How do they KNOW I bought in a war ally?

[magicalsushi]

If we, the humans, ask a civ to declare war on (or stop trading with) a third party, we get a diplomatic penalty with the third party. Okay, they're upset that we caused trouble for them - that's understandable. But how do they even know that we did it? By my understanding, if they do the same thing to us, we won't know who instigated the war or the embargo. We'll see the second party declare war or stop trading with us, but they won't tell us who asked them to do it, right?

This kind of asymmetry is pretty unfair on us humans; there's no real reason for it to be this way. I can understand why the AI needs bonuses to succeed - even the cheap unit upgrades have some slight justification - but why should the human be deprived of information that the AI not only gets to see, but also knows how to use?

Or am I just missing something obvious?

 

[TheLastOne36]

Yah i agree pretty much with you. How did Monty know that i brought in Mansa as a war ally?

 

[Ninjazn]

I've thought about this too, personally I think it should be like this:

If Civ A is at war with you and you bring in Civ B as a war ally against them, then maybe Civ A has a friend, Civ C, whom is also friends with Civ B. Civ B then tells Civ C that he was brought into the war by the human player and then Civ C tells Civ A.

Complicated process, but maybe that could be used sometimes and at other times the AI wouldn't even know if you brought in the war ally or not.

 

[magicalsushi]

Sure, I'd be happy with something like that, just so long as the human could get in on the "you'll never guess what Cathy told me..." action too.

 

[rabidveggie]

I've sure your ****** war ally is telling the opposing civ something like "Now that my human friend has given me research I will crush you!"

 

[50_dollar_bag]

I've wondered how they know myself. But I guess it has to be in there otherwise you get just get everybody to attack everybody else and just sit back and watch, of course you'll get harassed a lot with aid requests.
One of my favourite things to do is to get a civ to delcare on another civ I'm friendly with and laugh at how they're still Friendly with me, after all it's only -1 for 'you brought in a war ally against us'.

But as far as knowing whether an enemy brought in a war ally aginst you, does it really matter? I'd trade with any civ if I'd get something worthwhile out of it even if I was furious at Monty for attacking me 3 times already. Likewise I'd attack anyone even if they'd been my bestest friend the whole game, because I'm good like that.

And people call Monty a Pyscho

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

I was thinking about this today, actually, the fact that humans suffer so many penalties versus AI. I really hate how, in many ways, it's always Compyters vs Humans. They are more friendly with each other, vote for each other in UN, etc. I would much prefer it to be a free for all, where the AI holds everyone equally. Hopefully, this will have changed at least a bit in BTS.

Also: War monger respect blows, I really need to take that out, but I'm XML-illiterate.

 

[XxtraLarGe]

Civ IV really is quite crippled as far as diplomacy is concerned. Suppose somebody asks me to join them in a war, and I say I can't at the time. Why can't I join them in a war at a later time, and have the diplomacy penalty go away? When a Civ asks me for a technology, how come the only option is yes or no? Why can't I offer a different technology? Highly frustrating stuff.

 

[DrewTate]

And how if you worked hard for a friendly relationship then they ask you to go to war with them and you say no i cant maybe cuz u have no upgraded units or so and they go back down to pleased.

that's a bunch of . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

 

[Saim]

I also find it wierd that vassals give you a -1, when destroying a civ doesn't.

 

[Excedrin]

Suppose somebody asks me to join them in a war, and I say I can't at the time. Why can't I join them in a war at a later time, and have the diplomacy penalty go away?

This bothers me also, alot!

I want to help my allies when/if I can.

Wouldn't this make a good suggestion for the next version (if there is one) or expansion? Perhaps it's already in there?

Question along the same lines:

If 2 AI civs are at war, and you declare war one of them, do you get any diplo from the side you joined? You should, don't you think?

 

[TheLastOne36]

what if it's a 3 way war?

 

[Larklight]

I also find it wierd that vassals give you a -1, when destroying a civ doesn't.

That is strange, never thought of that. Maybe they just forget...

 

[davelisowski]

I also find it wierd that vassals give you a -1, when destroying a civ doesn't.

Razing cities is -8 (or it might be -4)... I can't check it now.
Aside from that, when you destroy a civ who cares what they think? They're gone!

I get the feeling the AI never asks each other for anything. Religion and borders seem to be the only reason AIs will attack each other. They are opportunistic as well. For example, Civ A declares war on Civ B. Civ C knows that Civ A will clearly dominate Civ B. Civ C declares war to land grab.

Now as for you, since the AI never asks each other for help, they can assume you did (when in fact, you did). I don't remember civs just randomly declaring war with another civ based on my war status.

 

[LlamaCat]

actually I think you can sort of figure out who brought in a war ally against you, if you read the diplomatic indicators between the civs carefully.

 

[magicalsushi]

Razing cities is -8 (or it might be -4)... I can't check it now.
Aside from that, when you destroy a civ who cares what they think? They're gone!

No, the point was that *other* civs get upset when you have vassals, but they don't care when you destroy another civ. It is a bit strange.

I get the feeling the AI never asks each other for anything. Religion and borders seem to be the only reason AIs will attack each other. They are opportunistic as well. For example, Civ A declares war on Civ B. Civ C knows that Civ A will clearly dominate Civ B. Civ C declares war to land grab.

My understanding is that they do occasionally ask, but only if the answer will definitely be yes. Unlike the human, they know this in advance. You'll certainly never see "you refused to help us!" between AI, but (I think) you will occasionally see "you gave us help".

As for Civ C seeing Civ A as a threat, I think you're giving far too much credit to the AI. As far as I can tell, war declarations = power graph levels + attitude + random numbers; there's no real assessment of what will actually benefit the AI.

Now as for you, since the AI never asks each other for help, they can assume you did (when in fact, you did). I don't remember civs just randomly declaring war with another civ based on my war status.

Not true. I don't even have to be at war with the target civ myself to get Monty or someone to declare on them, and the target will still know it was me.

actually I think you can sort of figure out who brought in a war ally against you, if you read the diplomatic indicators between the civs carefully.

Only if you're playing with a small number of civs. It's not so easy with 18 - and in any case, they know *exactly* who was responsible when I do it, but I have to guess when they do it. It's asymmetric, in favour of the computer, and I don't see why it has to be.

 

[Traitorfish]

Palantir? Worked for Sauron.

 

[AriochIV]

If you don't know by now that the AI civ's cheat and magically know everything about your empire, you haven't been paying attention.

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

Know what else I hate? When you meet a civ for the first time and your already their worst enemy.

WE JUST MET!