Is there any logic to an AI DoW?

[r_rolo1]

I was careful with my words, Dirk: I said plot a war and not declare war

And you forgot 2 cases:
-AP
-Events ( there is atleast one that has a insta war as a option. Neal got it in the Tokugawa version of his King of the World games )

On topic: there is another factor in AI decision of warring, that is the closeness of the target ( this unfortunately does not work very well in unmodded BtS. Better BtS AI project has a fix for it ), but there are some AI that do not take distances in consideration when deciding to go to war ( like Sitting Bull )

 

[Dirk1302]

I know you formulated well rolo . But more seriously i mentioned it anyway because the difference between plot time and actual declare time often leads to confusion here.

AP, indeed i haven't been declared upon massively ever by AP decision but i sure have been dragged into wars against one so i take it this could happen to me too.

I know of an event where you can choose for some benefit with the risk the ai involved might declare on you immediately. But this doesn't really count because you know you'll run that risk, i also don't know if the event i experienced is the same event that Neal mentioned

 

[r_rolo1]

I was talking of this event ( image gently ceded unvoluntarily by Neal ) :

Spoiler :

 

[Dirk1302]

Ok, i've had this one several times, i always decline, even if i'm building up i'll have these tanks in 2-3 turns anyway without having to give my intentions away to the ai. Going peaceful this would always be a no go of course.

 

[r_rolo1]

But the AI does not always decline ... and that was my point in talking of this.

 

[Dirk1302]

Does the ai get events like this also and do you think they might accept while they're friendly with you.? I know they have to respond to random events and they tend to say yes to for instance the herbalist event giving the 2 health. But is an ai allowed to go to war with you because of this event while he's friendly wih you. Never happened to me, i'd have to look into xml/python/ maybe even SDK but i have a feeling that the ais is still bound to the code, can't declare at friendly. Not sure at all though.

This brings me to a second point,

I've always played the game on experience sofar, i've also modded the game to make mass movement to some point easier and have some feeling especially for python in the game. There's a good strat guide that highlights some leader attitudes from the XML. It's not enough though. In the last deity thread i started Rusten and Snaaty both emphasized the need to get power as high as possible to avoid an early rush on you and i'm sure they're right. Only i'd like to know how much power ~0.4 compared to 0.2 helps, this code'll be somewhere in the xml/python/sdk.

It would be great to get a precise guide out that quantized these sort of effects so i'd like to gather some people here to compile something like this. i know it's a lot of work but it'll sure help our understanding of the game. I don't like to this all on my own since i like playing the game more than modding,researching mechanics,or even posting on this forum.Still if a group of people would be interested to research into these effects and compile a authoritive guide of all this i'd be willing to cooperate.

 

[BerserkerCR3]

If you get Ragnar, Shaka or Monty as neighbours, be happy! They never manage to tech very well so beeline to Axes and maybe Machinery and declare war, and watch their stupid armies come walking to your border city which you have 4-5 Axes or Crossbowmen + maybe hill + 40% city culture. You will easily beat hordes of Impi, Axemen, Jaguars, etc. Just make sure they won't bring catapults in their SOD that can be positioned in a forest outside your city. If you have the great wall, ever better.

All their might is in their army, so kill it and get a Great General for it.

 

[aelf]

Meh. Diplomacy in Civ4 is pretty good, though BtS did mess it up a little with random events and unit spam. I played a few rounds of Civ3 recently and all I could say was "WTH?"

 

[SnowlyWhite]

Whatever logic is used, it's flawed. I've seen AIs declare on other AIs with a fraction of their power (less commonly declare on me) and get stomped. Why would you declare with a tech deficit and a smaller army?

the mechanic I've noticed comes like this:

- as mentioned, the ai will roll to declare;
- the ai got a target, goes wheooh and starts building up; he won't revert his decission once he reached this stage unless is an oportunistic declaration - total war won't be reverted;
- you/the other ai/whoever's the target gets rifling; upgrade every lbow to rifle. If your power/the target's power has a very steep up curve the ai will declare thinking you'll only become stronger as time passes(obviously flawed, since he could in turn discover rifling in 3 turns and upgrade his lbows, but that's how it works)
- you, as human, aren't used to take in acct. espionage post bts. That since usually, unless running an ee, you'll be last in ep all the time. However, ais give various importance to espionage. So if a wants to declare b, who's double his power, there's chance(since probably b is also annoyed with a, as a is annoyed with b - and thus more prone to focus his ep towards a) that a doesn't even have a graph of b's power. One of the ways I know I"m about to be declared is suddenly catching lotsa spies from a civ. with which I don't have ob. That means I'm scouted; however, scouting goes that far... especially since lbow 1 with cg1 ai a saw in the 1st city doesn't differ in any way from lbow 2 with cg1 he's seeing in the 2nd city; might as well be the same guy.

 

[Leper]

The ones complaining about the AI declaring war on you when friendly,, isn't this what you yourself do to the AI almost EVERY game? It's OK for you to stab the AI but not the other way around or?

 

[aelf]

The ones complaining about the AI declaring war on you when friendly,, isn't this what you yourself do to the AI almost EVERY game?

Nope. Why attack a friendly AI?

 

[BerserkerCR3]

Nope. Why attack a friendly AI?

Cause there are only you 2 in the world, he has more land than you and you have a giant army that will soon be obsolete?

 

[aelf]

Cause there are only you 2 in the world, he has more land than you and you have a giant army that will soon be obsolete?

You can build your spaceship in peace.

How often does this happen anyway? When the AI is friendly it's usually through your effort. If you've been playing pretty focused and proper games, this should almost never happen. That's the case for me.

 

[BerserkerCR3]

You can build your spaceship in peace.

How often does this happen anyway? When the AI is friendly it's usually through your effort. If you've been playing pretty focused and proper games, this should almost never happen. That's the case for me.

1. No
2. No
3. Some are friendly but can still backstab me
4. If my opponent has a lot more land and a lot better tech he will finish spaceship before me.
5. Better to not take any chances and crush him while I can.
6. Spaceship is boring and takes a lot of time.

 

[PaulusIII]

Nope. Why attack a friendly AI?

Because land is power.

 

[Dirk1302]

You can build your spaceship in peace.

How often does this happen anyway? When the AI is friendly it's usually through your effort. If you've been playing pretty focused and proper games, this should almost never happen. That's the case for me.

Indeed it's often ( but not always) through my own effort. But that's so he doesn't bother me while my attention's elsewhere.I've no qualms whatsoever to attack a friend if this seems advantageous.

 

[aelf]

1. No
2. No
3. Some are friendly but can still backstab me
4. If my opponent has a lot more land and a lot better tech he will finish spaceship before me.
5. Better to not take any chances and crush him while I can.
6. Spaceship is boring and takes a lot of time.

May I ask what you are answering?

Friendly AI backstabbing is a problem. That's the point.

Whatever, dude. I can play the game any way I like too. I see no reason to attack a friendly AI, so I don't consider it 'fair' when friendly AIs backstab. Just because you are playing in some strange way or not playing at a high enough difficulty doesn't mean that applies to me.

Heck, you can use the Worldbuilder while playing, but that doesn't mean they have to make the AI cheat in some outrageous way just because some players do that.

Because land is power.

Nope. That's an oversimplification.

Indeed it's often ( but not always) through my own effort. But that's so he doesn't bother me while my attention's elsewhere.I've no qualms whatsoever to attack a friend if this seems advantageous.

Think about it, how often do you have to attack a friendly AI? It votes for you, it lets build your spaceship in peace. If you've let a friend run away chances are you have been playing a poor game diplomatically, on top of having played a rather bad game. And this situation doesn't crop up that often anyway.

 

[Dirk1302]

^I need land to have enough science for the ship so if the friendly guy is my neighbour i don't have much of a choice. But other things being equal i'd prefer to take out a not so friendly guy also because i don't have to fear a back stab from my "friend".

I can see your arguments more clearly in a RPC game where you'd impose the restriction that you're not allowed to attack ais who are pleased+ with you. This might indeed lead to a game with very realistic diplo.

 

[r_rolo1]

^^Why even try to be friendly with a civ nearby if you know that you'll need to it sooner or later? A low pleased would probably do it.....

 

[aelf]

^I need land to have enough science for the ship so if the friendly guy is my neighbour i don't have much of a choice. But other things being equal i'd prefer to take out a not so friendly guy also because i don't have to fear a back stab from my "friend".

What r_rolo said.

Also, in most games you should have attacked a neighbour before you have time to get him/her to friendly. Unless you are talking about a newer neighbour after you've conquered a previous neighbour, in which case I'd say chances are you don't need so much land.

I can see your arguments more clearly in a RPC game where you'd impose the restriction that you're not allowed to attack ais who are pleased+ with you. This might indeed lead to a game with very realistic diplo.

No, it doesn't have to be restriction. In most cases, it simply makes sense. Try playing a hard enough difficulty and you probably won't be wasting time attacking a friendly AI. It might even be counter productive as the AI can resist you better, so more land does not mean earlier or surer win. If you're simply going for Domination or Conquest all the time, the difficulty is probably too easy.

I'm not talking about pleased AIs, by the way.