AI still too passive compared to CIVIII

[Omegon3]

One thing I liked about the older versions of civs is sometimes a civ would demand tribute from you at your first meeting. If you refused, sometimes he'd say okay, other times he'd get mad and IMMEDIATELY declare war. Likewise you could demand tribute and sometimes that could spark a war too.

In civ 4 it just never happens. The AIs will ALWAYS accept peace upon meeting you which makes the early game very predictable. Also there is very little way to sour relations with other civs until writing is discovered and they start demanding to 'cancel deals'.

You "like" going to war early in the game before you have had an opportunity to establish your troops? Personally I like the early relationships with other civs before they have had the opportunity to discover how rotten or weak you really are...

 

[Omegon3]

I think in the early game you should be able to attack other civs units without declaring war (until you research writing).

I'm missing something here... Isn't attacking other civ units the SAME as going (i.e. declaring) war? Or do you simply want to be able to kill other civs' units without any ramifications from them (i.e. kill a few scouts off if they happen to appear somewhere near one of your warriors)?

 

[Omegon3]

I.e. De Gaulle right next to Hummurabi. They got "-4 relations" (not visible) from the start with De gaulle having +2 warmongering and -1 base attitude. Hummurabi +1 warmongering making it a practical "- 7-8" starting relation. You might not even have to spread different religions to them to get a war going fast.

Where do you see these values? Are they in the World Builders for BTS (which, sad to say, I've never been in...).

 

[theKurgen]

You "like" going to war early in the game before you have had an opportunity to establish your troops? Personally I like the early relationships with other civs before they have had the opportunity to discover how rotten or weak you really are...

I'm not saying I 'like' or dislike it. What I do dislike is the 100% predictable guaranteed peace you get upon meeting a civ, with the only early wars possible being human-initiated. It's boring when you know exactly how the game is going to behave.

 

[Scaramanga]

I'm missing something here... Isn't attacking other civ units the SAME as going (i.e. declaring) war? Or do you simply want to be able to kill other civs' units without any ramifications from them (i.e. kill a few scouts off if they happen to appear somewhere near one of your warriors)?

Basically yes. It might make the early game more exciting if you could pick off an injured scout or warrior from another Civ with one of your warriors. Peace treaties technically didn't exist until writing was invented so a declaration of war wouldn't really be possible either. Most barbarian tribes that invaded countries like Rome or China were illiterate anyways.

 

[JFLNYC]

Most barbarian tribes that invaded countries like Rome or China were illiterate anyways.

Some Presidents who invaded Persia, too.

 

[jessiecat]

Don't you mean Iraq? Though Iran/Persia's prob. next. Immortals vs Navy Seals, I guess. Shame they don't use elephants anymore, though animal
rights people would be on their case.

 

[athelious]

In BTS I noticed a huge jump in aggressiveness of the AI both towards you and between themselves once I started playing on emperor. I didn't realize how much more fun it makes the game. If I would have known back then I guess I could have turned on Aggressive AI.