(newbie) What stops the tribute from surrender?

[Trik]

I have found that doing the trade gold before DoW actually stops the Ai from surrendering all their stuff even though your army is like 100x the size of theirs. Also the distance from your cities plays a par tin this, like when some of the AI are "afraid" of you they won't give in to demands if your quite a distance away.

So i want to know what actually stops the ai from giving you tribute when they surrender.

Sorry if this a abit messed up, im new to all this. thx.

 

[Deau]

Welcome Trik,

From my personnal experience, the only particular thing I've noticed that refrained "fat peace treaties" as I usually call them was the war counts against that particular civ and the overall diplomacy. I usually expect a fat peace treaty from my first 2 rushes if and only if they are done on two different civs.

I'm not completely sure about the number of civs but there is definitely one thing I've experienced repeatedly and it was if I signed peace with a neighbor and went back after him after treaty expires, there is no way I could get a dime out of him even if he was to the point of elimination. Because of this I am really thinking it's the diplomacy or relationship between you and this civ that determines the outcome of tributes.

On the other hand, I've noticed they are more inclined to give everything they have if you are strategically positionned in such a way that if they don't sign an immediate treaty, they lose a city within 1-2 turns so I generally try to sign treaty "right before" taking a city rather than "right after".

 

[Thry]

AIs will only give you stuff once after a the first DOW. After that, they will only settle for a peace treaty.

It's stupid.

 

[roguepro92]

i think diplomacy plays the biggest role
in my current game i took 3cities, razed 1, puppet-ed 2 and my army is at least 3x their size + i have 4000gold in reserve. they aren't willing to sign fat treaty even with 2cities left because i have been chain denounced by other civs for being warmonger. this is the 3rd civ i attacked in a game with 7AI.
if the AI thinks other leaders are with him, he seems to refuse anything but fair peace regardless of how badly he is losing.

 

[Deau]

AIs will only give you stuff once after a the first DOW. After that, they will only settle for a peace treaty.

It's stupid.

I don't exactly agree that it's stupid. The reason why they give tribute is because they expect this "gift to you" will refrain you from attacking them again, even far beyond the peace treaty expires.

If you wish to get additionnal freebies from those weakened civs, you can do it through "demands". If they are still scared at your army enough and share borders or are somewhat close to your lands, they will be inclined to agreeing to your demands. Obviously, demands generally deteriorate your relationships but it may still be worthwhile to do this while attacking other civs rather than going straight back at them

 

[Feyd Rautha]

In other words, sign a ceasefire, make demands, and if they don't comply then finish them when the ceasefire is over.

 

[roguepro92]

maybe my army isn't stronger enough but, my question is that
the civ i whoop in war and sign fair treaty never agrees to my demands even if they got 1city and i got 10artillery. how does that math work? because im confused as hell on that lol

 

[Deau]

maybe my army isn't stronger enough but, my question is that
the civ i whoop in war and sign fair treaty never agrees to my demands even if they got 1city and i got 10artillery. how does that math work? because im confused as hell on that lol

Force based demands still have a diplomacy/previous warmongering factor in.

If they expect that you will attack them even if they commit to your demands, they won't agree to any.

The current level of diplomacy will also factor in, if they are guarded vs say neutral or post-first-war friendly (this occurs a lot), they will be less inclined to agree to demands.

Last, demands never give as much as tributes. Sadly enough you cannot "ask for a price" and see how much you can get out of demands. Every demand has a negative impact and wether they accept/deny your first demand, if you do a second demand the same turn (sort of like pricing a peace treaty) they are much much less inclined to agree. It can be seen by "what you ask something of me again already?" or similar replies to your other demands on the same turn.

I very honestly rarely ask for tributes or do any demands beyond my 2nd war. Instead, I just try to pick my first 2 rushing targets to be hopefully rich and thus use those 2 fat peace treaties to leverage my game upwards so much that I won't need additionnal freebies to keepup/win. This also often turns into "attacking some of the strongest civs on my first few rushes" but if it's succesful, it's game right there. Askia gave me 12500g tribute around turn 160 as my 2nd rush(first on monty, 2nd on him). I allied every single CS, ended up with so much BPT from scholasticism at this stage in the game that it was now trivialized...on deity

 

[fromar]

Askia gave me 12500g tribute around turn 160 as my 2nd rush(first on monty, 2nd on him). I allied every single CS, ended up with so much BPT from scholasticism at this stage in the game that it was now trivialized...on deity

That's quite a haul. I don't think you will ever see that kind of payout on a lower level because of deity bonuses. I don't recall ever seeing an Emperor AI have that kind of cash except at the very end of the game.

 

[bryanw1995]

I played an emperor cultural inland sea large standard game last night, by turn 200 alex was over 10k. By the time I won at turn 305 he was at almost 40k gold. He wasn't technically a runaway since several other civs were pretty strong, but none of the others ever got more than 4-5k gold. Generally speaking you won't even see emperor civs get over 10k gold until very late game.

 

[vexing]

it all depends on how much they hate you. at some point they'll hate you so much they'll never offer anything but peace for peace.
being a warmonger, declaring multiple times on the same civ, wiping out a civ or city state all make them hate you more.

 

[Resident Mario]

I believe that, under standard DoW with previously "Guarded" relations, it's a bell curve. If you don't do any damage to them at all, they will usually refuse Peace or only take a treaty with stuff from you. If you do some damage, they will look for a straight peace treaty. If you do even more damage and begin taking core cities, then they will drop everything they have to you for peace. If it is nearly hopeless, most of the time they only offer a straight treaty, partially b/c they're broke and partially because, well, it's hopeless anyway.

 

[Furycrab]

AIs will only give you stuff once after a the first DOW. After that, they will only settle for a peace treaty.

It's stupid.

It's to avoid AI abuses, where you would say park your army near your opponent and every 10 turns ask for more. Even a human player wouldn't agree to those terms unless he felt that before the next treaty ends he could change things around.

 

[IgnatiusTBarfat]

On Emporer, last night, I had a bizarre case where I took Monty's capital back in mid BC. I asked for peace and he offered me another city and some cash. Since the ADs, every 200 years or so he DoWs me from Friendly with the 'I know the odds are against me, but I gotta try' attitude. I destroy his units and and he won't give me anything for peace even though he replies with 'I know when I'm staring defeat in the face'.

After the war, he immediately goes back to Friendly towards me and wants to trade.

Makes me think that the AIs since the new patch are back to their old psycopathic tendencies. Or Monty is tired of playing and just wants someone to eliminate him from the game so he can go sit on the couch and watch TV.

 

[Deau]

On Emporer, last night, I had a bizarre case where I took Monty's capital back in mid BC. I asked for peace and he offered me another city and some cash. Since the ADs, every 200 years or so he DoWs me from Friendly with the 'I know the odds are against me, but I gotta try' attitude. I destroy his units and and he won't give me anything for peace even though he replies with 'I know when I'm staring defeat in the face'.

After the war, he immediately goes back to Friendly towards me and wants to trade.

Makes me think that the AIs since the new patch are back to their old psycopathic tendencies. Or Monty is tired of playing and just wants someone to eliminate him from the game so he can go sit on the couch and watch TV.

This is an issue with the overall flavours. Monty is very warmongering friendly thus if you warmonger a lot, he will still be your friend (and possibly love you even more). Thus for the calculation of his relation with you, he sees your wars against him "positively". On the other hand, when it comes down to picking a DoW target, since he is currently losing (no capital), he will DoW you every so often that his military is calculated to have decent odds against your military...especially if there is a tactical flank to his capital.

It's very awkward though, usually when I cripple a civ so much and so early, they just never catch up and thus never DoW me back later to try to retake the capital. Not even when 100% of my military units are 25+ turns away from this flank. The only time I had had a civ retake it's capital was after a sneak attack+quick peace treaty where I didn't take many of his units out. He just waited for peace to end and my military to be away to another target and just did the same back to me.

 

[Thry]

It's to avoid AI abuses, where you would say park your army near your opponent and every 10 turns ask for more. Even a human player wouldn't agree to those terms unless he felt that before the next treaty ends he could change things around.

The inability of firaxis in coding a AI competent enough to realize a human abusing it does not warrant the pathetic corner-cutting mechanism in place today.

And yes, I played Civ IV.

 

[roguepro92]

The inability of firaxis in coding a AI competent enough to realize a human abusing it does not warrant the pathetic corner-cutting mechanism in place today.

And yes, I played Civ IV.

lol. you do realize what your asking right?
to make a computer act smart and clever as a human player
yeah when that happens as a race we Humans will go extinct.
its not perfect but this you so call "pathetic corner cutting" mechanism isn't actually that horrible as you make it sound.

sick of people QQing about the solutions they can't even start to imagine the complexity of