Successful Diplomacy Experiences?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Strategy & Tips' started by aimlessgun, Oct 29, 2010.

  1. dublos

    dublos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    15
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    I'm having trouble envisioning this.. at least in my few attempts at this all that caused was the settler would drop right where I intercepted them, I'd get pushed back one set of hexs and they start the next settler forward.

    Could you provide some screen shots /play by play of this settler blocking process? (Speech bubbles optional but greatly encourged)
     
  2. ChevalierdeJstn

    ChevalierdeJstn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    I've seen successful settler-blocking discussed in other threads as well. Have not tried it myself.
     
  3. neilkaz

    neilkaz King

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    980
    Location:
    Chicago Suburbs
    When I continued from this save, turn 225 out of 500, I was unable to get any pacts with Alex, noting that our war had ended around turn 200 when he got bored of not sending units to die for about 50 turns and I adjusted his deal to give him 117 gold and furs (I have several). I played on a couple dozen turns, consolidating and teching and Darius DOW'd me on turn 252 !!

    :rolleyes: LOL at how the AI computes military strengths. I thought I was going to die badly noting that Darius supposedly had more troop strength than even Alex and a scouting tour of Alex's lands with a gifted scout (Almaty has normally been more generous and helpful) showed many units all over the place, making my scouting problematic. Yet I've cut through Persian lands like a knife through butter. He took one of my border cities but couldn't hold it while I've taken a couple large cities from him as well as Persopolis and its many wonders and now it is turn 260, and LOL Alex and Ghandi DOW'd me a couple turns prior even though we share no common borders with a couple Persian cities in between. Ghandi has sent one unit to its quick death, but nothing Greek has been seen yet, but I am wary and think I should just consolidate these gains and make sure to hold Persopolis noting there don't seem to be many Persian units near it. I now expect to win this game as long as I don't overreach too quickly with some costly military blunders.

    I assumed that the AI looked at quantity of troops when computing military rankings but perhaps it also considers the units' power? Anyhow, I quickly upgraded about a dozen units when Darius DOW'd.

    Back to my original query, I reloaded the save from turn 225 a few times, and 400 gold is a sufficient bribe to get either Alex or Darius to go to war, but there seems no way to
    get either Harun (weaker than Persia and Greece) or Ghandi to go to war.

    This first game on Immortal has been quite the learning experience for me as the AI civs build up considerably quicker and larger than on Emperor and have clearly larger armies as well.

    .. neilkaz ..
     
  4. DaveGold

    DaveGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,058
    Am I right in thinking there's no way to cancel pacts of secrecy at the moment?

    I've just played a game where Catherine got annoyed with me for no obvious reason and she started cancelling all our pacts. It was only then that I realised that we'd had pacts of secrecy against all the remaining players. Since I don't exactly what the pacts do I can only guess at whether we followed them or not, but I'm guessing we both broke all of them.
     
  5. stormerne

    stormerne is just a Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2001
    Messages:
    3,428
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    the United States
    @aimlessgun:

    What difficulty levels do you find this works for? All, or just the higher ones? In any case, it seems fascinating and I think I'll give it a go.

    Till now I've just PoC with the strongest civ, gone PoS with them against the weakest ones, and refused OB to everyone. It's crude, simple and boring, but it's effective, and has sometimes kept me friends with the most dangerous competitors throughout the whole game - no, really! :) But this sounds less boring and more fun. :mischief:

    It gives a new meaning to the term "puppet state"! :lol:
     
  6. aimlessgun

    aimlessgun King

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    782
    Well, you have to figure out where the settler is going first. This can be tricky. The best way is to take note of the 'recommended' locations for your own settlers while they move around. But usually you can tell the AI wants to settle next to a resource, and they strongly prefer right next to a resource (never never on a resource though).

    You have to start blocking them before they get to the intended target. There are 2 ways to block:

    1: camping on the tile directly. This only takes 1 unit, but it only holds them off for a few turns. After staring at your unit for a while, they will choose the next spot and settle, and it's really hard to anticipate where this will be in time.

    2: get 3 guys and make a wall before they get to the spot. Units only have 2 movement, and civilians can't move through your guys, so 3 guys is enough to make a moving wall that will block them forever (in my experience they will just move back and forth).


    In this screenshot they want to get to a position to settle next to some cotton to the left of the shot (which I've already claimed culturally after blocking them for 60 turns. Don't think for a second that just because you claimed the resource they were going for that the AI will change its settling location. They will absolutely settle a junk city right next to your cultural border).

    You might ask why they don't settle next to that marble instead. Probably because they planned for a spot that would get my cotton and then expand back to the marble. Since that spot is still technically 'open' they will chase it forever.

    This method is a lot better because the Ai doesn't realize they are permablocked, and will keep trying to settle at that spot forever, without choosing a new location. It also feels incredibly cheesy and exploitive, and you have to move 2 units every single turn to keep the blockade up (really tedious).
     
  7. aimlessgun

    aimlessgun King

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    782
    I don't have much experience except on deity. Also I've definitely had some failures getting the hang of it.

    Your plan sounds solid. It does seem almost gauranteed to create a runaway Ai though. Also the strongest civ is by no means going to like you every game!

    The diplomacy is interesting though because every game presents a new challenge and situation.
     
  8. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    While it's true that we can only ever guess at what's really happening with the AI on the diplomacy front, I definitely get strong impressions based on little clues that get dropped throughout the game.

    For instance, in the game I described on page 1 (which I ended up losing last night), Rome went from being a very involved trading and pact partner to a very lofty, arms length approach. This changed shortly after he made peace with France and cancelled our defensive pact very early on in my war with Napo.

    Also, as it turns out, France *was* sending units over to that one tiny remote city on the opposite side of my empire from his main territory. When I finally took that city, he stopped sending workers (so I stopped capturing/deleting them), and peace followed shortly thereafter.

    In the end of the game, as Catherine was zeroing in on a space race and I was teching faster and faster (500+ science), she started becoming increasingly belligerent, and its quite clear that she was the impetus behind the 3-civ pile on (France, Germany, and Russia) that occurred within the last 20 turns, even though she never sent a single unit to my territory. So, now I was back to trading units with France (who was working towards a cultural victory with 3+ policy trees completed 20 turns before the end). Once again, France and I were slowed down in a war that strongly benefited other civs on the map.

    Meanwhile, Rome stayed far above the fray, ultimately pulling off a time victory. From the time he made peace and bailed on our pacts until Catherine DoW'd me, I had the very odd feeling that Augustus was pulling a lot of strings via PoSs. Obviously I can't prove this, but at the very least, he made a very wise move by staying out of the Iro-Franco war, which kept me and France occupied for hundreds of years.

    So, while it's true that details are few and far between, AI attitude, willingness to cooperate or not, etc., lead to some impressions (some strong, some quite vague) about one's "standing" amongst the world of civs. I kind of like that. I suspect that's often the best a real nation can expect.

    At any rate, the game was extremely enjoyable, albeit with a disappointing conclusion.

    edit: One more thing, I think I often forget about my PoSs, and I strongly suspect that I break them, anger my partners, and end up mystified by their belligerence or unwillingness to work with me in the future.
     
  9. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    :faint:

    if you are right, this is other issue where they decided to unlearn lessons from previous games. Civ Iv AI, being the dumb creature we all knew it was , atleast recalculated the setting spots every turn and if it was faced with a situation like the one above it would settle somewhere else as soon as the cotton was taken ( unless they thinked they could flip it , a thing that is not possible in civ V ;) )
     
  10. Bibor

    Bibor Doomsday Machine

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,980
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    I played enough games that I can guarantee you 100%, even without feedback, that the AI diplomacy attitude has a very reasonable logic behind it.The only difference (from my experience) from CIV4 is that there are no "hard" requirements for declaration of war (for example some civs couldn't declare at "friendly" in CIV4) and obviously some modifiers are missing.

    What's confusing ot most people is that AI diplomatic relations are not designed to trigger when a certain value is achieved, but rather to roll a die when a certain value is achieved. This is exactly as it was in CIV4. For example, if the civ was friendly to you, every turn there was a 20% he would declare, but 80% he wouldn't. You might get lucky, you might get unlucky. But even a 5% die roll chance of an AI becoming "hostile" to you can happen on the first turn it becomes available.

    Basically, as long as there are more valid tagets out there, the less likely high % rolls will be aimed at you. But it can still happen.

    Exact values are still very important.

    In my most recent game I had the whole world (6 civs!) declare at me simultaneously. Why? Two reasons:
    - triple penalty (attacking a civ, attacking a weak civ (re-declared), killed of a leader)
    - no other civilization had such penalties with each other

    It seems that the AIs distribute "sins" among other CIVs and assign a % value to every civ based on it. Considering I was the only sinner, 100% of 100% was assigned to me. Easy roll :)

    Actually, now that I think of it, it might work just as the "attack table" used to work in WoW ages ago. Certain numeric values (or events) push some options from the table.

    That table probably looks something like this:
    -2 declare war
    -1 become hostile
    +0 do nothing / pact of secrecy
    +1 research agreement / fair trade
    +2 pact of cooperation

    So the initial panel (start of the game) would look like (rolled for every turn):
    50% do nothing / pact of secrecy
    30% research agreement
    20% pact of cooperation

    And lets say settling near borders is worth -1, so the whole table gets pushed down:
    50% become hostile
    30% do nothing / pact of secrecy
    20% research agreement / fair trade

    Pact of cooperation gets canceled (and stops being an option) and "hostile" enters the roll table.

    It also seems that some negative penalties go away after a while. This is why people who declare often get into a very deep diplomatic pit from which its hard co crawl out.
     
  11. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    Heh...maybe the end of the game pile on was more because I DoW'd Siam completely out of the blue to take their last city than because Cathy was worried I'd overtake her.

    edit: It's also interesting that Cathy, Rome, and Bismark all complained of my "war mongering" whenever I'd go on the offensive (take and sometimes raze cities) in the war that France utterly refused to end. I think a lot of people would consider this "broken" AI diplo, but on the flip side, during turns when I was holding defensive positions away from the border, their attitudes would soften a bit.
     
  12. Paeanblack

    Paeanblack Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    518
    http://www.sacklunch.net/wwi/2.html
     
  13. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,899
    :lol::lol::lol:
     
  14. Bibor

    Bibor Doomsday Machine

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,980
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Yeah, politicians took mutual protection pacts very seriously in those days. These met in Serbia and Bulgaria IIRC, hence Balkans got the nickname "Powder keg of Europe".
     
  15. troytheface

    troytheface Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,262
    as the greatest diplomacy master of all time the finesse and bartering abilities and instances are far to many to mention

    suffice to say that the outcome is determined by mood

    the evidence is clear-Ambassador of the New Tommorrow
     
  16. ChevalierdeJstn

    ChevalierdeJstn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    Thanks for all the great testing/research Bibor and others. Makes me want to try a "pacifist Ghandi" game implementing some of the diplomacy tactics you folks have tried and see what happens...
     
  17. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    Recent Game
    OK, I'm having increasing success with the AI, it would seem. In a recent game as France (King, Continents, Standard settings), I engaged in two very short wars with Songhai rather early on. Askia had settled right in the heart of my prospective lands and after antagonizing him for many turns so I wouldn't be the aggressor, I gave in and DoW'd. Once I had the city (took two wars because it had very high defense and I needed swords/muskets), I sued for peace and never went to war again for the rest of the game. Once I met Siam about mid-game, I managed to forge a Defensive Pact that was renewed repeatedly until Siam launched for a space race win. In all, it was a pretty weak showing for me, with the diplo success being the only positive aspect.

    Current Game
    My current game (Askia on Prince, Continents, Standard) is *much* more interesting and tricky diplomatically, but all in all, I think I've managed things quite well (although I think I'll again lose my culture-win bid to a Darius space race). Here's the scene (a bit detailed, but it truly feels like an intricate, interwoven web, with each fiber being critical to how this has all played out):

    Me, Monty, Wu, Suleiman, and Rome occupy a mid-large continent, and we're pretty evenly distributed (i.e., equidistant from one another). My starting location is in the heart of some *fantastic* terrain on multiple levels, but especially defense wise. To the west and south lay the sea. There are great choke points all over the place in the northeast of my core empire, with an eastern buffer of three tiles of marsh, then a river, then a maze of mountain ridges (Maze Mountains?), then Seoul, and then a vast desert in the center of the continent all buffering my northern-most city from attack from the east. Edinburgh is due north of that city, with a large sea inlet north of them. The entirety of my core empire’s eastern border is flanked by a long mountain range (which extends south from the marshlands to the north - Eastern Mountains?). The southeast border is the most “exposed,” with a 2 - 3 tile-thick range of hills extending south and east from the southern edge of the Eastern Mountains on my original eastern border.

    OK, so Rome starts to my north. Sully starts due east of me on an inland sea in the heart of the continent. Wu is in the far northeast, and Monty starts to my southeast, more or less directly south of Sully.

    Sully of course wastes absolutely no time before plopping a settler right in the heart of my prospective lands (just like Askia did to me in my last game...and now I'm Askia...coincidence?! ;)). I ask him not to settle near me, but he basically laughs in my face and plop goes the city. So, I warrior rush him, take it, make for his capital, and then ask for peace once I'm in place for the final assault. He accepts, and peace reigns for awhile.

    Fast forward a ways, and now I have swords with Chivalry on the way (I think this might actually be important). Rome has warred a little with Wu to his east and has also expanded rather quickly to the south, and now has a desert-encompassed city with river/flood plains due east of Seoul. Next thing I know, Rome DoW's and moves west through Seoul's territory and the Maze Mountains only to cross the river into the marshlands east of my northeastern city. My archers tear his units to pieces and my horseman and swords clean up any stragglers. Rome offers a cushy peace settlement and on we go.

    Fast forward again: I have Steel and Mandekalu, with Gunpowder on the way. Rome DoW's again (really starting to think the AI is anticipating the effects of militarily-significant techs), this time bringing a rather anemic Sully along with him. I take Istanbul and another of Sully's cities, the second one being on the inland sea due east of the Eastern Mountains. It also happens to be directly south of Rome's desert floodplains city. As a result, Rome asks for peace when I take that second Ottoman city, but I'm sick of his aggressiveness, so I take his desert outpost (actually a nice location), and then get another cushy peace deal. Awesome.

    All this time, by the way, Wu and Monty have been keeping everyone at arm's length and staying out of the fray, although Monty is starting to get more belligerent around this time (I suspect due to a PoS and/or PoC with Rome). When the Songhai-Roman-Ottoman war is over, however, Wu dives in, taking the last two remaining Ottoman cities. A period of relative peace then settles over the continent, and I start laying some diplomatic groundwork aimed at preventing further wars. I secure pacts of secrecy with Rome, Wu, and Monty against one another, except Monty wouldn't go for one against Rome. I'm then able to trade with each without seeming to upset the others (Monty being left out so I don't annoy Rome).

    Well, go figure that as I am researching Rifling, Rome comes back for more, bringing Monty along with him. This is actually very bad news, because I have my army split between the city I captured from Rome and a new city I founded near Monty's northwestern border. I managed to hold off Rome for quite a long time with a catapault, archers, Mandekalu, and a couple longswords, but ultimately they managed to surround and overwhelm the city (via quite competent use of pikeman, longswords, knights, archers). Meanwhile, in the south, the hills are really helping me on defense. It gets dicey, but I hold on, upgrade a longsword to a rifleman, drop a citadel on the border, and Monty eventually gives up. Around the same time I bulb chemistry, purchase a cannon, a rifle gets produced, I upgrade another longsword, and bring the rifle from Monty's border up to the city Rome had just recaptured. It's not long before I have that city back and secure yet another cushy peace deal from Rome. I’d like to note here that only once, during the early phase of that last war, were my goals as a builder in anyway affected by war. The topographical features make my strongest cities almost utterly unassailable, and so, other than needing to crank out units to replace those lost in defense of Rome’s old city, my core empire has been essentially unscathed by war since the outset.

    OK, anyway, now is when the diplo success really starts to get rolling. Once this war is over Monty is looking a bit like a whipped dog, but he’s dropping hints. “Your empire is famed for its strong economy…perhaps someday you’ll share your secrets…”. I take this as a cue, and as soon as I have the money, I offer a PoS against Rome and an RA. He bites. Cool. I visit the other leaders again, and this time I actually manage to get a PoS from each against the other two. A little while later, I get Monty to DoW Rome. It doesn’t last long, but then Wu and Monty go to war, and Monty starts to get the upper hand. I start to fear that I’ll lose continental supremacy, so I put feelers out to Rome to see if they’re interested in more war. They are, for the price of some of my abundant Gems (I have 7 sources). Fantastic! So, now all of the other civs on the continent are at war.

    Enter Darius and Ghengis. There’s not too much to say about them, other than that Darius is a freaking behemoth (I’ll probably lose to his space race bid), and that *both* are all too happy to maintain ongoing defensive pacts and RAs. As soon as I set these up, Rome becomes visibly disgruntled in all our dealings. I love it. He used to talk about his plans for world domination, and now he just shakes his head bitterly when he sees me. :lol: At one point he tried to get me into war with Wu, I said, “give me 10 turns,” then bailed, but he seems to feel powerless to do anything, lest he go to war with the two massive empires across the sea. So, as it sits, there is a continental war going on that consumes everyone but me. I may have to jump in to slow Monty down a bit, but that would be a bit counter to my diplo strategy, so I’m a little hesitant. I don’t think he could be beat me in anyway other than score/time, so I’m not sure it’s worth it.

    Anyway, I consider this successful, because I feel as though I was able to manipulate a map full of aggressors into refocusing their aggression from me to each other, and then reinforce that situation by being the first to find and make diplo inroads with the new world.
     
  18. Gnollguy

    Gnollguy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    I've run a few games where I will only trade resources, I won't accept any PoS or PoC and I won't go to war if someone asks me too. I will always accept an Open Borders if offered. If I get an angry response for something I'll say, I'm sorry this hurt our relations and then try a trade a turn or two later. Those games actually seem to go pretty well. Some of these games I've been top dog militarily and some of them I've been on the bottom, but I've only been DoW'd on once in the last 3 games. Now keep in mind the last 3 games, which are the ones I recall the best, I was going for time, then culture, then space victories to get the silly steam achieves. All 3 of those conditions will allow you to play with smaller empires that don't bother other folks so I didn't war much. I did take over my continent on standard map before I met the other continent but I was still trading with the other civs on mine, even though I DoW'd.

    I actually suspect that PoC's do have some negative effects. If you PoC with someone that someone else doesn't like I think you take a hit for that. If you break a PoC by not going to war when they ask or signing a research agreement with someone they don't like I think you take a hit. It feels like in the games where I just try to play the Swiss, "Hey I'm neutral, but I'll take your money, sure" that trading is a lot simpler and yes at times I'll give up two different luxuries just to get one because they are a little upset with me (I recently expanded or I bought a CS that they were friends with or I just DoW'd someone else).

    But it seems to work as I expect. They seem to treat me like someone who likes to keep to himself politically but is open economically and the relations stay pretty neutral.

    Dunno. I've also been successful with start a PoC and sticking with it the whole game and doing whatever they asked. I even asked them for a gift once when I screwed up and needed some extra cash and they agreed. Every other civ hated me and I got DoW'd a few times, but I kept my ally.

    In Civ IV I could make myself friends with everyone. You can't do that in Civ V and that is fine with me. You can stay neutral with everyone you can be friends with a few but then enemies with a few and that makes sense to me too. I actually get DoW'd less "out of the blue" than I did in Civ IV. It always bothered me that someone that I had +4 or +5 relations with in Civ IV and had had for centuries would just attack me. Every DoW that has happened to me in Civ V I've understood why.

    Call me crazy. :)
     
  19. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    Interesting stuff regarding PoC's. Mind if I pull those thoughts into a diplomacy strategy article I'm working on?
     

Share This Page