Underhanded Computer Strategy??

[camens]

OK, this is a move that I just encountered and it frustrated me and I can't figure out how to stop the computer. It's not a serious thing, I just wanted to stop it!!! Anyways, heres the situation:

I'm playing on a huge map and encountered a large jungle area. I wanted to control the entire jungle area because of potential resources. I couldn't afford to create to many cities within this jungle area, so I strategically placed them on the outward areas of the jungle, with the intention of clearing the jungle and placing additional cities a bit down the road. I was trying to keep the computer (American's in this case) from establishing any cities in this jungle area by controlling the outskirts and keeping the other civs from entering my territory.

Well sure enough the Americans approached with a horsemen and settler. My cultural border was 4 squares deep this early in the game. Upon his movement into my territory I asked him to leave. Well as expected, he said he would. Next turn he hadn't left yet, so I told him again. Same reponse, he said he would but never left. Well on the 3rd turn the option was move or war, but by this time he was closer to the middle of the jungle (which my cultural border hadn't expanded to) and he automatically moved to that area instead of out!! The little bugger!! I thought that the first request would be go, and the 2nd would be go or war! But the computer, requiring 3 moves to get close to the other border wouldn't give me that option on the 2nd request!

Now, this is not an AI complaint or a huge problem, but I wanted to know the actual computer guideline here, or if somebody knew how to stop it.

Sorry for the long one, but any suggestions??

 

[Badluck]

let them build citie for you while you grow.. kill all those citi with only 1 spearman inside since they are not connected to there citi and they is a lot of jungle..

 

[Greadius]

If you build up the cities surounding it, and NEVER build a road that can connect that city to the outside world it should culture flip in no time.

Or just go to war over it, if its oppertune.
Usually if an enemy moves a unit within attack radius of a city you can que the "Leave now or declare war", perhaps if you reloaded and strategically placed units to force him to go near the city.

Or better yet, place obsolete units in those squares.

 

[Cunobelin Of Hippo]

Beat the snot out of him I say The AI doesn't like to listen when it comes to removing their settlers from your land, so you've got to do it with force/ridiculously high culture to swamp him.

 

[camens]

I did reload and tried to 'influence' there movement with my units, but I didn't have enough units that could make it over there in time.

I like the idea of keeping them unconnected to the rest of the world to initiate a culture flip. I will definitely do that.

Unfortunately I don't expect a war to be viable for a little while, especially against the American strength they have made all to clear.

So is the 'move or war' option related to proximity to a city? I didn't know that.

 

[Zouave]

I once had seven rival civ's workers roaming around my territory blocking my movement and refusing to leave - what should be an act of war. But no doubt, if I attacked I'd be labelled a 'warmonger" forever. No, we never got to the "leave or declare war" option.

I've also had to tell a stack of ten Indian war elephants to get out of my territory fifteen turns in a row. They complied each and every tedious time I repeated myself. But back they came next turn!!

That, and the settler diarhhea, irritates me to no end.

With 1.17, the AI has gotten so dumb it now sends those settler/military pairs right into my territory if there is an open patch of land due to a razed city. And they do that even if we are at war and I have two dozen military units within a few tiles!! I destroy one pair and ANOTHER shows up also ready to also commit suicide.

This is a "challenge"??


That crazy AI.:crazyeyes

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Zouave

With 1.17, the AI has gotten so dumb it now sends those settler/military pairs right into my territory if there is an open patch of land due to a razed city. And they do that even if we are at war and I have two dozen military units within a few tiles!! I destroy one pair and ANOTHER shows up also ready to also commit suicide.

they jsut build more settlers in 1.17 so se that all the time, but it was there before...

I also got asked to Leave Or War when I was only 1 square dee in enemy territory, 2 squares from any city.

 

[Greadius]

Now that I've seen it brought up here, I can't think of a single reason to ask someone to leave without declaring war. I suppose if it was a trusted ally that was just passing through (I won't sign ROP) I wouldn't ask them to leave, but what motivation does a PLAYER have to diplomatically ask them to leave. If we want them gone, we want them gone NOW!

I just have a hard time concieving of an army marching into a modern nation and being politely asked to leave without the threat of hostility.

 

[Grey Knight]

Having gotten a "leave now or declare WAR!" on my first turn of an "incursion" (and it was a non-military unit, no less), something is obviously not right.

Having both options would be nice!

Cheers,
Shawn

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Zouave

With 1.17, the AI has gotten so dumb it now sends those settler/military pairs right into my territory if there is an open patch of land due to a razed city. And they do that even if we are at war and I have two dozen military units within a few tiles!! I destroy one pair and ANOTHER shows up also ready to also commit suicide.

I thought this was toned down in the first patch. I remember having to block a settler/escort from every civ on the continent from moving through my territory at all times until my borders filled in. I do agree it is rather stupid for them to send a settler defended by only one defensive unit through their territory. I wonder if this means they will not attack settler/escort pairs moving in their territory.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by eyrei


I thought this was toned down in the first patch. I remember having to block a settler/escort from every civ on the continent from moving through my territory at all times until my borders filled in. I do agree it is rather stupid for them to send a settler defended by only one defensive unit through their territory. I wonder if this means they will not attack settler/escort pairs moving in their territory.

It was toned down by lowering settler production priority, thus slowing landgrabbing. But now it`s back up again - perhaps the new tech thing leads to different priority values for military units and cultural buildings?????

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Killer


It was toned down by lowering settler production priority, thus slowing landgrabbing. But now it`s back up again - perhaps the new tech thing leads to different priority values for military units and cultural buildings?????

I hadn't noticed an increase with 1.17. Maybe this is because I have become significantly better at land grabbing myself.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by eyrei


I hadn't noticed an increase with 1.17. Maybe this is because I have become significantly better at land grabbing myself.

IIRC you aren`t much of a warmonger - true? That might be part of it. Also, the bigger the map, the fewer you`ll see of those settlers. When it`s real tight, the AI sometimes sends 3 or 4 settlers into a warzone where there`s only one place to build a city.....

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Killer


IIRC you aren`t much of a warmonger - true? That might be part of it. Also, the bigger the map, the fewer you`ll see of those settlers. When it`s real tight, the AI sometimes sends 3 or 4 settlers into a warzone where there`s only one place to build a city.....

True that I am not much of a war monger (unless its necessary), but I don't really see what that has to do with it. You are probably right about map size though. I almost always play on a large or huge map, though these are often quite crowded because of the number of civs.

 

[loki]

By carefully studying the military advisor, I have seen the AI usually does not produce settlers when all the land is taken. However, they may have "left over" settlers which were built earlier to plant a city in a good spot which was taken by another civ.
As soon as there is an opportunity to create a new city (spots razed after war), the AI will send those left over settlers to fill the gap. this may explain the somewhat irrational AI behaviour regarding warfield settlers.

loki

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by eyrei


True that I am not much of a war monger (unless its necessary), but I don't really see what that has to do with it. You are probably right about map size though. I almost always play on a large or huge map, though these are often quite crowded because of the number of civs.

the AI keeps producing settlers for each open spot, even if it can`t reach it. A settler underway - even if he will surely fail - doesn`t count for the new open location. So prolonged wars with their quickly shifting borders make for huge settler production. Sometimes you can see that very clearly with the multi-cheat: as soon as the first city falls, all AI on the continent start at least one settler ASAP.....

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Killer

the AI keeps producing settlers for each open spot, even if it can`t reach it. A settler underway - even if he will surely fail - doesn`t count for the new open location. So prolonged wars with their quickly shifting borders make for huge settler production. Sometimes you can see that very clearly with the multi-cheat: as soon as the first city falls, all AI on the continent start at least one settler ASAP.....

I actually do the same thing if the city that was razed was near my borders. This is one of the ways I peacefully expand. Recently, I have started keeping a settler on hand for this occasion.

 

[Umask077]

1: The blockade. I Move a few horsemen or other fast unit between them and there desitnation and they go away.

2: I use hidden nationality ground units. Assassin, Bandit, Spec ops team. They die and no war although it does annoy the computer oppenent it doesnt make you a warmongerer.

 

[loki]

Originally posted by eyrei

I actually do the same thing if the city that was razed was near my borders. This is one of the ways I peacefully expand. Recently, I have started keeping a settler on hand for this occasion.

Just admit it, you are The Civ3 AI posting
No human can post so many times a day, while actually playing too!
Now, tell me how much you love producing longbowmen

loki

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by loki

Just admit it, you are The Civ3 AI posting
No human can post so many times a day, while actually playing too!
Now, tell me how much you love producing longbowmen

loki

Unfortunately, I am at work. While I obviously have nothing to do, I cannot get away with playing civ3 in my cubicle.

I have learned a few things from the AI. Like keeping a settler on hand, keeping track of trade agreements, keeping a large standing military, etc.

I have only once produced longbowmen, and that was because I did not have any way of getting horses, and I was at war.