some edge spot that I wasn't particularly interested in anyway. While I'm tempted to get mad about that, I find it's easier to be patient, for most of the time those cities flip to me after a while anyway.

 

[Revolutionary]

some here are making the mistake of thinking that the AI is even capable of being "paranoid" or being "hypocritical"

remember the AI is programed to do this, if its bigger and stronger then it won't bother with a RoP espeacially if it might be able to take you down at the moment or is even "planing" it later.

I know I'll violate the AI's terrtory to get to another AI first then to sign a RoP with that AI, espeacially to insure no RoP rapes

signing a RoP in the game is the closest thing we have to a non-agression pact if you sign it, its most likely you won't attack that AI out of fear of a bad rep. and the AI is less likely to attack you because the RoP will improve your relations towards it.

Now if the AI is bigger and more powerful they, like me, would perfer to violate your terrtory then become more "friendly" with you and risk RoP rapes.

the AI's "disrespect" for your terrtory is caused by the fact that they will try to take the fastest route to where ever they want to go and that just might be a straight line through your terrtory.

now this tactic is very flawed because

1. The AI will not take into account that they might be asked to leave your terrtory and thus will take longer to reach its destination then if it would of avoided it

2. because there is a known exploit that the human player can do by simply making gpt deals and taking all their gold and techs or even get them to declare war on your enemy then demand tribute from them until their furious with you and then demand them to withdraw no matter how weak they are that AI will declare war on you and thus you get alot of stuff from them for free.

now I also think the AI should "respect" your terrtory but I don't think that a RoP should be mandatory. What they need to do is to improve the AI's reasoning where it would realize when its in their best interests to sign a RoP or go to war and also improve their path finding ability

they should also fix that "fake war" syndrome the AI has when it will offen demand tribute from me then declare war even thou its halfway around the world in another continant and can't get to me for a long time.

 

[CrazyScot]

Originally posted by Renfield
I have found that without a RoP agreement I can "herd" the AI troops where I want.

If they are headed to beat on a rival AI I usually leave them alone, but for instance if they are heading towards a resource I will herd them. It's pretty easy just roll out a few units - it can be ANY units - and occupy the squares around the AI's units except for the direction you want them to go. The AI will not declare war on you for this and therefore wont march over your units, rather try to walk around your units. So box 'em in and steer them where it is you want them to go.

This annoys the living crap outta me too - but Renfield is right.

With or without RoPs, if the AI ventures into my territory, I take a few of my worst units or even workers and heard them straight back out, or away from vital areas.

Still, it's a pain that I have to do it.

EDIT:

And why is it that once you hit Regent difficulty, the AI NEVER seems to build an Embassy with you?

You always wind up spending the money building with them. Unrealistic and annoying, epsecially for those who aren't early warmongers.

 

[NHJ BV]

Originally posted by TheNiceOne
I still think you should think about improving your play instead of wishing a simpler game. If the AI manages to send settlers through your territory to build cities in land you wanted, then that's because you failed to build your empire fast/smart enough.

I think that having to work hard to keep the desired land for yourself is an interesting part of the early challenges of this game. Taking it away will make the early game more shallow IMHO.

Also, remember that this mostly takes place early in the game, its not too difficult to imagine that borders are less settled and less respected then, just as was the case in the real world.

In my current game, I have the top of a continent all settled, with the Germans being my southern neighbours. They also have one 6-sized city all at the top of my continent. At the moment some 7 units (all military, no workers/Settlers) are desperately trying to cross all the way through my territory (probably to that one city). I now physically blocked the way with some 8 Knights, as their side of the border is filled with roads, so they can get quite far in one turn, so I need that many units.

It is simply inexcusable and ridiculous that I have to physically block the way into my territory. I'd rather use my Knights to help garrisonning my newly-conquered Dutch cities (I'm Carthage) to keep them from perhaps flipping to Germany or to keep them happy, but I have no choice. Befoer my Knight-blockade I already asked them to leave countless times, but they do not seem to want war either.

 

[tomart109]

I was gonna say this, but marioh beat me to it:

Originally posted by marioh

I've resorted to playing games with the AI when he moves stacks of units into my territory. I usually only need about 4-8 units to do this. I basically blockade the AI units, but leave a gap for the AI to think he can go though. The AI moves towards the gap, I close the gap, and create another one which causes the AI to move back to where it was in the prior turn. I keep doing this, the AI armies end up going nowhere, they basically end up taking one step forward, one step back continuously.

I've kept Settler/defender pairs in a useless two-step for long times, often til i get my own settler in place... ...And it takes fewer units than a big blockade.

 

[LeroyJr]

In my current game the English declared war on the Summarians. They are both to the north of me and share a rather large border with each other. The Summarians have two dumpy little towns in my southern coast. The English declared war and using the ussual AI stupid war logic of taking out the easiest town they send 40 cavalry units three deep into my territory to make a run at the dumpy towns. I had a ROP with the Summarians so they just butchered the entire English offensive force outside of one of my cities.

Not really on topic but I find it really irratating when some country like England feels it is necessary to march 40+ cavalry units through my territory without an ROP to take out some little crap size 2 town in the dessert that is defended by a single spearman. I can understand them wanting to take out that town I suppose but they do not need to march their entire military force into my territory to do it. Ussually I will sign an Military Alliance with their opponent and butcher them myself.

ROP's should also be one sided. The US bases forces in Saudi Arabia and where ever but does not allow Saudi forces to base out of the US type thing. Request for use of air space, their territorial waters or using their land for an attack should be an option. Of course signing a one sided deal like the above should be seen as a hostile move by the other side.

 

[Cedrick]

Originally posted by TheNiceOne
I still think you should think about improving your play instead of wishing a simpler game. If the AI manages to send settlers through your territory to build cities in land you wanted, then that's because you failed to build your empire fast/smart enough.

I think that having to work hard to keep the desired land for yourself is an interesting part of the early challenges of this game. Taking it away will make the early game more shallow IMHO.

Also, remember that this mostly takes place early in the game, its not too difficult to imagine that borders are less settled and less respected then, just as was the case in the real world.

Your point is well taken, however, in the game it is one sided. The AI will always violate your borders but take offense when you return the favor. They also do not distinguish units. You will get the "get out" order for ships or workers.
I put one of my workers on automatic and he started building a road for trade. The AI border expanded over him and bang, I had a war because I wanted to trade
I do not know if there is a simple solution (programming wise) but the AI should show as much respect for your borders as you do thiers and distingish unit threats. That is, a worker building improvements should be viewed as a gift not a declaration of war.