An attempt at understanding diplomacy in civ V
- Thread starter Makaz
- Start date
H4run
Deity
i found a funny thing in civ 5 diplomatic, and i consider it as a point.
So in my game, there are 4 super power wich is, Darius (fair on quantity best on quality), Napoleon (overwhleming quantity, but bit off in quality), Oda (lesser in quantity but fair quality) then me. ANd then Monty pop up, talking to me asking for diplomacy pact, but in my experience in civ 4, monty always set as antagonize, poor him in real event his not really that bad, but in AI he set as a backstabber, agresive and paranoid. So i decline, and click next turn. Then Monty pop up again, he said :
"oh dear paragon leader, i hope u can be best example for a tiny country like me"
i said, eh? then i click on my diplomacy screen, and he got new status wich is "affraid". He "affraid" of me? that is interesting.. the effect? preety funny, he oftenly come up with an open border offer. So i think, he is not a threat, his being a nice guy lately, maybe we can be friend. So i click accept. Then suddenly he refuse his own offer, because this "affraid" status, and the open border are close for being negotiate. It just soo funny. I know its a bugs, but its a good and entertaining bugs, because after that i should work on my pursue of happiness.
I hope i can contribute to your research with this information. Nice thread btw.
So in my game, there are 4 super power wich is, Darius (fair on quantity best on quality), Napoleon (overwhleming quantity, but bit off in quality), Oda (lesser in quantity but fair quality) then me. ANd then Monty pop up, talking to me asking for diplomacy pact, but in my experience in civ 4, monty always set as antagonize, poor him in real event his not really that bad, but in AI he set as a backstabber, agresive and paranoid. So i decline, and click next turn. Then Monty pop up again, he said :
"oh dear paragon leader, i hope u can be best example for a tiny country like me"
i said, eh? then i click on my diplomacy screen, and he got new status wich is "affraid". He "affraid" of me? that is interesting.. the effect? preety funny, he oftenly come up with an open border offer. So i think, he is not a threat, his being a nice guy lately, maybe we can be friend. So i click accept. Then suddenly he refuse his own offer, because this "affraid" status, and the open border are close for being negotiate. It just soo funny. I know its a bugs, but its a good and entertaining bugs, because after that i should work on my pursue of happiness.
I hope i can contribute to your research with this information. Nice thread btw.
Same as I have had games with Siam building nothing but workers and wonders and games with Siam massing tons of archers / warriors at turn 20.
Other case in Rome where everytime I saw it settle everywhere except one where it stayed on the spot and didn't move at all in ancient era.
I am trying to get an explanation on how their starting strategy are defined. I guess there is a bit of randomness about it E.g. Napoleon would have 80% to aggressively conquer, Ramses 70% chance to spam WC and DOW everything; Rome 90% to focus on settlers right away, SIam 80% chance to become wonderwhore; Ghandi 60% chance to be peaceful etc etc etc
I definitely think that there are multiple possible starting behaviours for the AI:
- Mass Settler
- Mass army
- Mass worker
and that these are attributed randomly at the beginning to each leader with a % chance for each to happen depending on leader's personality.
Other case in Rome where everytime I saw it settle everywhere except one where it stayed on the spot and didn't move at all in ancient era.
I am trying to get an explanation on how their starting strategy are defined. I guess there is a bit of randomness about it E.g. Napoleon would have 80% to aggressively conquer, Ramses 70% chance to spam WC and DOW everything; Rome 90% to focus on settlers right away, SIam 80% chance to become wonderwhore; Ghandi 60% chance to be peaceful etc etc etc
I definitely think that there are multiple possible starting behaviours for the AI:
- Mass Settler
- Mass army
- Mass worker
and that these are attributed randomly at the beginning to each leader with a % chance for each to happen depending on leader's personality.
Guardian_PL
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,231
That's the single most quoted nonsense on these forums.
Yesterday after long and refreshingly challenging struggle on Immortal low sea level standard continents I've finally managed to secure entire continent for myself. On the other landmass the Augustus was basically doing the same, by the time I've made contact he had 3/4 of the land, while Babylon was in bad shape. I just couldn't be bothered to do sea invasion (especially that I didn't even had rifles while Augustus was boasting with his Mechanized Infantry O_o), so I went for the Culture instead.
So basically I was friendly to him, traded lots of resources and stuff, I even signed a Secrecy Pact against Babylon (sure, why not, they'll die soon to Rome anyway). I was aiming for Culture (I like scoring Social Policies), but it was taking years of hitting "Next Turn", so in the end I've built the UN. I've lost first voting because of a bug - one City State was still allied with long-dead Iroquis and kept me at Friendly regardless of the money. So like 8 turns later I bought out some CS from under Augustus, and won the game.
Augustus not once told me that he is worried that he could lose the game, in fact he was happily trading me some cash (he had like 40k of gold in his piggy bank), so I can assure my support from the City States.
And in the meantime everyone justifies ****'d up AI diplo by that worn out raggedy phrase "oh but they play to win". Give me a break please and fix the AI, mmk?
Where can I find this? I haven't seen any status like this yet.
Guardian_PL
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,231
Just have a big, advanced army and get in touch with a backward AI that has been mutilated down to 4-5 cities by someone. I had Siam behaving like this to me in one game - it is hilarious when that "afraid" AI is being forced by other, stronger AI to declare war on you - it then goes with something like "we might not have a slightest chance against you, but at least we'll go down fighting!", said in a scared voice
I've had the AI comment on my economy before, in the same manner that they comment on your happiness. I'm not sure if it was a prelude to war declaration as it happened while I was setting up to take this same AI out.
As for the AI "playing to win", I believe they do. However, I think that while considering how they are going to win the game, they consider a time/point victory too much. In pretty much all of my games I am always behind in points, and I think this leads the AI to think they are in a good position to win. I've only seen the AI go for a science victory once and never go for a cultural victory(at least not convincingly). It's hard to tell if they are trying for a domination victory since if they are doing it well they kill me off, who knows if they had the ability to kill all the other AIs.
As for them "playing to win" meaning they act to prevent me from winning:
I've only managed one cultural victory, and it was on a difficulty level 2(whatever that is), and by the time I had 4 or so trees finished, a couple different AIs declared war on me trying to stall my progress. In other culture victory attempts I've run into AIs that became aggressive, pointing out my weak military.
They seem oblivious to diplomatic victories because those are really cheap(cheesy) and practically impossible for them to prevent. However, if you get friendly/allied with a bunch of different city states at early or mid-way points in a game, certain AIs will make comments, particularly if about city states that are near to them, or city states whose affection they may already be vying for. I think this is the AI trying to prevent a diplomatic victory, but they don;t understand that once you build the United Nations that you are just going to buy up all the city states right before the vote.
I've only done one science victory and that was in a bugged game, so I don't know how they react to your scientific progress.
We all know how they respond to domination attempts, they get angry and your warmongering and just try to match might with might.
I think being well ahead in points makes them aggressive to you as well, but I generally don't pay a ton of attention to my score.
As for the AI "playing to win", I believe they do. However, I think that while considering how they are going to win the game, they consider a time/point victory too much. In pretty much all of my games I am always behind in points, and I think this leads the AI to think they are in a good position to win. I've only seen the AI go for a science victory once and never go for a cultural victory(at least not convincingly). It's hard to tell if they are trying for a domination victory since if they are doing it well they kill me off, who knows if they had the ability to kill all the other AIs.
As for them "playing to win" meaning they act to prevent me from winning:
I've only managed one cultural victory, and it was on a difficulty level 2(whatever that is), and by the time I had 4 or so trees finished, a couple different AIs declared war on me trying to stall my progress. In other culture victory attempts I've run into AIs that became aggressive, pointing out my weak military.
They seem oblivious to diplomatic victories because those are really cheap(cheesy) and practically impossible for them to prevent. However, if you get friendly/allied with a bunch of different city states at early or mid-way points in a game, certain AIs will make comments, particularly if about city states that are near to them, or city states whose affection they may already be vying for. I think this is the AI trying to prevent a diplomatic victory, but they don;t understand that once you build the United Nations that you are just going to buy up all the city states right before the vote.
I've only done one science victory and that was in a bugged game, so I don't know how they react to your scientific progress.
We all know how they respond to domination attempts, they get angry and your warmongering and just try to match might with might.
I think being well ahead in points makes them aggressive to you as well, but I generally don't pay a ton of attention to my score.
Tidbits from my last game to help the OP:
Difficulty: King
Map:Large Pangea (I need a faster processor!)
Number of Civs -2 from default
Number of city states - 5 from default
option - no start bias ON
option - have to wipe out civ ON. (forget what its called)
Alexander
Started very well (3 silver?! yes please). Immediately settled 1 city below me and had Alexander declare war almost immediately. At this point I did not know he was on the other side of the mountain range (maybe 8-10 hex away). Even after peace Alexander continued to ignore requests to not settle near me, etc so I did end up razing a city of his later. Alexander repeatedly attacked the two nearest city states, to the point of permanenet war (this had the effect of alexander being constantly harrassed and making turn processing take longer. DAMN YOU ALEX!).
Alex woudl go from 'hello friend' to 'you suck' with little input from me for the rest of the game. Trading woudl help but i was unsure why he started to dislike me again, possibly due to border reasons as he would mention this every now and then.
Ghandi
Declared war on Ghandi due to him plonking 3 cities down right near me and my pet city state. These 3 cities were practically in each others pockets so I have no idea what he was thinking.
Razed them to the ground. Ghandi didn't really like me after that however he wasnt furious like...
Askia
This guy hated me once I got to a certain power level or I did something to a friend of his that I don't know about. Perhaps her really hates people razing cities as I did that a fair bit when people started encroaching. He would consistently call me bloodthirsty, a plauge, etc. I was nowhere near his cities.
Washington
I was 100% nice to this guy and slowly he turned against me. Even when he loved me he would not sign a defensive pact. Towards the end he disliked me pretty badly.
I even took back some of his cities and gifted them back to him! You think he would appreciate Washington back!
napoleon
Expanded down towards my northern border. Developed riflemen, declared war. He is predictable!
His tactics were good, I didnt see stupid stuff often mentioned in this forum, however my Chinese Great General meant defending was pretty easy.
Oda Nobunaga
Standoffish at the start, on the other end of the pangea map. Later he would become threatened by the same superpower that threatened the world and he was 1 or 3 civs that had any power at all.
Traded with him a lot rather than trade with Hiawatha.
Later signed a defensive pact that lasted until the end of the game. At the time of signing Hiawatha had an army that was double mine and oda's combined!!
Oda often mentioned my economy and later my army when i realised I needed to gear up or die.
Hiawatha
This is a weird one. I was probably saved by the fact that I had a few civs between me and him. However Oda bordered Hiawatha for most of the game and was never destroyed.
Later in the game he stopped signing cooperation pacts and would complain about my units sitting in my territory (while he had an army lined up on his border!!! double standards!!)
One by one the civs and city states of the world fell to his might but he always called me friend and was never mocking of my military.
Just before diplomatic victory became an option every city state (excpet 2) declared war on Hiawatha and he wiped any out that I did not pledge to protect. Yes... you heard me correctly. Even though his army was massive he did not invade the ones I pledged to protect. I can assume the only reason is that he liked me or feared my single atomic bomb. Later on when I got nukes in a sub I had a mutal destruction thing going on but that was much later.
Diplo victory was off the table after a while. Not enough states left. Hiawatha rarely went for 100% kills of civs either, he just removed their chances at power.
Win
I won via space race. My army was too powerful for an easy invasion (note that keeping my army big enough cost more than building maintenance). Most of Hiawatha's territory was puppets and his main cities were pretty small for the time (1990+). My 6 cities had 3 production powerhouses that could churn out stuff at a strong rate.
All in all I enjoyed the diplomacy more than Civ4. Fear kept me going!
Difficulty: King
Map:Large Pangea (I need a faster processor!)
Number of Civs -2 from default
Number of city states - 5 from default
option - no start bias ON
option - have to wipe out civ ON. (forget what its called)
Alexander
Started very well (3 silver?! yes please). Immediately settled 1 city below me and had Alexander declare war almost immediately. At this point I did not know he was on the other side of the mountain range (maybe 8-10 hex away). Even after peace Alexander continued to ignore requests to not settle near me, etc so I did end up razing a city of his later. Alexander repeatedly attacked the two nearest city states, to the point of permanenet war (this had the effect of alexander being constantly harrassed and making turn processing take longer. DAMN YOU ALEX!).
Alex woudl go from 'hello friend' to 'you suck' with little input from me for the rest of the game. Trading woudl help but i was unsure why he started to dislike me again, possibly due to border reasons as he would mention this every now and then.
Ghandi
Declared war on Ghandi due to him plonking 3 cities down right near me and my pet city state. These 3 cities were practically in each others pockets so I have no idea what he was thinking.
Razed them to the ground. Ghandi didn't really like me after that however he wasnt furious like...
Askia
This guy hated me once I got to a certain power level or I did something to a friend of his that I don't know about. Perhaps her really hates people razing cities as I did that a fair bit when people started encroaching. He would consistently call me bloodthirsty, a plauge, etc. I was nowhere near his cities.
Washington
I was 100% nice to this guy and slowly he turned against me. Even when he loved me he would not sign a defensive pact. Towards the end he disliked me pretty badly.
I even took back some of his cities and gifted them back to him! You think he would appreciate Washington back!
napoleon
Expanded down towards my northern border. Developed riflemen, declared war. He is predictable!
His tactics were good, I didnt see stupid stuff often mentioned in this forum, however my Chinese Great General meant defending was pretty easy.
Oda Nobunaga
Standoffish at the start, on the other end of the pangea map. Later he would become threatened by the same superpower that threatened the world and he was 1 or 3 civs that had any power at all.
Traded with him a lot rather than trade with Hiawatha.
Later signed a defensive pact that lasted until the end of the game. At the time of signing Hiawatha had an army that was double mine and oda's combined!!
Oda often mentioned my economy and later my army when i realised I needed to gear up or die.
Hiawatha
This is a weird one. I was probably saved by the fact that I had a few civs between me and him. However Oda bordered Hiawatha for most of the game and was never destroyed.
Later in the game he stopped signing cooperation pacts and would complain about my units sitting in my territory (while he had an army lined up on his border!!! double standards!!)
One by one the civs and city states of the world fell to his might but he always called me friend and was never mocking of my military.
Just before diplomatic victory became an option every city state (excpet 2) declared war on Hiawatha and he wiped any out that I did not pledge to protect. Yes... you heard me correctly. Even though his army was massive he did not invade the ones I pledged to protect. I can assume the only reason is that he liked me or feared my single atomic bomb. Later on when I got nukes in a sub I had a mutal destruction thing going on but that was much later.
Diplo victory was off the table after a while. Not enough states left. Hiawatha rarely went for 100% kills of civs either, he just removed their chances at power.
Win
I won via space race. My army was too powerful for an easy invasion (note that keeping my army big enough cost more than building maintenance). Most of Hiawatha's territory was puppets and his main cities were pretty small for the time (1990+). My 6 cities had 3 production powerhouses that could churn out stuff at a strong rate.
All in all I enjoyed the diplomacy more than Civ4. Fear kept me going!
BobTheDude
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2010
- Messages
- 6
As of right now in my game, every single Civ (except Catherine) is at war with me, and their city-state allies are all at war with me too. Guess I'm not too good at this diplomacy thing, haha.
EDIT: The game before that was strange, though. I played on an Earth map, and started off in North America. I was alone on the continent, and when I went to Eurasia I finally met the rest of the civilizations. At the end of the game, only three remained: I, the romans, Hiawatha, and Napolean. Hiawatha was a monster, expanding and destroying everything in his path. Napolean was also very expansionist, and together both of them ended up owning the entire Eurasian continent. Rahamkang or whatever was very weak the whole time, he only had about 5 cities (and gifted two of them to me when I went to war with him.)
EDIT: The game before that was strange, though. I played on an Earth map, and started off in North America. I was alone on the continent, and when I went to Eurasia I finally met the rest of the civilizations. At the end of the game, only three remained: I, the romans, Hiawatha, and Napolean. Hiawatha was a monster, expanding and destroying everything in his path. Napolean was also very expansionist, and together both of them ended up owning the entire Eurasian continent. Rahamkang or whatever was very weak the whole time, he only had about 5 cities (and gifted two of them to me when I went to war with him.)
A wonderful post! The more I play Civ V, the more intricate things seem "under the hood" in terms of AI personality. It's not perfect, of course, and if anything I wish they were a little more cut-throat (Ceasar really didn't seem to care that I was getting away with a diplomatic victory while he owned 75% of the planet and had triple my score), but I feel much more like I'm playing with "AI Players" instead of "NPCs". Civ 4 definitely had an NPC feel to it and, though it was easier to control and read, +1 -2 +4 diplomacy made me feel like I was most definitely playing against a computer.
But, here are some observations that I'd like to add. Keep in mind, these are one or two game-based impressions, so they could be way off the mark.
Bismark-
- More than anyone, Germany seems to look down on me for having a small military force, and he seems very likely to declare war on someone just because they look like they can't put up a fight.
- Where many other civs seem to appriciate a large army (as long as it's no where near them) Germany only seems to care if they're too small.
Darrius I
- Always seemed kind of foolishly cocky. Two king games in a row, he settled way too close to me, eventually resulting in his destruction. In the second game, four other civs wanted pacts of secrecy against him, and eventually, all four took turns going to war with him until he was gone.
- He also seemed rediculously forgiving, offering trades, open borders, and research agreements after I had taken away his capital city.
Ghandi -
- Oh poor Ghandi... he always seems to be getting his butt kicked in every game I've played.
- From what I can tell, Ghandi resists the idea of war without "honorable" reason, and won't declare to grab land, resources, or exploit another civ. However, he will go to war for defensive reasons, either for himself or for an ally. (I'm not sure about this, since he never seems to be doing well enough to make a good war effort).
-Ghandi seems to reject threats (quite apropriately!), to the point where he refused to give up silver in exchange for peace, even when I was one turn away from wiping him off the map.
But, here are some observations that I'd like to add. Keep in mind, these are one or two game-based impressions, so they could be way off the mark.
Bismark-
- More than anyone, Germany seems to look down on me for having a small military force, and he seems very likely to declare war on someone just because they look like they can't put up a fight.
- Where many other civs seem to appriciate a large army (as long as it's no where near them) Germany only seems to care if they're too small.
Darrius I
- Always seemed kind of foolishly cocky. Two king games in a row, he settled way too close to me, eventually resulting in his destruction. In the second game, four other civs wanted pacts of secrecy against him, and eventually, all four took turns going to war with him until he was gone.
- He also seemed rediculously forgiving, offering trades, open borders, and research agreements after I had taken away his capital city.
Ghandi -
- Oh poor Ghandi... he always seems to be getting his butt kicked in every game I've played.
- From what I can tell, Ghandi resists the idea of war without "honorable" reason, and won't declare to grab land, resources, or exploit another civ. However, he will go to war for defensive reasons, either for himself or for an ally. (I'm not sure about this, since he never seems to be doing well enough to make a good war effort).
-Ghandi seems to reject threats (quite apropriately!), to the point where he refused to give up silver in exchange for peace, even when I was one turn away from wiping him off the map.
