why a civ can't be cool with a superpower?

[Jim Bro]

i noticed that the AI is at best guarded and at worst openly hostile to a superpower. they just can't get along with the strongs of this world. why is that? i want the others to be gracious sometimes. FIRAXIS PLZ FIX THE DIPLOMACY.

 

[bite]

Actually if you follow the Realist School of International Relations this is exactly what should happen in an international system. Other states will try to balance the Superpower by backing another power or forming together as a block to try and limit the power of the Superpower. If you want to talk about the realism of the game this is actually a good example to use of it getting it right.

 

[Jim Bro]

Actually if you follow the Realist School of International Relations this is exactly what should happen in an international system. Other states will try to balance the Superpower by backing another power or forming together as a block to try and limit the power of the Superpower. If you want to talk about the realism of the game this is actually a good example to use of it getting it right.

well i would say civ5 AI bends more towards macchiavelic and stupid than realist i mean if you're always nice with a small country you should expect them to love you 6000 years later not acting like a paranoid schizophrenic even if they seek to win.

it was funny in my game i gave 3 coals for 30 turn+money to Bismarck (the second strongest) to declare war against everyone else (i wasn't at war with them btw) and then 3 turns later he denouced me. yeah you should have think about it twice before declaring war against the world: dumbass

see those kind of stories are piling up and make me realize that diplomacy is totally a mess in this game: i don't think it's random. bismarck should have said like ok yeah you're my buddy we're the two bests we're partners but no he got into a deal and right after he denounced me because that's what the other civs do all the time no matter what the .... we do. he didn't regret the deal, he simply denounced me because he was angry to not be the champ. it doesn't make sense.

 

[shihuacao]

When you talk about realism, can you give me an example of small nations that loves their super power neighbors in real world?

 

[King Patrick]

well i would say civ5 AI bends more towards macchiavelic and stupid than realist i mean if you're always nice with a small country you should expect them to love you 6000 years later not acting like a paranoid schizophrenic even if they seek to win.

it was funny in my game i gave 3 coals for 30 turn+money to Bismarck (the second strongest) to declare war against everyone else (i wasn't at war with them btw) and then 3 turns later he denouced me. yeah you should have think about it twice before declaring war against the world: dumbass

see those kind of stories are piling up and make me realize that diplomacy is totally a mess in this game: i don't think it's random. bismarck should have said like ok yeah you're my buddy we're the two bests we're partners but no he got into a deal and right after he denounced me because that's what the other civs do all the time no matter what the .... we do. he didn't regret the deal, he simply denounced me because he was angry to not be the champ. it doesn't make sense.

You sold him 3 coal in return for declaring war on every other civ (how does that work, anyway? I've never seen that option.), and he should be your friend forever?

 

[Jim Bro]

You sold him 3 coal in return for declaring war on every other civ (how does that work, anyway? I've never seen that option.), and he should be your friend forever?

3 coals and a bit of money was his price for declaring war against everyone else. if the diplomacy was alright in this game, other civs would know what they're doing and wouldn't be angry at the superpower all the time. there is no way you can be a genuine friend in this game. if you're too strong, they'll hate you and if you're too weak, they'll prey on you. and they denounce all the time and there is no way to repair relationships...

 

[vincentz]

When you talk about realism, can you give me an example of small nations that loves their super power neighbors in real world?

Denmark pretty much loves their ally USA. We wouldnt do anything to harm them and vise versa. Other small nations have the same relationsship.

There were quite a few communist countries that loved their superpower USSR. (Im not talking about neighbourghs, but neither is the OP.)

 

[shihuacao]

I don't know about Denmark, but what you said about USSR is not true.

And I don't need to remind you of Charles De Gaulle Denounced US almost right after they saved his ass?

 

[jagdtigerciv]

Diplomacy is the real world is always based around the idea that we're not "playing" in a "controlled game" where there are "winners and losers".

Denmark in the real world, for example, realizes that Earth is going to end at turn 500 and its diplomacy, I can only assume, is based on the notion that Denmark is full of human beings that have lives. That there are real consequences to their diplomatic actions not only on todays population, but from now until the predictable length of the existence of our universe.

A game of civilization on the other hand, is based around the notion that diplomacy is a way to further your own personal victory agenda.

There are some key differences here. If I played a game of civ where weak civs gave up trying because "its nice to cuddle with the super power" i'd quit. In fact, I see threads all the game on civfanatics about how diplomacy is broken because "a small nation won't help me beat on the top score -- don't they realize we all have to team up to beat him"?

Just another point on why diplomacy in this game is so subjective.

 

[Maniac]

Small nations are represented by city states in Civ5. They are more than happy to suck up to you.

 

[apocalypse105]

I thinx it depends on wich civs you play with and map size because i was playing a mediterian map game a huge map I was playing at france and in the medieval era i only med 2 civilizations spain and babylon because of the gigantic map i was constantly at war with babylon and i finally killed him after that spain got angry and denounced me A few turns later i med england and russia i saw that england was at war england asked me for a declerations of friendship after some trade sow i accept when i was in the renaissance i met olso russia i saw global politics:
Spain was at war with england interesting and russia was at war with england

but Russia couldnt get through because england had a citie state that blocked it and they allready used rifleman(probably of my tech lv) and she only had swordsman sow was funny to see it

Anyways declared war on spain toke a citie and her capital and made peace and let england bully her for the rest of the game...

A few turns later i med all the other leader bismark and arabia Sow i trade a lot research agreements and my abundance of luxury resources money
Then russia declared olso war on bismark and made peace with bismark a few turns later and a few turns later arabia,bismark denounced russia sow i was like ok i can do that tho and got a + modifier we denounced the same leader with bismark , arabia but olso with england sow only catherine is mad ad me but she is at war with england who has the highest score currently and is next to me sow if she wants to come to me she has to come through england..

When i entered industrial era and just constantly getting amore cities I was the most powerfull civilizations in the game but still everybody was friendly I even got declerations of friendships with bismark and arabia. Except russia of course that denounced me every 60 turns i do the same.

Then i won a diplomatic victory lol because of my gold surply

I thinx how smaller the map how more civs will get upset because you are so close and getting a real big threath. Olso it seams that some civs just like you when you are strong I have always had this with arabia every time or maybe it was because i constantly trade with him


This was my first game i saw this normally when i am winning all the AI declares war on me or denounces me Getting anoying but apperently in this game not dont know why if someone coult explain XD

And i agree it is verry anoying When the AI hates you of beeing good. It shouldnt have this atitude of must win sow must kill player if he gonne win ...

 

[apocalypse105]

Actually if you follow the Realist School of International Relations this is exactly what should happen in an international system. Other states will try to balance the Superpower by backing another power or forming together as a block to try and limit the power of the Superpower. If you want to talk about the realism of the game this is actually a good example to use of it getting it right.

Who cares about realisme it is a computer game it is suposed to be a little bid unrealistic when i play age of empires 2 i dont want to see my pikeman die by one shot of a archer because that is realistic.... Or i dont want to see my tanks get out of fuel when i am playing command and conquer

Please games that are to realistic usally arent that great

edit: sorry for dubbel post i was doing sometine else so i didnt notice i allready post something here

 

[TheMeInTeam]

More civs should do this, not less. Attempting to win through stated victory conditions is called playing the game. Unfortunately, the big problem is that only some AI try to win.

When you talk about realism, can you give me an example of small nations that loves their super power neighbors in real world?

Take your pick; it happens virtually anytime being chummy with the superpower is economically favorable (IE trade with it is profitable and reasonably trustworthy).

Realism is a terrible basis for arguing game aspects though and isn't worth anyone's time.

Fortunately, there are very good GAMEPLAY reasons to hate on a superpower too. Indeed; the AI should be a lot more consistent about this and hate on other AI superpowers heavily also. Its inability to actually do much to a superpower despite banding together is one of the game's problems.

 

[Furycrab]

Being chummy with a superpower can be healthy, not economically favorable. Almost nothing you can trade won't help the superpower more than it does the smaller state.

If anything I think they could have made the AI even more volatile or dickish considering the moves we often pull on them. However what I don't want is so AI that suddenly decides that it's will to live is important enough that they will let themselves get strung along for free as an extra RA buddy.

 

[aatami]

"FIRAXIS PLZ FIX TEH DIPLOMACY." is exactly the reason why they won't. You got to have actual facts, even more so if the opposing side does and you do not.
Sure, the diplomacy needs to be worked on, but it is not the enraged random loonatic that some people make it out to be.

 

[Glassmage]

I don't know what you guys are talking about. I'm playing TSL mod map by ?Gedemon? and the diplomacy is cool. I play as Japan with 21 other civs and TSL city states. I've been warmongering, expand crazy and wiped Siam off the map and I have 3 declaration of friendships and an alliance block, assume no one will backstab...

Sure... I got denounced by 7-8 different people but it's life! I took over Seuol early in the game and people denounced but later on some of them are 'friendly' again. You just have to not be afraid of denouncing other people to your advantage. Check the diplo global politics screen often, it is very useful.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

"FIRAXIS PLZ FIX TEH DIPLOMACY." is exactly the reason why they won't. You got to have actual facts, even more so if the opposing side does and you do not.
Sure, the diplomacy needs to be worked on, but it is not the enraged random loonatic that some people make it out to be.

Actually, a quick glance at the code allows a pretty easy conclusion of enraged random lunatic.

They get pissy for reasonable reasons at unreasonable timings and use evaluation criteria that causes nonsensical in-game situations like the 5 city empire that captures 3 cities being a warmongering menace to the world (when it didn't even declare) while there's a 20 city empire out there that captured more.

I'm betting it gets tweaked a few more times before firaxis is done, unfortunately unlike making civ V a legit game by giving it controls of a quality later than the mid-late 1990's.

 

[Furycrab]

Actually, a quick glance at the code allows a pretty easy conclusion of enraged random lunatic.

They get pissy for reasonable reasons at unreasonable timings and use evaluation criteria that causes nonsensical in-game situations like the 5 city empire that captures 3 cities being a warmongering menace to the world (when it didn't even declare) while there's a 20 city empire out there that captured more.

I'm betting it gets tweaked a few more times before firaxis is done, unfortunately unlike making civ V a legit game by giving it controls of a quality later than the mid-late 1990's.

And yet ironically, I find more sense in trying to understand the AI in most of my games than I would playing evaluating any "sane" player.

Personally my only issue is with the novel combat system AI and I would like for it to be a little be smarter so that it wouldn't need overwhelming numbers to beat anyone with good tactical sense.

However personally I don't have enough words to describe how much more satisfying the combat is in this game vs all the previous ones.

 

[SpearMan153]

There are a number of reasons why the ai tends to hate the superpower these are not in my view related to "playing to win" or gang up on the high scorer coding

So the super power will likely:
- have lots of land (more chance of covet land penalties, or expanding to fast penalties)
- have lots of city states (more chance of competing for same city states penalties)
- likely to have had a successful war or two (more chance of war mongering penalties)
- dominate on grabbing wonders due to high products and teach lead (more chance of wonder covet penalty)
- if you conquer a capital or two the domination victory civs think you are trying to win their way
- if you are dominating in wonders and policies the culture victory civs think you are trying to win their way
- if you have a big tech lead, or build apollo program then science civs think you are trying to win their way

From what I can see ai doesn't "play to win" so much as to achieve victory condition x.

Yes Civ5 diplomacy is clunky, unforgiving and sometimes buggy but when things go pear shaped I can work out why

If you can accept the system as it is now (and yes it needs work) and that the ai places no value on mutual trade benefits and no value on shared wars then things make sense (according to the system as it is now, not how it should be) and diplomacy is quite workable and the angst and WTH moments go away.

And yes the currently system is overly biased to conflict. There needs to be mutual trade positives (but not too much) and a shared war positive that at least negates war monger penalties against a mutual enemy. And liberated civs shouldn't denounce you for being a warmonger. And I'd love to see the no-chance civs pick sides more to create opposing super power blocks.

 

[Jim Bro]

Actually, a quick glance at the code allows a pretty easy conclusion of enraged random lunatic.

They get pissy for reasonable reasons at unreasonable timings and use evaluation criteria that causes nonsensical in-game situations like the 5 city empire that captures 3 cities being a warmongering menace to the world (when it didn't even declare) while there's a 20 city empire out there that captured more.

I'm betting it gets tweaked a few more times before firaxis is done, unfortunately unlike making civ V a legit game by giving it controls of a quality later than the mid-late 1990's.

yeah finally someone agrees with me. and like another person said, it pays off for some countries to be allied with a superpower so the AI should distinguish a good superpower from an evil one. i don't want to see only city-states to lick civs boots because and solely because of money. there should be some reward for being friendly to others while being the best. aatami i think i stated my point pretty clearly. i'm not getting into anecdotes if that's what you call arguments though.

Moderator Action: Please don't troll other people. The style of this posting is too offensive.