They want peace and a tech?

[Bobv13]

Why is that the AI insists on getting an tech with it's peace deals when I've been kicking it's butt. I am clearly the stronger civ, he is loosing more troops and land but he wants a tech in the deal. When I insist on a tech he can be down to his last city and say no! (I was going to crush him like the bot he is any way but I want to strip him of his pride in the process .)

 

[sercer88]

Hmm, have you searched in the Strategy and Tips forum to know when an AI knows it's beat? Otherwise, I'm guessing there must be SOMEthing that the AI knows about you that you are overlooking.

 

[PaperBeetle]

Do either of you have allies? If you have an ally who is getting pounded, or if your enemy has an ally who is still strong, they might be getting factored into the offer.
Also, the subject of "peace rep" is one which is not well understood. There is an article in the War Academy which states that there is no such thing, but that is contrary to my observations at least. I believe that if you have previously broken peace deals within their 20 turn tenure, the value of your peace offer will decrease. It's all anecdotal though, I don't know the reason for sure.

 

[gmaharriet]

When you approach them for peace, are you using:

1. Our troops are threatening your cities and you'd better give up? (I'm paraphrasing the words, because I never use this method. )

2. We seem to have overextended ourselves and want to discuss peace.

Type 1 doesn't seem to work as well. It insults them when they're already furious, and they seem to offer less in a peace deal.

Type 2 will bring up the screen for straight-up peace, but there is also an option of "Will you listen to our counter offer?", in which you can ask for more from them. My experience has been that they seem to be more generous when you ask nicely.

 

[Bobv13]

I generally start by selecting "I'd like to propose a deal"

 

[Jazzmail]

me too.
the neutral response appears to be best. That takes you directly to the barter screen, which is what you wanted.

 

[gmaharriet]

I generally start by selecting "I'd like to propose a deal"

Maybe I'm misremembering something, but I'd swear that option is not always there when I want peace. It's a bit like the "Leave or Declare" option that sometimes isn't there, and all you can do is ask a civ to leave politely.

 

[sercer88]

gma: I'm pretty sure you have 4 options when you contact a leader with whom you are at war.
1)"our troops are approaching your cities"
2)"what would it take for peace?"
3)"we would like to propose a deal"
4)"Farewell"

 

[JDAllison]

I second that. I almost never use anything except "propose a deal" because I want the most leverage I can get.

 

[Jazzmail]

I second that. I almost never use anything except "propose a deal" because I want the most leverage I can get.

I doubt you get any more leverage out of options 1 or 2. I wonder if anyone has even bothered to try and measure the difference somehow.

 

[JDAllison]

I doubt you get any more leverage out of options 1 or 2. I wonder if anyone has even bothered to try and measure the difference somehow.

Fascinating. I will be willing to try, but it'll have to wait until Monday. Anyone else wanna take it, then go for it.

 

[Jazzmail]

I'm still not sure of the best method how to do it.

Obviously the target AI would need alot of cash and some new techs. Prolly some size 1 and 2 towns aswell, to see how far we can go demanding.

The problem is we need to wage a succesful war for atleast 10 turns, which may change our parameters. Gold being the variable most likely altered during the war.

 

[JDAllison]

Is there a way to set up a scenario where the AI is gifted a set amount of gold every turn? Also, what if there was an MP game set up, where human 1 goes to war with the AI and human 2 stays out of it. On the eleventh turn of the war, Human 2 gifts the AI some gold and tech, and then Human 1 sues for peace. Or something like that. I'll think about it this weekend and see what I can come up with.

EDIT: I just thought of something. I wonder if the amount of gold/tech/cities has anything to do with their willingness to give you lots of stuff in exchange for peace. IOW, an AI civ that has a lot of gold might be more willing (or less willing) to give it to you in exchange for a peace treaty. Something else to consider, IMHO.

 

[sercer88]

Is there a way to set up a scenario where the AI is gifted a set amount of gold every turn? Also, what if there was an MP game set up, where human 1 goes to war with the AI and human 2 stays out of it. On the eleventh turn of the war, Human 2 gifts the AI some gold and tech, and then Human 1 sues for peace. Or something like that. I'll think about it this weekend and see what I can come up with.

why would you do this?? Why not just have Human 2 give the Human 1 the gold and techs??

 

[Rodrig0]

sercer88
Because they want to test if the AI will be more willing to sue peace for money, if it had more. But because at war AI is usually $$$ broken, the human player would give the AI money so the other human player can demand more gold for peace.

 

[sercer88]

sercer88
Because they want to test if the AI will be more willing to sue peace for money, if it had more. But because at war AI is usually $$$ broken, the human player would give the AI money so the other human player can demand more gold for peace.

Oh, I see, now.

 

[Aabraxan]

gma: I'm pretty sure you have 4 options when you contact a leader with whom you are at war.
1)"our troops are approaching your cities"
2)"what would it take for peace?"
3)"we would like to propose a deal"
4)"Farewell"

There's also "We appear to have overextended ourselves," isn't there?

 

[JDAllison]

There's also "We appear to have overextended ourselves," isn't there?

That's what sercer meant with no. 2 on the list. It's just a paraphrase.

EDIT: I am sorry, sercer, I misread the quote and thought that gmaharriet had posted that list. My mistake!

 

[JDAllison]

Due to a friend's illness, I will not be able to conduct research on this today like I'd planned. She underwent emergency brain surgery yesterday morning and the doctors removed a blood clot "the size of a tangerine". I will probably be at the hospital with her husband until time to take my wife to the ENT doctor. Monday is supposed to be my day off, but so much for that, I guess. I'll try to get to it either tomorrow or Thursday. Oh rats, I just remembered I have an algebra exam tonight, too.

Anyway, if someone else wants to take a stab at it, go for it. My hypothesis is:

I. That the amount the human can gain from an AI civ in peace treaties is directly proportional to the amount of power the human civ has over the AI civ (as determined by the powergraph), along with the presence (or lack) of human units in AI territory, presence (or lack) of AI units in human territory, alliances, and number of techs human has in excess of the AI.

II. That choosing any of the three options in the "sue for peace" screen will not change the amount the human civ can gain from the AI civ in peace treaties
A. Provided the human player is >5% ahead on the powergraph and provision I is met
B. Unless the human civ is equal to or less than the AI civ on the powergraph, regardless of whether or not provision I is met

Seem clear as Greek? Good, because I took ancient Greek as my foreign language in high school. Seriously, if you need me to talk more clearly, let me know. Also, if I have missed the point of the research, let me know.

 

[AznWarlord]

I generally start by selecting "I'd like to propose a deal"

I like to start with threatening them. I don't enforce peace unless they are willing to give both peace AND something else. If they ask for peace only, it's a big fat no. I want to crush them until I can snag some tech and that only happens when they're begging for peace (basically take over some cities, raze some if they're too corrupt, and send a stack of doom right next to a key city).

If they ask for techs and peace, "Throw you caviar in their face!" (Krusty the Clown).