Peace - means nothing?
- Thread starter Zambaku
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,316
And by that do you mean to say you'd never do the same thing to a poor, unsuspecting AI?
The AI may not be very good at tactics, and it may not make the best choices for infrastructure improvements or even the best choices in war, but leaving your borders underdefended for too long is asking to be invaded.And really, what better way to fool your enemy than pretending to ally with them? Germany aligned with the Soviet Union against Poland, only to turn around and backstab them. My friends have "aligned" with me in strategy board games only to prove to be filthy liars (granted, sometimes they actually are allies - have to play the honest one sometimes if anyone's to trust you in the long term). They pulled a fast one on you, and even if it wasn't actually intentional in the algorithm (only Firaxis knows that), the AI is sly enough to not always be true to agreements.
MPPs are usually bad choices if you want peace. If you want to drag several AIs into war, however, they can be used to your advantage, even without breaking your reputation. Just sign one with the AI's you want to drag into war (preferably near your border), declare war on the other AI's (preferably not on your border, but on the other AI's border) you want to be in on the war, and park a poorly-defending unit just outside the far-away AI's borders. They'll attack it, invoking the MPP, and the two (or more
) AI's will be in a big gun-slinging war, while if you played it right, you'll have to worry about the odd convoy at most. After 20 turns, make peace. It might cost you a little, but the AIs will keep fighting, destroying their democracy and thus science, and draining all their resources. Certainly not risk-free, but used correctly, MPPs can be very beneficial. Just don't sign them for the "defensive" value unless you really need the defence (and your ally would be forced to defend you from your likely enemy - i.e. they separate you from your enemy) and/or can afford a war if it does come up.Right of passage, I use somewhat liberally. In general it helps AI relations, which at least supposedly garners you better trades. I also use it to give one AI an edge against another in wars where they must cross my territory to reach each other (while not leaving the cities along their path unguarded of course). On the other hand, there is an inherent risk (especially after railroads). And I find them generally disadvantageous when the AI is just using them to move settlers across my land. But there's a time to use them, too.
The AI is very reckless in declaring war, nothing can stop them
gpt usually helps but aometimes even it fails because if they see an undefended snatchable worker they will go for it despite gpt. ROP are raped many times for the most slim gains. Army strength also isn't working. Too much time I was sneak-attacked by some two logbowman units while having tanks and general balance of power more then 3:1 to my favor. The most extreme case was being attacked by 2 city civ against mine 25 cities. Half era tech lead, ROP AND gpt given to them (on monarch)
gpt usually helps but aometimes even it fails because if they see an undefended snatchable worker they will go for it despite gpt. ROP are raped many times for the most slim gains. Army strength also isn't working. Too much time I was sneak-attacked by some two logbowman units while having tanks and general balance of power more then 3:1 to my favor. The most extreme case was being attacked by 2 city civ against mine 25 cities. Half era tech lead, ROP AND gpt given to them (on monarch)
Krunchyman
Chieftain
Sometimes civilizations might attack you at the end of the game if they know you're winning or will win. I once played the middle ages scenario and did fairly good, strengthening my civ while keeping peace with my allies, and making sure my enemies were under control. Near the end, every civ clearly knew that I was going to win the game. So they ganged up on me and at one point, I was at war with 3 civs. Even my best allies suddenly got annoyed or furious with me. Make sure you have a strong foothold against your rivals during your endgame.
I very seldom use them either. I've given up on RoP - there's a giant AI conspiracy that everybody should ROP-rape the player and nobody cares in their diplomacy.
Quintillus makes some nice points about abusing MPP. As he said, if you're going for a peaceful victory, all of your objections hold. Only sign them if you want to get dragged into some war and have an "ally". Never trust the AI, though. They like to drag you into a war and then make peace and leave you holding the bag.
This is exactly where a MPP could be useful. If you know they're about to declare on you, and you get MPPs signed with everyone else, then when they attack you they dogpile the other civ instead of you. I rarely sign them, but this is exactly the time I would.
Hellfiredoom
Warlord
I've only given ROP one time. It was quite some time ago, so don't remember which Civ it was, but I had them cornered on the end of a peninsula. They were sizable otherwise I would have attacked them. Anyhoo, I had two Civs DOW on me, I gave the cornered Civ ROP and paid them to MA on the other two Civs. It actually worked out well and they never did stab me in the back. We teamed up for the destruction of several other Civs before I finally had to play the bad guy and use the ROP to set stacks next to their cities and then nuked them. 
