Coincidence?

[blackcatatonic]

How much information does the AI have access to that the human player doesn't?

In my current game (King, Continents, Standard), my nearest rival (Wu Zetian) has been 'Friendly' with me since the start of the game. I've been walking on eggshells not to annoy her for most of the game, but by this point - turn 300 - she's become a threat and I want rid. Having decided I'm not ready to attack her myself yet, I bribe Montezuma to declare war on her in 10 turns. I've never actually done this before, so I'm not sure how the target AI responds in these situations diplomatically.

Of course, now - only a couple of turns after bribing Montezuma, so he hasn't even declared yet - she's denounced me, out of the blue, for no good reason that I can think of.

So my question is, is there any way that she could know that I paid Montezuma to attack her, before he's even done so, or is it more likely that her decision to denounce me has more to do with my interfering with her victory strategy (I have stolen a couple of CSs from her in the last 20 turns, although I don't have a negative diplomacy marker for that showing) and the surprise denouncement is just a coincidence?

 

[orangecape]

The AI does not know that you paid someone to attack it. Sometimes they do denounce for no apparent reason but usually there is a reason. The CS steals might do it, or Wu may be aggressive for the same reason you are. Lack of expansion room, win condition, etc. You can definitely pay AIs to attack other AIs without any diplomatic penalty.

 

[blackcatatonic]

It seems you were right. She was upset because she thought I was copying her victory strategy and because we were competing for the same CSs - the negative diplomatic tags only showed up after she denounced me. Shame - she's usually one of the better behaved AI...