You can't do anything right in this game

[r_rolo1]

Doesn't it feel more immersive when other world leader plot war against you out of envy for your rich cities, or because your armies are grown too strong? I dunno. It feels better this way to me. I never liked being about to manipulate the AIs like silly putty.

To be honest ... No.

Ok, the silly putty AI was not that immersive, but surely the "pissed because you have a pulse" aproach is not exactly immersive either.

Anyway that is a typical false dichotomy fallacy. Those aren't the only options, after all ...

 

[Roxlimn]

I don't generally have problems keeping the AI off my back. In fact, right now I'm having trouble getting an AI to DoW me.

 

[jjkrause84]

Doesn't it feel more immersive when other world leader plot war against you out of envy for your rich cities, or because your armies are grown too strong? I dunno. It feels better this way to me. I never liked being about to manipulate the AIs like silly putty.

When the AI's STATED purpose for declaring on me is, "We can't pass this opportunity up" then, yes, it does impede imersion just a bit.

 

[Roxlimn]

They can't pass an opportunity to invade a weak kingdom? Isn't that why Genghis Khan invaded south and into China? Isn't that why his sons continued to carve a path straight through Central Asia?

 

[r_rolo1]

I don't generally have problems keeping the AI off my back. In fact, right now I'm having trouble getting an AI to DoW me.

Oh, that is easy ... delete your army and they will come With their ridiculous 180 score for targetting behaviour when they perceive a civ as weak, that it is a assured thing

Anyway, that was not my point. I would feel immersed if I felt that there were thinking entities behind the leaderheads ( or it is leaderbodies in here ? ), a thing that would be acheived by a AI that had a plan and made their game around it. Neither civ IV or V have it, so neither is immersive. But if you want to compare, I do think that the silly put aproach is more immersive, simply because cooperation is the best way of dealing with things except in a minority of situations and the silly putty AI cooperares far more often that the civ V AI.

Other thing that contributes for the lack of immersion in Civ V IMHO is that the AI behaviour seems very basic ( I'm not saying that it is, just that it looks like it ) ,without any visible consideration if a behaviour of other civ is good for them or not. .. and that shows up a lot more when you are trying to pretend you're smart.

 

[Roxlimn]

r_rolo1:

I dunno...

Generally, the AI are good about offering me all kinds of things and asking me to go to war with them against their enemies and what-not. I don't normally go with anyone on any of these requests, but provided that we have a common Pact of Secrecy going on against the Civ in question, the Civs have been good about being reasonable.

I've never had Gandhi be mad at me for participating in a war that he requested.

In return, I've asked AIs for Secret Pacts, Pact of Cooperation, Defensive Pacts, Open Borders and so on and so forth. It generally makes sense. Sometimes I get AIs agree to Secret Pacts which sometimes leads to an allied war. Sometimes, it stay Secret. Sometimes, they just agree to war with ridiculously low prices. Alex and Nappy are really good for this. Monte I rarely need to ask - he's always at war with somebody.

 

[troab]

All this back and forth seems silly... it seems like everyone who likes the "gamey" aspects believe that the rest of us are asking for push-over AI... we're not.

We don't want AI that does not compete with you.. be it for land, luxuries, strategic resources.. maybe even for trade routes and everything else.

We don't want a game full of Ghandi's.. we want Ghandi,, and Monty and everything in between.

We want AI that gets pissed at you and DOW's because of something that has value to them within the reality of the game...

Just to use wonders as an example: declare war because i built a wonder that you were trying to build - perceive me as insolent, as a copycat, as anything like that.

Do not declare war because I stole the pyramids from you which will deprive you of 2 culture points per turn a free scientist and that you were going to use to light bulb a tech....

The distinction is subtle.. in many ways it has more to do with the writing than the AI itself (but it still has to do with the AI).

We don't want a computer game about a board game.

We want a computer game about the history of civilization.

We don't want other civs to stop getting mad at us... we just want them to do it for internally consistent reasons.


EDIT: Yes I know those are not the actual benefits of the pyramids...

 

[Varelse]

Is this a widespread wish? I always assumed that most players want other civs to behave more like "real" civs, not civs playing a Civilization game. For example, in Civ IV when someone would like you because you built a wonder that the civ admires.

At least that's what I want. It's crucial for the immersion.

Civ 5 isn't really about immersion, I think. All the elements of the previous games that seemed to be primarily there for immersion reasons were left out of this game. Seen as frivolous and not worth wasting time on, perhaps?

 

[Varelse]

What is DoW?

 

[QuixotesGhost]

Declaration of War

 

[Tyrael]

Civ IV diplomacy was much more involved then "adding numbers". You had interesting decisions about which religious bloc to ally with, and they could switch, forcing you to reevaluate. When switching civics (another interesting decision you had to make over and over that I miss) you had to take into account which AIs would stop liking you because you switched out of their favorite. There was tension in calling a peace treaty vs. finishing a war despite war weariness because you got demerits for each declaration. Should you trade techs with the black sheep of the continent to get that tech you desperately need at the cost of hurting your friendships?

Nothing you do matters diplomatically in Civ V. The buggy AI will arbitrarily find reasons to hate you and declare on you no matter what you do. The AI has no sense of friendship. I certainly think that the AI should be programmed to play to win, but let diplomacy matter, let friendships be developed, and let that task fall to the hostile AIs.

 

[Mikkow]

The difference I perceive in AI between Civ4 and 5.

Removed: "Favorite Religion"
Removed: "Favorite civic" (replaced by favorite empire trait)
Added: "Favorite Empire Trait" (can give both penalty or bonus)

Damages relations:

• Breaking an agreement or declaration of intent (major. Also damages relations with others).
• Military near its borders. The more military the worse (bugged due to it thinking everything it can see is its borders). Remove or lessen military presence should help.
• Wonder spam.
• Declaring war. (major)
• Declaring war on another who is not a common enemy.
• Puppeting or annexing cities (major if its cities).
• Razing cities (major if its cities)
• Having any city within 7 hexes of its cities.
• Buying land near its borders.
• Having friend or allied status with City State AI wants relations with.
• Declaring war on City State it pledged to protect (major).
• Declaring war on City State it has relations with.
• Saying "You will pay for this" - without having superior military strength.
• Demanding something without having superior military strength.
• Being in reach of any victory type.

Improves relations:

• Defensive pact. (major).
• Cooperation pact. (major).
• Secrecy pact.
• Declaring war against third party upon request (major).
• Destroying 3+ units belonging to common enemy they are at war with or both being at war with third party for a long time.
• Research agreement.
• Trading (gifting things might give more bonus).
• Open borders.
• Giving in to a demanded resource request (asked for resources)
• Liberating (returning) a worker.
• Liberating their cities (major).
• Liberating cities in general.

It can be afraid of you, like in Civ4. The stronger military power the more fearful it will be. It won't make it like you but it will be less likely to declare war and more likely to try to please. If it complies with a demand there will be no penalty either.

I suspect that saying "You will pay for this" when having a superior military strength makes it more intimidated and will not challenge you as much after. Perhaps also other civs become more fearful when this happens.

Slight suspicion that having strong military and tendency to declare war in general also makes them more fearful, since you have displayed a willingness to use force.

The weaker one is militarily, the more tempted it will be to declare war and conquer some land from you.

 

[bryanw1995]

"Your continued greed in collecting wonders of the world has become an issue. Consider our pact of co-operation closed."

Next turn pact of secrecy closed. Two turns later she declares war bringing a war ally in too. Ressource trades, research treaty, and open borders cancelled. Doesn't it just make you love the game?

any time you get a message like this you should try to get someone else to dow her with you pre-emptively. by the time you get to this war is nearly inevitable anyway and she'll try to bring in an ally or 3 if you let her do the declaring.

 

[TheDisco]

As soon as you get into 10% range to their "score", they turn hostile.
And with score, it's either gold, overall score, number of wonders, army size... You pick it. They always find a reason to hate your guts.

Hopefully this will get fixed in the patch, because otherwise I like the game.

I agree on this, I hope they make an option to bring back a more role play type AI, where you can actually build real alliances. Leave the "Make AI play to win only" option for those that like it but I for one prefer to play with an AI that is more realistic than simply decalring war if you are winning.

As an analogy, that would mean Canada and Mexico will invade the USA if we start building a rocket to Alpha Centurai. Or Britian will declare war because we are building a Utopia. Thats just plain stupid.

 

[eoc]

Civ4 diplo was challenging because it required actual thinking what you are doing. Civ5 diplo is challenging because it requires guessing. Luckily while failing diplo in Civ4 = end of the game, failing diplo in Civ5 = more cities for you

No need guessing, it always becomes hostile. And if you declare war on it, It won't decrease your relationships so much, they will open borders with you in the next turn, trade with you, sign pact of coor. While you build cities or build things, AI becomes very much angry.
First of all angries---- "don't settle near me", but AI will settle near you, then AI becomes hostile