Request, loyal war

[3141592]

Would there be some way to use to Warscript to force a two civs to keep fighting if one just dragged you into it? In my current game Calbium(spelling) asked me to go to war withe Hippus. Two turns latter they declared peace. If it would be possible to force a civilization to stay in war at least ten turns after inviting you in that would be great.

 

[Grey Fox]

Sometimes they actually ask you to go to war BEFORE they go to war themselves.

 

[Joebasalt13]

Well there is the holy war spell; doesn't really fix what your talking about but I noticed that in the game I am playing and think it is cool.

Only problem is noone else has my religion so it don't do anything. ;(

 

[brainpan]

I happen to like that feature. It makes going to war a risky venture, as it should be.

 

[Jean Elcard]

If you bribe someone into war there maybe should be a chance, that the victim gets wind of who was the one doning it. I can't imagine he would be willed to make peace just two rounds later.

Btw, is it possible, if someone asks you to go to war against someone else and you choose to decline they react different? Varn for example was asking me every 5 turns to smash mahala togehter. Got -2 every time. Mahala was doing the same the other way around and nothing happened. Just a -1 the second time he asked.

 

[onedreamer]

I happen to like that feature. It makes going to war a risky venture, as it should be.

Actually the behavior of the AI is quite predictable. If they can win a war they won't ask you to join. If the situation is in stall they may ask you to join and they may very well continue the war. If they are losing a war, and they ask you to join, it's because they will have more chances that the enemy civ will agree to a peace treaty since they have a new opponent.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

When a player requests a war ally, the victim gets a "-1:You brought in a war ally against us"
Not sure if the same applies to the AI, though it should.

 

[Kael]

Actually the behavior of the AI is quite predictable. If they can win a war they won't ask you to join. If the situation is in stall they may ask you to join and they may very well continue the war. If they are losing a war, and they ask you to join, it's because they will have more chances that the enemy civ will agree to a peace treaty since they have a new opponent.

As human players don't we do the same thing?

 

[onedreamer]

we sure do ^^
I meant to say, don't join an AI in a war they're loosing hoping that they don't sneak out of the conflict !

 

[snarko]

Actually the behavior of the AI is quite predictable. If they can win a war they won't ask you to join. If the situation is in stall they may ask you to join and they may very well continue the war. If they are losing a war, and they ask you to join, it's because they will have more chances that the enemy civ will agree to a peace treaty since they have a new opponent.

There's no check for how well they are doing. It's random if they ask or not (with some restrictions, like not doing it too often).

 

[Gamestation]

There's no check for how well they are doing. It's random if they ask or not (with some restrictions, like not doing it too often).

Well there are the power charts and you could look at the scores... (and in case you did not know already, you can check those things while the AI is talking to you).

 

[snarko]

Well there are the power charts and you could look at the scores... (and in case you did not know already, you can check those things while the AI is talking to you).

What I meant was that the AI doesn't look at this or anything like this when deciding if they are going to ask you or not.

 

[subanark]

I think that if you were dragged into a war and later that civ signed a peace agreement, then you should too be able to ask for peace even if it was only one turn ago you were brought in.

 

[3141592]

I don't have a problem if someone asks you to go to war with someone they arn't at war with, than you don't expect them to join. But when they are at war it almost seems cheap for them to coup out so quickly.

 

[Gamestation]

What I meant was that the AI doesn't look at this or anything like this when deciding if they are going to ask you or not.

Yeah I guess I did misinterpret what you wrote before. I just thought you were saying that there is no way to tell how well an AI is going to do in a war so that you would know whether or not they will probably abandon you.

 

[onedreamer]

What I meant was that the AI doesn't look at this or anything like this when deciding if they are going to ask you or not.

I'm pretty sure I'm right. If it was really random, there would be a 50% chance that I'm wrong, instead if an AI is losing a war, and asks me to join them, it's guaranteed that they will sign a peace treaty just the turn after provided the enemies accept it. The only part that could be random is wether the winning AI accepts or not.

 

[TheBoatman]

Luckily the AI doesn't do my favourite trick of bribing someone to war only to backstab them.

 

[snarko]

I've looked at the code several times. The AI asking you to join a war is random. There is no check for how the war is going.

The AI has a chance of making peace for nothing with another AI. This is a 1 in X chance where X is the average of iMakePeaceRand for each leader in the team. There are more requirements, such as they must've been at war for over 20 turns.

Beyond that they also have their normal check. Here the X in the 1 in X chance is the leaders CONTACT_PEACE_TREATY. Both sides also have to find the offer acceptabled plus some more requirements, like the other leader being willing to talk. In the case of AI to AI negotiations acceptable means within 3/5th of how much they want.

 

[Blakmane]

The AI has a chance of making peace for nothing with another AI. This is a 1 in X chance where X is the average of iMakePeaceRand for each leader in the team. There are more requirements, such as they must've been at war for over 20 turns.

Maybe this should be edited out of the FFH code. It has the unfortunate side-effect of cutting otherwise massive confrontations short for no reason.

 

[onedreamer]

I've looked at the code several times. The AI asking you to join a war is random. There is no check for how the war is going.

The AI has a chance of making peace for nothing with another AI. This is a 1 in X chance where X is the average of iMakePeaceRand for each leader in the team. There are more requirements, such as they must've been at war for over 20 turns.

Beyond that they also have their normal check. Here the X in the 1 in X chance is the leaders CONTACT_PEACE_TREATY. Both sides also have to find the offer acceptabled plus some more requirements, like the other leader being willing to talk. In the case of AI to AI negotiations acceptable means within 3/5th of how much they want.

Yeah, I understood that you had looked at the code. But I had looked at the game, and the behavior of the AI is not what you described. A code can have unpredicted side effects for the writer, figures for someone who looks at it. As a matter of fact, I've seen wars between AIs last less than 20 turns.

edit: note that you probably missunderstood my words anyways. I wrote that "if the AI is losing a war, and asks me me to join them, it's guaranteed that they will sign a peace treaty just the turn after provided the enemies accept it". This is different from saying "If it is losing, the AI will ask me to join them just to break the "alliace" the turn after", which is what you seem to have interpreted.