Nerf AI conquering City States?

[Victoria]

"Deity is supposed to be tough" is a non-argument in the context of this thread's discussion. It doesn't address the complaints made, and it doesn't build a supporting case for the behavior or design ease. Can't we move past that?

On deity, 2-3 city states down by turn ~20 (on standard) is pretty common. Does that significantly contribute to deity's difficulty? I'm not convinced. Does it centralize the game? Yes. Do some of these often go to the player? Also yes.

City states should scale like AI civs, so they can be conquered but aren't settler-steals for everyone.

WTH, did you even read what I responded next or you just knee jerk? I’ll just move past this.

 

[KandAffar]

An interesting option would be the ability to attack units within CS territory without a declaration of war.

 

[historix69]

An interesting option would be the ability to attack units within CS territory without a declaration of war.

To avoid diplomatic conflict, it would be better to form temporary volunteer units who would fight under the flag of the CS but are player controlled (and can return later).

For historic example see : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Tigers

 

[Karpius]

So I haven't checked in since Friday only to find this argument still going strong.

Time to break out the beer!
Dilly! Dilly!

 

[Koot Katmandu]

I think they are attacked too fast also. It looks like the AI aggression to them, is intended to get emergencies going to defend or liberate them. However, in the games I have played most emergence are too far away for me to participate. The few that are close and I join have almost no AI join with me. The AI seems overly hostile to them, will attack and seldom defend. I hope they tune it some.

 

[Kruos]

The player and AIs should be able to pledge to protect a CS for 30 turns, during which war declaration with the CS would be a War declaration against the protector as well - I don't see how an ability to pledge protection on a city state would harm the AI. They could pledge to protect CS from the player or each other too.

Yes I think it is a good direction to follow too. Actually at the begining I thought initially that being a suzerain imply triggering systematically a war with the CS agressor, it seemed logical to me. But it's not implemented like that for now, which is sad and lead to the CS disparition problem we have now.

But it's not as critical as some have reported here, in my games (everything standard, continent, deity) there are always ~5 surviving CS at the end of the game, it's quite few but it's nearly OK to me, not critical I would say.

 

[historix69]

...
It looks like the AI aggression to them, is intended to get emergencies going to defend or liberate them.
...

(As others mentioned before : )
If this happens only on higher difficulty levels like deity, it is probably not intended but a consequence of higher production boni and more initial military units for AI.

 

[newbie2]

Ive started playing on higher difficulties and Ive noticed this as well. Every discovered/easily reached city state is gobbled up by the AI around turn 100-120. It just makes a whole aspect of the game irrelevant, which is really a shame, cause CS were one of my favourite additions to civ V. The city state emergencies only trigger after an AI ihas conquered 3 in my experience


Isnt there the possibility to give CS ancient walls from the start? It would at least slow down the conquest

 

[historix69]

I haven't used it yet but this mod might help: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1130568132&searchtext=city+states

I heard it helps a lot.

 

[steveg700]

(As others mentioned before : )
If this happens only on higher difficulty levels like deity, it is probably not intended but a consequence of higher production boni and more initial military units for AI.

Also, trying to spur emergencies would not be a great reason to have AI's be hostile to CS's.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

Using the mod with walls, I was able to actually use city states again in a Deity game.

Details: 13 civ, 22 CS on Large Shuffle (Deity). First CS captured on turn 162 (!!!). There have been about 5 more captured as the turn went into the low 200's.

Epic speed.

Problem solved.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

WTH, did you even read what I responded next or you just knee jerk? I’ll just move past this.

Yes, a poster was pointing out that on high difficulties, city states disappear quickly and consistently (with ease working against their design purpose). You pointed out that deity is supposed to be tough, and doubled down on this a few posts down by pointing out that this outcome is okay on deity for that reason (removes player options --> harder game argument).

The only thing that "moves past" is the discussion. That is not a new point in this thread and it has been addressed already, more than once, and by more posters than just me. Throwing a "WTH" at my response, especially given that I made a brief mention of some of said earlier discussion (non-inclusive) is disingenuous in this context .

 

[Victoria]

One little one line comment defending Firaxis and you come down on me like the thought police?
I am trying to move on, can you do the same?

 

[Karpius]

Okay, so I still don't see the issue here. I am at turn 180 on my current game (Ludicrous map, 30 civs, 24 CSs, continents, standard speed, King level) and I am seeing nothing of what is being complained about. So far, only two CSs have been taken, while I have managed to suz four others. I know its not Deity level, but this leads me to believe that whatever players are experiencing on higher levels is not something coded specifically for CSs.
So, my speculation for what its worth.....
The developers, having fielded many comments about how easy the AI is even on higher levels started looking for new ways to challenge players. Sort of like your run of the mill arcade game where higher levels typically mean increased frequency of difficult challenges rather than the single challenge being harder or 'smarter'. I don't think (though I am only guessing) that they coded the AI to go after CSs more, but that the AI was told to attack more. The algorithm might be comparing value of defense versus value of attack strength to randomly determine if the AI should attack first and ask questions later.

I am firmly in the camp that sees nothing wrong with a higher difficulty level utilizing such a mechanic. Making the AI more aggressive has consequences. More aggressive behavior is likely to include removing things the human player might take advantage of.

My only suggestion to players who are at their wits end with this condition is to plead with Firaxis and help them design a Deity level that you are more comfortable with. Tell them what you find acceptable as "more difficult" and what aspects of the game you don't want to be difficult.

 

[Athmos]

First, a warning : I've made only one experiment so far with this, so take it with a grain of salt : the AI aggression toward city states can be gamed to make the game easier, in at least some of the cases, and to me at least the issue I have with it is not a question of difficulty.

Context : playing Russia, deity all standard (Continent map), on a continent shared with Brasil, Scythia, 6 CS on the continent.

In my last game, I was lucky enough to first meet two close city states (both cultural, which was great !), and I was able to get a second envoy (inspiration for state workforce) in Kumasi between me and Brasil. I was planing to go to war this game, and I saw Brasil massing forces near Kumasi and my border. I diverted a few turns to mysticism to get an envoy. By that time, Toronto had been conquered by Brasil and another two CS by Scythia. I started pushing horsemen, gearing for war, and dropped the envoy in Kumasi to gain suzerainship. Brasil still attacked, I delayed their strike a bit with units in the CS border, while I kept preparing for war. I lost suzerainship at one point (didn't check if it was Scytia or Brazil actualy) and got my units expelled.
A few turns later, Kumasi fell, but I was able to regain suzerainship before (I don't know if it matters). I got an emergency out of it, which meant that I would get the CS back and also gain a free war with Brasil, without warmongering penalty, an immediate relationship boost with Scythia, 1600 gold and assorted trade route bonuses.

I am now almost done conquering Brazil, without any war weariness, and I benefited immensely from the situation. Of course, I'm not sure of the exact conditions to trigger an emergency, but I'm making the hypothesis at the moment that at least if you were planing to conquer a neighbor (which is almost mandatory in my experience), If you are lucky enough to get a doable quest and a first meet bonus, the mysticism envoy might become key to the start of your conquest. Much too early to say how repeatable this all is, but so long as you are going for early war, this looks like a relatively straightforward slingshot to penalty-less war and a great load of gold. The relationship boost (to some AIs at least) might even help protect you from other attacks while you are on a rampage.

I was playing with Magnus, but Amani might make this more reliable as you only need the first meet envoy to gain initial suzerainship, and she can act as reusable envoys later.

 

[Pietato]

The inability to tell your friends and allies (or declare a protectorate war on them) compounds this issue.

 

[Kyro]

It's funny how people who don't have an issue with a game feature being non-existent because "it makes the AI stronger" don't come up with suggestions that directly make the AI stronger.

It's so easy to say nothing's wrong when the way you play does not emphasize city state relationships, they're simply insignificant. You conquer all you see and therefore diplomacy is quite irrelevant to you. Of course it doesn't matter then. That's just being inconsiderate.

The trend I see among people like that is when suggestions that actually make the game more difficult by making warmongering less profitable they immediately oppose it or back off because it makes their play style less relevant.

You want AI to be stronger? That can only happen if conquering isn't always a good thing. Oh, and that will immediately solve the issue altogther because City states will cease to be "food".

Remove the reason why AI invariably chooses to conquer them, remove the problem.

 

[PibbZ]

Every city state should start with walls at least. That would help them a little early on.

 

[megabearsfan]

I wish that Protection and Liberation wars were available earlier. Maybe even as early as Early Empire, in order to be able to more easily counter the A.I.'s aggression towards city states. It would also be helpful if Suzerain civs could gift units to city states like they could in Civ V. One part of the problem is that most city states don't build enough units, though there always seems to be that one city state that has like 20 units running around. Another thing that could help would be if liberating a city state granted some free units to it, so that they can defend themselves a bit easier once the liberating civ moves its units away.

Sometimes, I wish that I could give quests to city states. "Hey, build more units to defend yourself, and I'll send you envoys!"

Also, instead of globally changing the A.I.'s flavor for killing city states, I would prefer if Firaxis implemented A.I. aggressiveness as a game option. That way, each player can tailor the game experience to their own preference:
http://www.megabearsfan.net/post/2017/06/05/Expanding-challenge-in-Civ.aspx

It would also be very helpful if players had ways of warning other civs not to attack city states. I started another thread in the suggestion sub-forum proposing a system for setting foreign policies that warn other civs about what you consider to be friendly and hostile actions:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/feature-idea-foreign-policy-influencing-a-i-behavior.628754/

 

[Thormodr]

I am personally enjoying my wars with Scythia playing the Dutch. Scythia seems intent on attacking City States and I am just as intent to liberate them. I’ve won three emergencies so far and piled up a lot of $$$. It’s fun playing the World policeman...err woman.

Definitely hope that there will be expanded diplomatic options in relation to City States and with other Civs. Perhaps the second expansion will focus more on diplomacy.