How I learned Civ5 was a wargame (no rant intended)

[FlowKey]

I have also noticed early DoW's seemingly unrelated to military strength. Civ may not be a war game, but the no-stacking plus hexagonal tiles makes it more of a chess game - which I personally like. Of course I'm better at chess than the AI-engine, but that's just how it is. Plus it forces you to keep focussing on military buildup, even if your style of play is more directed towards gold or science, especially since in civ V cities can defend themselves to some degree. I'm sorry it's not your cup of tea Falk.

I skipped civ IV, so no comparison from me. I remember from civ III there was often a long era of peace between middle ages and what I dubbed 'WWI' early modern times, which didnt always sit right me from a reality POV (and my own bloodlust of course).

Diplo could of course always be better, but then again it's probably harder for an AI to deal with the mathematics, trust/betrayal and coalitions of diplomacy, then a game of say go or checkers...

 

[Becomedeath]

I'm still convinced that the AI's relationship with City States has way too much influence over their decision making.

Early aggression from AI Civs seems to have a much larger number of variables than later warfare, i.e. resources are more vital, size and strength are less clear etc.

I think a large part of the problem with AI Diplomacy that I've read on the forums isn't so much what it's doing but the lack of clarity around why it's decided to do it. Which is why I tend to try and force the AI into conflicts of my choosing rather than letting them make up their own "minds"!)

 

[Strategist83]

I have to disagree there, Becomedeath. Now, I've got a ton of play time of CiV but I can practically always tell why it's doing what it does. It all boils down to one simple rule: It's trying to win. So far so good, that is the aspect of the AI that works - even if it doesn't necessarily work how you might like. In that regard the AI is actually hugely succesful in that it closely emulates a human player in a multiplayer game - players there might do 'insane' things as well from a roleplaying perspective but it makes sense from a trying-to-win perspective.

That the AI is piss poor at the execution - actually winning and being successful - is another matter, the main culprit of which is the abysmal tactical AI.

 

[Babri]

Not really. AI do hate each other for DoWs.

Thats why we end up with runaway civs.
Seriously I have rarely seen AI hating each other as much as they hate human player. Many times an AI is on the top, conquering everyone but there is no one stop them. But when it comes to human player, AI suddenly realises that they are playing to win.

Change "hate" to envy, and you will feel much better.

No. Hate is the correct word because you get a negative modifier about that + many times AI hates you just because of this.

 

[Falk]

I started another game today that further proves my hypothesis of entirely random aggression. I play as the Inca and started building a worker and then nothing but military stuff including 3 early Slingers and I also again grabbed the garrison buff from the tradition tree.

Guess what. 80 turns in and three civs are at war with me. Washington and Montezuma declared on me early on and warrior rushed. Elizabeth joined somewhat later but fortunately didn't send any units. She wanted peace about 10 turns later. The other two sent unit after unit without accomplishing anything.
I'm now about 150 turns in and I am still(!) at war with Washington. He only wants peace when I give him pretty much everything I have. Monty had made peace at some point but already DoWed on me a second time soon after that. Only to again lose some warriors and then offer me peace and 560 gold on top of that (wtf!?). Thank you.
In the meantime Kamehameha also sent me a DoW at about turn 110. He lost two archers and drew back. We're still at war though. Elizabeth also joined the fun again, but still hasn't sent any units.
It gets still more ridiculous: Around turn 100, when Monty and Washington were besieging me with their warriors, Washington suddenly declared war on Monty too. So those two clowns were battling each other in range of my city and Slingers. (wth!?)
None of my enemies is very close to my land. Infact, i don't see a single one of them yet (I haven't explored much yet though).

This is insane. Aside from the worker I have built nothing but military for 80 turns and I easily manage to replace my very few losses. Still they are DoWing me and each other constantly and are randomly refusing peace or offering peace on ludicrous terms to their disadvantage. It's laughable.

I also fail to see how those AIs are trying to win. Yes, the warrior rush is a good try at winning, but when they notice it doesn't work, they should do something else instead of keeping the warrior rushes up for 150 turns (or start archer rushes which isn't any smarter).

That the AI is piss poor at the execution - actually winning and being successful - is another matter, the main culprit of which is the abysmal tactical AI.

The abysmal tactical AI makes things worse, but it is not the only problem. If the AI at least noticed its failures and adapted accordingly (i.e. if it switched to pursuing another victory condition or to expansion/economy until another war looks more fruitful) I could live with the tactical non-AI. But the AI is entirely random in almost everything it does. (EDIT: I misread you and now I notice we actually pretty much agree! Sorry!)

 

[FlowKey]

I think we all basically agree on the poorness of strategic insight of the AI. Let´s not forget it needs ´cheats´ to sort of keep up with the human player, even at the lower levels. But having them change their minds half way?! Great idea in theory but probably a worse disaster in practice. I´d say± work on the whole AI decision making progress first...

 

[Awsny]

Well I've just finished my first post-patch game and was able keep the Inca as an ally for literally the entire game just by trading luxury resources fairly consistently and renewing DoFs the turn they expired. I guess the fact that we were both at war with Oda for quite some time helped as well.

 

[Glassmage]

Well I've just finished my first post-patch game and was able keep the Inca as an ally for literally the entire game just by trading luxury resources fairly consistently and renewing DoFs the turn they expired. I guess the fact that we were both at war with Oda for quite some time helped as well.

OMG THANK YOU!!! This is exactly how to keep AI's friends for life. People a lot but they don't do this!