Any Effect of Beating a Fellow AI Invader to Occupy an Under-Attack City?

[Lost Soul 1]

Still learning my way in the game (on Noble level)...so excuse the novice question.

Situation: An AI declares war on another AI. I decide to join in on the attack (without a prompt from the initial AI for "do you want to join in the slaughter?" via a diplomacy screen pop-up). While attacking a city, the attacking AI (initiator) can't or doesn't complete the city siege. I want to move in for the final kill (displace the other AI's last units occupying the city) during my turn and can do so.

Are they any retribution or diplomacy "penalties" for not letting the attacking AI finish off this one city--which he (Genghis) could probably do the next turn? (I could move onto other cities, but why not let some other civ do the bulk of the elimination?) How would I know about these "penalties" or bad karma (for the attacking AI's relation to me which is currently "annoyed" anyway)? Has there been a time where the attacking civ turns its resources immediately on you for finishing off the city siege? Some other form of negative impact?

I also plan to target 2-4 other cities to pillage, but if I can add another close-by one relatively easily that has not been finished off (for this turn) by an attacking AI, would it come back to haunt me in future aggression?

Simply put, do any of you use the strategy of letting an AI do most of your tandem-team attacking and then swoop in for the final city occupancy. Thereby, leaving the attacking AI spent with little to show for their attack?

Hope that's a clear (albei long-winded) question.

Lost Soul 1

[Arrian]

Are they any retribution or diplomacy "penalties" for not letting the attacking AI finish off this one city--which he (Genghis) could probably do the next turn? (I could move onto other cities, but why not let some other civ do the bulk of the elimination?)

None that I am aware of. You should, in fact, get a small diplo bonus for "our common struggle" or somesuch.

The AI isn't smart enough to know that you've "stolen" a city from it.

-Arrian

[Diadem]

Yeah, I've frequently let another AI do my dirty work in beating down cities. There are no penalties, and it's in fact a useful strategy.

Would be nice to have an AI smart enough to get angry over this. But we most likely wont'see such an advanced AI until civ 6 or 7 (unless fireaxis hires Blake fulltime, which, incidently, would get my support).

There are more ways to exploit ai blindness. If you're ahead in a war, but about to loose a lot of units or a city, you can often bargain peace. The AI will even pay for it.

[Arrian]

Blake's work is (as you can see in his thread) being actively monitored and used by Firaxis.

But I don't know if even he could rewrite the AI so it could understand something so complex.

-Arrian

[zeace]

If an AI and I are attacking a common enemy from the same direction, it's usually pretty easy to take the cities after the AI does the dirty work. At some point, though, the AI's army will be weakened sufficiently that it'll stop attacking the enemy, and will instead start pillaging. Usually I have a large army flowing from city to city taking over everything, so the AI is essentially pillaging "my" improvements. The AI thinks it's doing you a favour in your "mutual struggle". Stupid AI...

Sometimes you have to take the good with the bad...

Blake's AI changes reduce the amount of pillaging the AI does. I hope it works. (Yay Blake!)

[Lost Soul 1]

Thanks to everyone who responded with info and tips...your input definitely helps me decide what to do next.

Lost Soul 1

[couerdelion]

Having the AI do your dirty work for you is a bonus since it rarely works out this way and you should take advantage of it when you can.

More likely will be the case that your ally will pillage improvements that you want to keep so the best bet for you would be to go in with sufficient to finish the job alone before your ally can do too much damage.

[Sarek]

Originally posted by Arrian


The AI isn't smart enough to know that you've "stolen" a city from it.

-Arrian

Curiously in a recent game, I was in just this position. Monty had reduced an early city to just an archer with Jags and some spears. I took the city with a couple of Horse Archers that I had stationed just outside on the next turn.
Then, as only Monty would, he declared on me literally the next turn.
It was a pretty nice city, if I do say so myself.

[Jaybe]

Sarek, that just goes to show that Monty's units had orders to attack the city, and had not been notified that it no longer belonged to the 'enemy'. The units' attack triggered the war declaration.

Of course, this assumes that he DID attack the city after you took it.

[Sarek]

Oh Ya...
Easily took out my two HA's and then it was his. I had no answer of course at the time, so lost a very decent city.
And, because the city was still in revolt, he didn't even have to move his units.

[ColdPhoenix]

The opposite happened me last night. Ragner joined in on my war against Gandhi (against my wishes) and then proceeded to take a city that I had weakened.

Of course I then declared war on the Vikings and took it for myself!