AI unreasonably timid

[saamohod]

After installing the latest version and applying the .dll fix which was supposed to rectify the AI passiveness, I run a new game.

I start on a small continent along with the Iroquois (king difficulty, epic speed, large map, 11 civs), we both establish our own religions and start competing. I manage to fully suppress his own religion in his cities with my aggressive spread, steal his land with my GG. Obviously he doesn't like me.

I'm ahead in tech race, my cities possess record number of world wonders and my military is somewhere in the top half.

I've no Defensive Pacts.

Based on my previous experience (and reports from other civs who warn me that he is plotting against me) I feel that it's just a matter of time before he declares on me.

I'm on top of the score board, but he's right below me.

So I decide to run an experiment and provoke him into attacking. I disband all my military units (except an explorer who occasionally spies on his troops movements) and wait. When his native religion manages to pop back in some of his cities I suppress it immediately by my missionaries (just to add to his rage). His diplomatic modifiers towards me(I don't use transparent diplomacy in the current playthrough) are predominately negative (see screenshot).

Sometime in the course of it he demands a tribute in the form of 2 luxuries, I refuse hoping for him to snap. But he just backs off.

I've waited for 41 turns and gave up. He didn't attack.

 

[Recursive]

For the next version, I added a check so that they always DoW if they make a demand and are both militarily and economically stronger than their adversary (assuming it wouldn't backstab).

 

[ASCII Guy]

There was in issue in Martin Fencka's Russia playthough with AI aggression. The Inca had most of the map's uranium. There was a ban on nuclear bomb creation. Martin was going for a domination victory; this was clear from his capital acquisition. The Inca didn't try to repeal the nuke bomb, and lost as a result. They could've nuked Russia to prevent the loss.

 

[saamohod]

There was in issue in Martin Fencka's Russia playthough with AI aggression. The Inca had most of the map's uranium. There was a ban on nuclear bomb creation. Martin was going for a domination victory; this was clear from his capital acquisition. The Inca didn't try to repeal the nuke bomb, and lost as a result. They could've nuked Russia to prevent the loss.

Martin was playing June or July version. May not be relevant anymore.

 

[andersw]

A few versions ago I swapped to using low sea (on pangea) for more settle space, would this actually have made the game more timid?
Or is this just a minor factor?

 

[Dolen2]

It doesn't matter.
I also touched upon this issue in a previous thread, see what I discussed if you want.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/horrible-war-related-ai.651400/

 

[Recursive]

Somewhat more aggressive pre-Renaissance, but it's really a tiny factor.

 

[PapaRockett]

For the next version, I added a check so that they always DoW if they make a demand and are both militarily and economically stronger than their adversary (assuming it wouldn't backstab).

Wait, does this include friends who are requesting 50% of my gold income too? (Obviously an exaggeration but I never feel willing to give away large amounts of GPT)

 

[Recursive]

Wait, does this include friends who are requesting 50% of my gold income too? (Obviously an exaggeration but I never feel willing to give away large amounts of GPT)

Request for help != demand, so no.

 

[ridjack]

(Obviously an exaggeration but I never feel willing to give away large amounts of GPT)

You absolutely should. Friends are invaluable and difficult to keep into the late-game. Assuming you have tech trading enabled, they'll start gifting you technologies later.