"I see you have a lot of units near my borders..."

[Walter R]

This one really bugs me for some reason. Got it twice in succession in current game.

Yes Monty because you have invaded me once earlier in the game.

Yes Napoleon because you have DOW every other civ and wiped out two, and also they are near your border simply because you just settled next to me.

However, now if I have to DOW either of these in the next x turns I'll get a diplo hit. I feel that it's a broken mechanic because the player cannot ask the same question of an AI civ (at least I don't think so).

 

[FeiLing]

It's definitely a feature that is annoying, as you do never know for sure when they will ask it and you can not ignore it either because if you lie, your diplomacy with the rest of the world is ruined.

A) It needs to be clearly what the rules are. X units next to their border = this comes up (and only the number at the end of your turn counts, not during the AIs turn when border have expanded or tiles bought or new cities been settled). Also, currently sometimes 2 units is already enough to have it happen, sometimes 0 is also good because apparently units some tiles away from their border may still count. It's all really weird.

B) Other civs must not care if you lied to their enemy and also not if it is a warmonger and they hate warmongers.

 

[Polisurgist]

If I'm building up defensively, I build up defensively within my own borders. I can fight them easier there anyway. If I'm able, I'll pepper a no-man's-land with armor or cavalry to take the wounded units they send back, but still try to keep them out of sight of the prospective enemy.

If I'm building to an attack, I just try to move in quick.

But 100% agree that we should have that ability to pull on the AI. Is this something someone could do with a mod?

 

[mrwho]

It's definitely a feature that is annoying, as you do never know for sure when they will ask it and you can not ignore it either because if you lie, your diplomacy with the rest of the world is ruined.

A) It needs to be clearly what the rules are. X units next to their border = this comes up (and only the number at the end of your turn counts, not during the AIs turn when border have expanded or tiles bought or new cities been settled). Also, currently sometimes 2 units is already enough to have it happen, sometimes 0 is also good because apparently units some tiles away from their border may still count. It's all really weird.

B) Other civs must not care if you lied to their enemy and also not if it is a warmonger and they hate warmongers.

I'm not denying it happens but I've never got this message unless I actually have a number of units near the AI's borders. Every time I have had it, it's been warranted. I definitely disagree with making the rules clear. That just makes it far too 'gamey' and far too easy to cheat the system.

I think it's a good concept, at its core. I just think the diplomatic hit from it is far too higher and the counter for it is too long. And it's just stupid that you can't do to the AI what the AI can do to you in any circumstance, including this one. I'd also love to randomly insult the AI I want, just for the hell of it, be able to ask them to denounce someone etc.

As an aside I'd also like to see a return to the pacts of secrecy, which was a nice concept but never really worked properly.

 

[Polisurgist]

I'm not denying it happens but I've never got this message unless I actually have a number of units near the AI's borders. Every time I have had it, it's been warranted. I definitely disagree with making the rules clear. That just makes it far too 'gamey' and far too easy to cheat the system.

Aren't there two versions of this? One that's just a comment you click through (like "the positioning of your military is worrisome"), and one that actually calls you to declare war? I've definitely gotten comments from the AI just for having a ship passing by, but I don't think they were of the "COME AT ME BRO" type.

 

[mrwho]

Aren't there two versions of this? One that's just a comment you click through (like "the positioning of your military is worrisome"), and one that actually calls you to declare war? I've definitely gotten comments from the AI just for having a ship passing by, but I don't think they were of the "COME AT ME BRO" type.

I think the full phrase is 'the positioning of your military is somewhat worrisome. I suggest you withdraw for future peace' - and then you get the usual two options of either declaring war or saying your units are just passing through. I don't seem to see either message all too often now and I never read the text now and just automatically click, so I may be wrong.

 

[Polisurgist]

I think the full phrase is 'the positioning of your military is somewhat worrisome. I suggest you withdraw for future peace' - and then you get the usual two options of either declaring war or saying your units are just passing through. I don't seem to see either message all too often now and I never read the text now and just automatically click, so I may be wrong.

I may be confusing it with the message you get when clicking on the leader to discuss or trade. They sometimes comment on military near their borders in those scenes.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I definitely disagree with making the rules clear. That just makes it far too 'gamey'

Utter silliness. Knowing the rules of a game is paramount to playing it. If you are operating under different rules, you're playing a different game. That might be good for some people, but in the base game Civ V should play like the strategy game it purports to be, not like a 1st grade game of pretend with nebulous rules that are discovered only as one goes along.

The bigger issue here isn't the nerves over nearby units, but the diplomatic penalty one receives from everyone, and that it is received independently from context. Suddenly you can't defend your friend without your friend getting angry over it because your troops were "just passing through" your own freaking territory?

This "gamey" argument is nonsense in general and also tired. In fact, the OP is complaining because it is a nonsensical and gamey mechanic that favors the AI. It would be a lot more rational as a mechanic if the AI in question simply saw you as a more elevated threat level, while the rest of the world only cares if you actually commit evil acts with those troops, like unfounded acts of heavy aggression/conquest. Instead, the game penalizes you for loyalty and a joint effort against a confirmed warmonger in these situations, and we're going to see the logically awful "gamey" argument even so?!

 

[Catalytic]

Utter silliness. Knowing the rules of a game is paramount to playing it. If you are operating under different rules, you're playing a different game. That might be good for some people, but in the base game Civ V should play like the strategy game it purports to be, not like a 1st grade game of pretend with nebulous rules that are discovered only as one goes along.

I completely agree. The rules should be clear and they should be fairly applied to all players.

I have noticed the AI isn't quite as dumb as has been asserted. In my games, if I stack up an army on the borders of an enemy in preparation for an attack, the AI will see it and usually rush buy an archer, a ranged ship, and defensive buildings in the nearest city. I've seen it time and time again, which is smart and reflects good strategy by the AI. So it does respond. It just shouldn't be able to give you an ultimatum of either starting a war or de facto peace for the next 50 turns unless you can do the same to it.

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

Ok, I'm going to agree that it's not fair that you don't have the same option the AI does here but I don't think it's a bad mechanic.

General rule of thumb is that you won't get this message as long as you keep your army 2 tiles away from their borders. 2 tiles is close enough that they can easily respond to an attack before losing any cities so a strictly defensive force has no reason to trigger this message. If it's defensive just keep your army 2 tiles away. Easy as that.

What the mechanic does do is prevent a player from positioning all their troops right on some one's borders so they can DoW and cap a city in one turn before the defender can respond. It's a good mechanic because it keeps players honest and keeps them from using super cheesey strategies. At least early on, that is. Once you get artillery, battleships and bombers you can take cities lightning quick. Not much can be done about that.

 

[Sabarok]

I would also love to see more options for this. I want one of the options to be goading the AI into declaring war. Yeah, I'm building up for an invasion, but I'm not going to invade today. What are you going to do about it?

 

[Karmah]

Gosh I was so sure that we had the same diplomatic option as the AI (withraw your troops or declare war) ....come to think of it I m almost sure that this button exists in a diplo menu somewhere.

 

[Soil]

It's also annoying how they ask you this when they conquer a city or city-state on whose borders you had a lot of units.

I was making use of gunship diplomacy as Assyria after having conquered 3 of 4 other civs on my continent before Washington suddenly attacked the Songhai (who I had already crushed) who had control of one city-state on my borders. I was in the process of influencing them with my units and then America conquered them and immediately told me not to 'hide in the shadows like a child' because he now registered the presence of my units on his new borders. So I went ahead and crushed him then and there even though I wasn't planning on conquering any more lands and was switching gears for a science victory.

 

[alpha wolf 64]

the rules as I have learned over time is that if any AI city or unit can see 3 of my units, they will send this message. It really pisses me off that since BNW, even if they see you in your own territory, they send the message. its really bogus that hey can do this while i'm in my territory, and that I cannot do it to them under any circumstance. This ranks right up there with AIs that agree to stop spying or settling, but continue to do so anyways with no repercussions.

 

[Rohili]

I actually love this mechanic. It makes fighting the AI more challenging, which is a good thing. You want to put your forces in place for a blitz assault on a city, but you don't want to have too many troops near their border so as not to trigger any questions.

I do agree that there shouldn't be a double standard, though. The human player should be able to say this to the AI too, and the AI must either declare war immediately (thereby allowing the human player one free turn to attack their units) or suffer diplo consequences with all the other civs when they eventually break their word.

 

[FeiLing]

Also if my border is next to his border any complaints about me having units within my border are insane.

 

[Rohili]

Also if my border is next to his border any complaints about me having units within my border are insane.

There are usually at least 4-5 hexes between your city and the enemy city, so there is really no reason for you to have a massive troop presence right on their border unless you were really planning an assault. If your troops were simply meant to defend yourself, they would be kept closer to your cities rather than spread out along the border. If I were the AI, I would be suspicious as well.

 

[FeiLing]

Border to border with no hex in between is rather usual, not unusual except maybe for the very first war in the early game. But in the mid game it's pretty normal. And when the enemy has 10 units around his city all bordering my border, I absolutely must be allowed to have units around my city as well (which would then also be next to his border).
Like I said earlier when I put just two units of mine inside my border which happens to be to close to the enemy he might already show up with his stupid question. And yes I wanna kill him, but I carefully just put two units close to him, the other units were left behind to not trigger this crap. But it triggers anyway by the units you have there to clean up barbs or even just a damn scout!

 

[Rohili]

Border to border with no hex in between is rather usual, not unusual except maybe for the very first war in the early game. But in the mid game it's pretty normal. And when the enemy has 10 units around his city all bordering my border, I absolutely must be allowed to have units around my city as well (which would then also be next to his border).

I'm not talking about the distance between your borders but about the distance between your cities. You can't settle a city less than three hexes away from another city, so there definitely would be space. You don't need to put units right on the border to secure your city.

Like I said earlier when I put just two units of mine inside my border which happens to be to close to the enemy he might already show up with his stupid question. And yes I wanna kill him, but I carefully just put two units close to him, the other units were left behind to not trigger this crap. But it triggers anyway by the units you have there to clean up barbs or even just a damn scout!

I've never had the message been triggered by just two units. Usually the message only ever triggers for me when I am actually planning to attack him and have 4+ units on his borders.

In any case, if it triggers but you were not planning to attack him, then what's the problem? Just say you were passing through. But if you were planning to attack him, then the system is working as it should.

 

[FeiLing]

No, I want to attack him in like 5 turns so all my units except 2 random ones are 4+ tile away from their border. And then it's just plain annoying if it pops up. As said, the rules need to be clearer.