News: BOTM 247 - Clash of the Titans Part 2 - Deity - Starts January 12, 2023

MarleysGh0st

King
GOTM Staff
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
753
Location
Elsewhere

BOTM 247: Clash of the Titans Part 2



In BOTM 241, @Noble Zarkon had this introduction for Clash of the Titans Part 1:
Forum member @drewisfat recently stated "I'm familiar with std/normal/deity non-cheese victories, as that's what I always play. Rome is strong there. I think a perfect Rome game outperforms a perfect Inca game." So I thought we should test this hypothesis :) We discussed it on Staff and decided the best way to do it would be to play the same map twice, once as Inca and once as Rome. My feeling is nothing can compete with the Inca not even the mighty hordes of Rome so we will play as the Inca first then Rome next month - this means Rome will be played with map knowledge, if that turns out to be too easy then we will do this again in 6 months and swap the order! In order to avoid cheesy victories only Conquest and Domination victories are enabled.​
I've tried to remove luck as far as possible - there's a strong hint as to what direction to head in from the position of the Quecha and all the AIs are very similar so it shouldn't matter too much which order you find them.​

Real life interfered with the original schedule, but now we will continue with Clash of the Titans Part 2. We have the same map and the same AI, but this time you play as Augustus of Rome. How will Augustus fare compared to Huayna Capac?

Game settings:
Playing as: Augustus of Rome
Rivals: 6 AIs
Difficulty: Deity
Starting Era:
Ancient
Speed: Normal
Options: No goody huts, no random events
Victory Conditions:
Conquest, Domination

Map settings:
Map: Custom
World Wrap: None
Mapsize: Standard
Climate: Temperate
Sea level: Medium
Map latitudes: -90°S to 90°N


Augustus is Imperialistic and Industrious, and you start with Fishing and Mining.

The Imperialistic trait gives +100% great general emergence and +50% production of settlers

The Industrious trait gives +50% wonder production and double production speed of Forge

Unique unit: Praetorian (replaces Swordsman)
Enemies fear the praetorian! It is extremely powerful for such an early unit, having a base strength of 8. It does however lack the +10% city attack of the swordsman.

Unique Building: Forum (replaces Market)
Besides the benefits of a market, the forum gives +25% great person birth rate in its city.

Starting screenshot

This is the start of the game (click for a bigger image):



Adventurer Class bonuses:
You play on Emperor level, but the AI still have Deity level starting units.

Challenger Class Equalizers:
No Challenger class needed this time!

To Enter the Competition:

This competition will open at 00:01 am on 12 Jan 2023, server local time (UTC-6:00). From that date and time, you'll be able to get your chosen starting save >>>here<<<.

Submit the save after your victory (or defeat) here, by 15 Feb 2023.

Here is a link to a list of the differences between Vanilla, Warlords and BtS.

Software Versions

Windows: This game MUST be played in Beyond the Sword (NOT Civ4 Vanilla or Warlords), patched to version 3.19, and with the BUFFY mod version 3.19.005 installed. You can download the BUFFY mod here. Players using Windows Vista or Windows 7 are encouraged to read the notes on Vista fixes here.


Macintosh: This game MUST be played in Beyond the Sword (NOT Civ4 Vanilla or Warlords), patched to version 3.19, and with the Mac BUFFY mod version 3.19.003 installed. You can download the Mac BUFFY mod here.

While playing...

Remember - for your entry to be accepted, it MUST be your first attempt to play this game, and you MUST NOT replay any turns. If you make a mistake while playing, you have to live with it, learn from it, and carry on the game without replaying.

We will open 'spoiler' threads during the month for players to discuss what happens in their games. Do not discuss any details of your game outside those threads.
@The_J @Blake00
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MarleysGh0st

King
GOTM Staff
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
753
Location
Elsewhere
Real Life events, particularly the recent series of server crashes, have delayed some of our BOTM games, but this one essentially returns us to our standard schedule of having the easy games (Noble, Prince, Monarch) starting on the 1st of the month, with the hard games (Emperor, Immortal, Deity) starting on the 15th. Because this game presents some challenges that might take longer to play out, I'm starting this game three days earlier to give you a bit more time.

The big difference between this game and others is that this one is reusing exactly the same map, with the same AI, as in BOTM 241. There were very few players who completed that game, and they obviously will start this one with information that is not generally available. I want to make it clear, therefore, that it is perfectly legal to go back and research that game by any or all of the following means.
  1. You can read the First Spoiler and Final Spoiler and Final Results threads for BOTM 241.
  2. You can see and compare graphic replays of all the submissions here.
  3. You can download the starting save for BOTM 241 and play part of that game for fun. I'd recommend at least playing far enough to familiarize yourself with the AI and the terrain beyond the starting screenshot.
In BOTM 247, I was the only player to submit an Adventurer save. In an attempt to attract more non-Deity level players to this game, I've set this Adventurer save to Emperor difficulty, instead of leaving it at Deity and trying to guess at a comparable bonus for the 8 Quechua and 500 gold that was offered in BOTM 241. I may be a generous mapmaker, but there's no way I was going to give you 8 Praetorians! :evil:

I also want to call your attention to the victory conditions. As in BOTM 241, only Conquest and Domination are enabled. Because there is no Time victory, that means the game will not automatically end on Turn 500. If no civilization achieves the victory conditions, the game can conceivably go on...forever? [Fortunately or unfortunately, there's still a real life submission deadline.] For the Deity-level players in BOTM 241, that was not a problem. For the rest of us mere mortals, take heed!
 
Last edited:

Xcalibrator

Ultraviolet Catastrophe
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
2,292
Location
Boston
I was pretty darn surprised--nay, astonished!--that Kaitzilla and Jovan managed to get Deity victories with the Incas. I really can't imagine how we're supposed to do it as Rome. No quechuas this time (so even harder to capture cities) and the nearest iron for praets is in America (how you gonna get that iron except by capturing an American city or two? ). [Thanks, Frederiksberg (#7), for correcting my faulty memory.]

(BTW, the 241 Final Spoiler link points to First Spoiler, and it would be good to put this thread up top in the yellow section.)
 
Last edited:

MarleysGh0st

King
GOTM Staff
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
753
Location
Elsewhere
(BTW, the 241 Final Spoiler link points to First Spoiler, and it would be good to put this thread up top in the yellow section.)

Oops! The link has been fixed. Pinning a post (moving it to the yellow section) is one of those powers I don't have. But just in case it's necessary again, humble staffers can now edit a game's end date on our own! :)
 
Joined
Sep 3, 2002
Messages
508
Location
Dor-lómin
An ice start (shown on the starting screenshot so not a spoiler) on the previous Botm (I hate ice) and a deity war game (Con and Dom aren't really peaceful options on deity). At least I won't need to waste any time on Civ in the foreseeable future. I guess for those who love deity wars it's a win-win.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Messages
3,101
Location
Denmark, GMT+1
Who dares to worker steal on Deity with just a regular warrior? :mischief:
Most likely I won't do it. I'm not sure how I can get peace after the worker steal, because the Deity AI is much more powerful in the early game.

I was pretty darn surprised--nay, astonished!--that Kaitzilla and Jovan managed to get Deity victories with the Incas. I really can't imagine how we're supposed to do it as Rome. No quechuas this time (so even harder to capture cities) and the nearest iron for praets is in America (how you gonna get that iron except by capturing an American city or two? ).

(BTW, the 241 Final Spoiler link points to First Spoiler, and it would be good to put this thread up top in the yellow section.)
You are mixing up things. There is iron in the fat cross if you settle on the PH. Closest source of horses, however, is in America.
 

MarleysGh0st

King
GOTM Staff
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
753
Location
Elsewhere
An ice start (shown on the starting screenshot so not a spoiler) on the previous Botm (I hate ice) and a deity war game (Con and Dom aren't really peaceful options on deity). At least I won't need to waste any time on Civ in the foreseeable future. I guess for those who love deity wars it's a win-win.
Consider trying the Adventurer save at Emperor level. It may still be a difficult task, but not quite so impossible.

Read the Final Spoilers for 241. I'm particularly interested in whether the nuclear option can work in an Emperor game. :mischief:
 

drewisfat

King
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
837
If only someone had foreseen the worker steal issue, perhaps ahead of time, in the thread that inspired this contest :mischief:
I believe Romans have been better than HC ever since the AGG AI worker stealing trick was discovered, because HC benefits much less from that compared to everyone else.
I think that longer term approach, and settling your own cities with IMP, became much stronger when it was discovered how AGG AI lets you easily (by HoF standards) steal multiple workers
@Fippy impressive game no doubt! Doesn't even look like micropangaea or agg ai?

Theorycrafted for conquest, you build oracle -> feudalism. IMP/IND the best traits you can have for that since the capital is literally building like settler, settler, oracle, settler at the critical point. And feudalism is a big way Rome can catch up to the rushboys. They have to conquer every city at least of the initial targets, Rome takes 1-2 and it's onto the next. Probably fail on getting feudalism ~60% of the time, but the early wars are a lot more consistent because vassalage + ignoring hill cities. Praets very good for capitulating, since you'll take fewer casualties (-warscore) and have higher military power (so keeping a bunch of 1-2 city vassals doesn't make the last AI resistant to capitulating).

Being a hub map over 1000 tiles instead of a 300 something pangaea also destroys any plan for capitulations, because you can't get land target with a single AI nonetheless all of them lol
 

Lich_Lord

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 11, 2016
Messages
17
Since my Inca game went really well I doubt I can do better with Rome. But I look forward to trying. I think I will dare to worker steal:satan:
 

Kaitzilla

Lord Croissant
Supporter
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
11,804
Location
America!
Is stealing workers from aggressive AIs easier? If so, why? @drewisfat

The Aggressive AI setting lets the human player in war get Cease Fire and Peace Treaty with the AI a lot easier.
Just have to threaten their city by moving a war unit to within 2 tiles so that more of their cities are threatened than yours.
Spoiler Bit more info :

It really made a difference in SGOTM15.

I think the first time it became popularized for fast wars to steal workers was using Manco Capac's worker stealing guide.
Select your target -> Aggression of the Target -> Aggressive AI is on



In Hall of Fame games, it improved worker-stealing powered games tremendously for me anyway.


My brain melted the 1st time I tried to calculate precise endwar values.

Almost always, threatening the AI city with Aggressive AI turned on will compensate for the lower power rating of the human player vs. Deity AI.
It will allow an early Cease Fire or Peace Treaty which is usually almost entirely determined by power ratio and war success.
 
Last edited:

Kaitzilla

Lord Croissant
Supporter
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
11,804
Location
America!
I'll try the EndWarValue calculation one more time.
The BetterAI Mod can do it by holding Alt and then mousing over the Scoreboard in cheat mode I think, but in regular Civ 4 it can only be calculated by hand. :sad:

Here is the code description for EndWarValue that Lustus posted in the BetterAI forum 15 years ago.
Code:
Code:
AI_endWarVal
{
    EndWarValue = 100

    EndWarValue = EndWarValue + (CountOurCities + CountTheirCities) * 3);
    EndWarValue = EndWarValue + (CountOurPopulation + CountTheirPopulation);

    EndWarValue = EndWarValue + (WarSuccessThemVsUs * 20)

    EndWarValue = (EndWarValue * (TheirPower + 10)) / (OurPower + TheirPower + 10)
 
    if (weAreNotHuman and our power is at least 20&#37; higher)
    {
        if DaggerStrategy then reduce EndWarValue to (90% * TheirOurPowerRatio)

        if We Own 20% more Land than Them then reduce EndWarValue by (90% * TheirOursLandRatio)
 
        if we in financial trouble // warmonger war to solve finances factor
        {
            if TotalWar and (Dagger or (maxWarRand < 100)) reduce EndWarValue by (70% * power ratio factor)
            if LimitedWar and (limitedWarRand < 100) reduce EndWarValue by (70% * power ratio factor)
            if DogpileWar and (dogpileWarRand < 100) reduce EndWarValue by (70% * power ratio factor)
        }
    }

    if total war and the aggressor is non-human, double EndWarValue
    if total war and the aggressor is non-human, increase EndWarValue by 50%

    round to the nearest 10 (actually using "DIPLOMACY_VALUE_REMAINDER" from GlobalDefines.xml)

    if human and less than 10, set it to 10.
}

I made a deity difficulty game with Aggressive AI turned on, started a war Darius, and waited 11 turns.
No military wins or losses on either side. (war success)

===========================================================

Human: 1 City, 3 Population, 7k Soldier
Darius Deity AI: 3 City, 8 Population, 41k Soldier


Human EndWarValue:
Start -> 100
City Adjustment -> 100 + 3*(1+3) = 112
Population Adjustment -> 112 + (3+8) = 123
War Success Adjustment -> None
Soldier Power Adjustment -> 123*(41+10)/(7+41+10) = 123*51/58 = 6273/58 = 108.155 = 108
Final step is to round down to the nearest unit of 10 -> 108 = 100
Human EndWarValue is 100


Darius EndWarValue:
Start -> 100
City Adjustment -> 100 + 3*(3+1) = 112
Population Adjustment -> 112 + (8+3) = 123
War Success Adjustment -> None
Soldier Power Adjustment -> 123*(7+10)/(41+7+10) = 123*17/58 = 2091/58 = 36.05 = 36

Forum migration to a new version a few years ago messed up Lustus' code a bit.
if (weAreNotHuman and our power is at least 20&#37; higher)
But DanF mentioned it I think?

Darius gets nasty since he is non-human and has greater than 20% more soldiers than the human player.
The human player needs to get above 5/6 or 0.83333 power rating with Darius here to avoid giving him extra benefits.
7/41 = 0.1707 Power ratio, ugh :sad:

Since he is greatly stronger, let's make Darius feel even better about the war and adjust his EndWarValue down even more after the Soldier Power Adjustment!
Dagger Strategy Adjustment -> None
Land Ownership Adjustment -> Darius does not have 20% more land tiles than human in my test because I don't want to calculate this, so his EndWarValue does not shrink down.
Financial Trouble Adjustment -> None I think?
Total War Adjustment -> None, the human started the war
Final step is to round down to the nearest unit of 10 -> 36 = 30
Darius EndWarValue is 30

Darius is 70 End War Points ahead of the human player, so a Cease Fire or Peace Treaty is off the table unless the Human can sweeten the pot.
2 End War Points = 1:gold:, so he will want 35:gold: + Peace Treaty to end the war right?
Yup!

Spoiler :





===========================================================

Now for the last step.
Since Aggressive AI is turned on, any side that threatens more of the other side's cities gets their EndWarValue divided by 3 :D
The order of operations matters though, so what is the actual code in Civ 4 Beyond the Sword 3.19 that governs EndWarValue?
Actual EndWarValue Code:
Spoiler :

int CvTeamAI::AI_endWarVal(TeamTypes eTeam) const
{
int iValue;

FAssertMsg(eTeam != getID(), "shouldn't call this function on ourselves");
FAssertMsg(isAtWar(eTeam), "Current AI Team instance is expected to be at war with eTeam");

iValue = 100;

iValue += (getNumCities() * 3);
iValue += (GET_TEAM(eTeam).getNumCities() * 3);

iValue += getTotalPopulation();
iValue += GET_TEAM(eTeam).getTotalPopulation();

iValue += (GET_TEAM(eTeam).AI_getWarSuccess(getID()) * 20);

int iOurPower = std::max(1, getPower(true));
int iTheirPower = std::max(1, GET_TEAM(eTeam).getDefensivePower());

iValue *= iTheirPower + 10;
iValue /= std::max(1, iOurPower + iTheirPower + 10);

WarPlanTypes eWarPlan = AI_getWarPlan(eTeam);

// if we not human, do we want to continue war for strategic reasons?
// only check if our power is at least 120% of theirs
if (!isHuman() && iOurPower > ((120 * iTheirPower) / 100))
{
bool bDagger = false;

bool bAnyFinancialTrouble = false;
for (int iI = 0; iI < MAX_PLAYERS; iI++)
{
if (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).isAlive())
{
if (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).getTeam() == getID())
{
if (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).AI_isDoStrategy(AI_STRATEGY_DAGGER))
{
bDagger = true;
}

if (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).AI_isFinancialTrouble())
{
bAnyFinancialTrouble = true;
}
}
}
}

// if dagger, value peace at 90% * power ratio
if (bDagger)
{
iValue *= 9 * iTheirPower;
iValue /= 10 * iOurPower;
}

// for now, we will always do the land mass check for domination
// if we have more than half the land, then value peace at 90% * land ratio
int iLandRatio = ((getTotalLand(true) * 100) / std::max(1, GET_TEAM(eTeam).getTotalLand(true)));
if (iLandRatio > 120)
{
iValue *= 9 * 100;
iValue /= 10 * iLandRatio;
}

// if in financial trouble, warmongers will continue the fight to make more money
if (bAnyFinancialTrouble)
{
switch (eWarPlan)
{
case WARPLAN_TOTAL:
// if we total warmonger, value peace at 70% * power ratio factor
if (bDagger || AI_maxWarRand() < 100)
{
iValue *= 7 * (5 * iTheirPower);
iValue /= 10 * (iOurPower + (4 * iTheirPower));
}
break;

case WARPLAN_LIMITED:
// if we limited warmonger, value peace at 70% * power ratio factor
if (AI_limitedWarRand() < 100)
{
iValue *= 7 * (5 * iTheirPower);
iValue /= 10 * (iOurPower + (4 * iTheirPower));
}
break;

case WARPLAN_DOGPILE:
// if we dogpile warmonger, value peace at 70% * power ratio factor
if (AI_dogpileWarRand() < 100)
{
iValue *= 7 * (5 * iTheirPower);
iValue /= 10 * (iOurPower + (4 * iTheirPower));
}
break;

}
}
}


// XXX count units in enemy territory...

if ((!(isHuman()) && (eWarPlan == WARPLAN_TOTAL)) ||
(!(GET_TEAM(eTeam).isHuman()) && (GET_TEAM(eTeam).AI_getWarPlan(getID()) == WARPLAN_TOTAL)))
{
iValue *= 2;
}
else if ((!(isHuman()) && (eWarPlan == WARPLAN_DOGPILE) && (GET_TEAM(eTeam).getAtWarCount(true) > 1)) ||
(!(GET_TEAM(eTeam).isHuman()) && (GET_TEAM(eTeam).AI_getWarPlan(getID()) == WARPLAN_DOGPILE) && (getAtWarCount(true) > 1)))
{
iValue *= 3;
iValue /= 2;
}

if (GC.getGameINLINE().isOption(GAMEOPTION_AGGRESSIVE_AI))
{
int iOurEndangeredCities = 0;
int iTheirEndangeredCities = 0;

for (int iPlayer = 0; iPlayer < MAX_CIV_PLAYERS; iPlayer++)
{
CvPlayer& kPlayer = GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iPlayer);

if (kPlayer.getTeam() == eTeam)
{
int iLoop;
CvCity* pTheirLoopCity;

for (pTheirLoopCity = kPlayer.firstCity(&iLoop); pTheirLoopCity != NULL; pTheirLoopCity = kPlayer.nextCity(&iLoop))
{
if (pTheirLoopCity->AI_isDanger())
{
iTheirEndangeredCities++;
}
}
}

if (kPlayer.getTeam() == getID())
{
int iLoop;
CvCity* pOurLoopCity;

for (pOurLoopCity = kPlayer.firstCity(&iLoop); pOurLoopCity != NULL; pOurLoopCity = kPlayer.nextCity(&iLoop))
{
if (pOurLoopCity->AI_isDanger())
{
iOurEndangeredCities++;
}
}
}
}

if (iTheirEndangeredCities > iOurEndangeredCities)
{
iValue /= 3;
}
}

iValue -= (iValue % GC.getDefineINT("DIPLOMACY_VALUE_REMAINDER"));

if (isHuman())
{
return std::max(iValue, GC.getDefineINT("DIPLOMACY_VALUE_REMAINDER"));
}
else
{
return iValue;
}
}

Ya, threatening cities with Aggressive AI option is processed right before the final rounding to nearest 10.


Move the Warrior to within 2 squares of Darius' city to "threaten" it.

Human EndWarValue:
Start -> 100
City Adjustment -> 100 + 3*(1+3) = 112
Population Adjustment -> 112 + (3+8) = 123
War Success Adjustment -> None
Soldier Power Adjustment -> 123*(41+10)/(7+41+10) = 123*51/58 = 6273/58 = 108.155 = 108
Aggressive AI Setting (Threatening more AI cities than AI is threatening player cities) Adjustment -> 108/3 = 36
Final step is to round down to the nearest unit of 10 -> 36 = 30
Human EndWarValue is 30

Darius and the Human Player are tied with 30 End War Points.
It should be possible to sign a Cease Fire or Peace Treaty, but getting any :gold: from Darius in the Peace treaty is impossible without more Power Rating or War success on the Player's part.
So he will want 0:gold: + Peace Treaty to end the war right?
No!

Spoiler :






This is the insane logic that we know and love from Civ 4, but the refusal is because we asked "Let's bury the Hatchet. What is the Price for Peace?" and he can't add 0 :gold: to the Peace Treaty.
If we ask "Would you accept this deal?" he takes it as expected. :)
Spoiler :




**Edit**
Ya, it was a bit lazy for me to bail out on any land tile ownership adjustments when the AI has more land than the player and x1.2 or more soldiers.
I gradually reduced the player to 1 Land tile, and the Peace Treaty price went from 35:gold:, to 40:gold:, to 45:gold:, and finally 50:gold:
Clearly Darius' EndWarValue adjusted down from 36 down to the single digits and then got rounded to 0.
That is a difference of 100 End War Value Points with the Human Player and is worth 50:gold:

War Success can be quickly looked up here.

Stealing a lone Worker from the AI counts as +4 War Success and greatly inflates their EndWarValue by +80 as the 3rd adjustment :)
This worker steal, not losing any units in a counter-attack, and threatening a Deity AI city with Aggressive AI game option is what gets the fast no-cost Cease Fires and piles of Workers.
If the Deity AI gets a huge power spike from teching Bronze Working or finding it in a goody hut, they might not accept a Cease Fire or a Peace treaty without :gold:, tech, or a city.

I've done everything right and not gotten a Cease Fire because my Warrior-based army was too pathetic compared to the Deity AI I was at war with.
Pretty rare to see that though.
Usually it is losing a fight, or a wandering Archer threatens my city and I can't threaten 2 of theirs at the same time.
 

Attachments

  • Aggressive AI Peace Treaty Test.CivBeyondSwordSave
    43.8 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
492
Location
US
The Aggressive AI setting lets the human player in war get Cease Fire and Peace Treaty with the AI a lot easier.
Just have to threaten their city by moving a war unit to within 2 tiles so that more of their cities are threatened than yours.
Spoiler Bit more info :

It really made a difference in SGOTM15.

I think the first time it became popularized for fast wars to steal workers was using Manco Capac's worker stealing guide.
Select your target -> Aggression of the Target -> Aggressive AI is on



In Hall of Fame games, it improved worker-stealing powered games tremendously for me anyway.


My brain melted the 1st time I tried to calculate precise endwar values.

Almost always, threatening the AI city with Aggressive AI turned on will compensate for the lower power rating of the human player vs. Deity AI.
It will allow an early Cease Fire or Peace Treaty which is usually almost entirely determined by power ratio and war success.

Thank you, @Kaitzilla !

so it is an "aggressive AI" game option, not stealing workers from eg Ragnar being easier than from Gandhi?
 

Kaitzilla

Lord Croissant
Supporter
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
11,804
Location
America!
Thank you, @Kaitzilla !

so it is an "aggressive AI" game option, not stealing workers from eg Ragnar being easier than from Gandhi?
Ya, that's right.
'Aggressive AI' game option is the ultimate worker stealing boost.


Ragnar vs. Gandhi would be about some of the more subtle points of Worker stealing.

Fast Workers are harder to catch since they move around farther and faster.
But Ragnar is more likely to have a higher power ratio with cheap barracks and the desire to pursue military tech.
He also will have more units wandering around to kill and achieve war success that have a bit higher odds of attacking.

Huayna Capac has a very easy time stealing workers because Quechuas don't have to worry about being attacked by Archers as much as Warriors do and can threaten cities and get war success easily.

The Caesars also have an advantage because they can gift a cheap 67:hammers: city for a peace treaty no matter how bad the war is going as long as the AI has 3 cities or less.
If 4+ cities, the city for peace has to be within 9.5 tiles of their city.
Then after watching the AI build a road to that peace treaty city for 10 turns, war with unstoppable Praetorians to take back what is theirs.
 
Top Bottom