Crazily inconsistent politics

[Kalmah]

I'm a fairly casual player and recently bought civ5 vanilla, playing on Chieftan atm but about to move up to Prince soon. In my games the politics are insanely inconsistent, going from friendly to guarded or even war within a turn and for no apparent reason. As I tend to be winning hard at Chieften it's not a huge deal but if I move up to Prince and struggle a bit I can see it becoming a big problem for me.

For example, in my current game I've been allies with Askia for around 350 turns then suddenly he denounces me, literally out of no where. It wasn't until around 10 turns later the "covets land you own" message appeared in diplomacy. Around the same period (~350-400 turns, 1750 AD and later) the whole world went crazy with wars and denouncings.

Is this normal, anything I can do to avoid it? I was regularly trading with allies, frequent declaration of friendships and in the end it didn't matter.

Also I've had the strongest army for almost the entire game. Suleiman declared war on me when I had muskateers and cannons while he still had archers and warriors lol.

 

[Gamewizard]

There are many reasons for a friend to backstab. Perhaps an enemy of yours was better friends with Askia than you and bribed him into war. If you are the clear score leader (thanks to wonder spam or a large territory) the AI, whether friend or foe, will look for an opportunity to lessen your lead. Religion competition is also a big factor of hate, as well as your industrial era policy choice. If you take Order and Askia went either Autocracy or Freedom, they will no longer want to work with you unless you are a really good friend.

A helpful tip: just because you can get 240 gold for a luxury (normal speed) doesn't mean you have to take 240 gold. Give your friend a good deal and sell it for 100 gold, or even gift it if you are really kicking butt. They will appreciate it much more.

 

[Adjuvant]

At some point, the AI eventually realizes it has absolutely no chance against you, and starts to generally hate you. In the background invisible to you, though, the AI make deals with each other, bribing to war, demanding denouncement, etc. It's hard to say what happens first.

As you learn higher levels of difficulty you start to realize that "niche" one can fill siding with others against a common, strong opponent. If you get too far behind, you're food. If you get too far ahead, don't rely on democracy and don't meander.

 

[Kalmah]

If you take Order and Askia went either Autocracy or Freedom, they will no longer want to work with you unless you are a really good friend.

Had no idea this happened, pretty interesting. Do leaders tend to go for the same policies, such as strong military civs going into honour and order etc?

My biggest issue is the timing of all of this. Askia asked me to go to war with Suleiman, I accepted but asked for 10 turns to wait. 2-3 turns later he denounced me. It doesn't make sense to me. I also gifted silver a few times to Arabia and like Askia was friends with them for most of the game and also received a random denouncing. One of the reasons Askia ended up being guarded was that I was a warmonger even though I was defending myself from the 3 city-states right next to my borders (they declared war on me). Pretty ridiculous to get negative diplomacy from defending yourself.

 

[fuzzatron717]

you are in vanilla correct so buy gods and kings you are not going to get this as often and ai is much better in gods and kings.

 

[DavisonACT]

you are in vanilla correct so buy gods and kings you are not going to get this as often and ai is much better in gods and kings.

I have seen this suggestion a lot - taking it to heart and have it on order from an online store.

 

[Kalmah]

I would have but I bought vanilla during the steam sale and didn't realise G&K was available for $4 extra. I only put $20 in my account and the bank was closed when I got home I've read that the AI in G&K is very aggressive though.

 

[fuzzatron717]

Depends how you play you stay neutral like no contact you are not likely to get DoW (Declaration of war) and the Ai aren't as likely to backstab like they did to you in vanilla.

 

[Matthew.]

Were you close to winning? I believe the AI is programmed to become extra hostile if you are close to victory.

Otherwise, having too much of a lead in general can anger other leaders.

If it is a strong military/expansionist Civ and they've exhausted all options and you just happen to be in there way, relations may break down. Some leaders are only friendly because they simply haven't reached you yet on their hit list. It could explain Askia. Covet lands usually means they want to expand, and the places they want to expand to happen to be your empire.

 

[smallfish]

Were you close to winning? I believe the AI is programmed to become extra hostile if you are close to victory.

This one really depends on AI personality. Gustavus is more likely to denounce you as spaceship is nearly finished, than say... an Attila whom you were friends with for more than 100 turns (and helped).

 

[Kalmah]

Nah I wasn't close to winning, though by the time Askia denounced me I was quite far ahead.

If it's something that's fixed in G&K I guess I'll just have to put up with it until I can afford it.

 

[BSPollux]

errrmmm 'fixed in G&K'... not realy.

Depends on one thing: If it was a stupid or a smart move to become hostile against you. The AI is smarter in G&K, so if it was a dumb move then you might not have seen that move there. But if it was a smart move ("now, everyone pile up on him, we need to stop him!") then you might actualy see it more often.

So if you hope for a change that allows you to be all peacefull while conquering the whole world then no, the AI wont stand by and watch you winning without giving a fight

 

[joncnunn]

I'm a fairly casual player and recently bought civ5 vanilla, playing on Chieftan atm but about to move up to Prince soon. In my games the politics are insanely inconsistent, going from friendly to guarded or even war within a turn and for no apparent reason. As I tend to be winning hard at Chieften it's not a huge deal but if I move up to Prince and struggle a bit I can see it becoming a big problem for me.

For example, in my current game I've been allies with Askia for around 350 turns then suddenly he denounces me, literally out of no where. It wasn't until around 10 turns later the "covets land you own" message appeared in diplomacy. Around the same period (~350-400 turns, 1750 AD and later) the whole world went crazy with wars and denouncings.

Is this normal, anything I can do to avoid it? I was regularly trading with allies, frequent declaration of friendships and in the end it didn't matter.

Also I've had the strongest army for almost the entire game. Suleiman declared war on me when I had muskateers and cannons while he still had archers and warriors lol.

Vanilla: Signing DOFs is actually what makes MORE civs mad at you.
Bascially: With vanilla the civs starting closest to you have land envy from turn 1. (If not showing it, they are just pretending) If during the course of the game, you end of adjoining other empires, they get land envy as well (no matter who founded the city which brought your borders into near contact)
The AI is just as mad at the other AIs for being on their borders as they are the humans.
And actually signing a DOF causes all AIs that hate that AI to now hate you as well.
The AIs that already like both you and your friend will like you a bit more, while that particular AI doesn't care at all until he later "requests help".

G&K: If there's a decent gap in the borders, it's a bit easier to keep the peace with embassy being a minor plus. And there's an additional plus to those civs far away (the ones you actually didn't need a plus for). Also if they don't found a religion but adopt yours, another plus. Otherwise basically the same (if its one of those that plants down cities in your direction you'll be at war)

 

[DavisonACT]

Real world politics have - historically - been crazily inconsistent. I think the devs have done a good job of shoe-horning that fact into a reasonably playable AI.

 

[Kalmah]

Vanilla: Signing DOFs is actually what makes MORE civs mad at you.
Bascially: With vanilla the civs starting closest to you have land envy from turn 1. (If not showing it, they are just pretending) If during the course of the game, you end of adjoining other empires, they get land envy as well (no matter who founded the city which brought your borders into near contact)
The AI is just as mad at the other AIs for being on their borders as they are the humans.
And actually signing a DOF causes all AIs that hate that AI to now hate you as well.
The AIs that already like both you and your friend will like you a bit more, while that particular AI doesn't care at all until he later "requests help".

I understand how signing DoFs will make others pissed off at you though I never signed a DoF with someone Askia hated, the only other being Napoleon who seems to be the master of diplomacy as no one is angry at him.

I'm now very close to winning space race. Two turns from particle physics being researched and two parts to finish. No one is attacking me as a last ditched effort to save the game. Askia's right above me with an empire that spans modern day Russia and Europe with the second strongest military so he could make a reasonable push though he'd ultimately lose to my stealth bombers and death robots. How come no one's declaring war on me?