Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Making friends with aggressive civs.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Making friends with aggressive civs.

    When I play a game vs the AI, either in MP or SP, invariably an aggressive civ or two are on the AI team. Have you found any way to stay peaceful with them until you are ready to attack. Invariably they are at war with me about ten turns before I'm ready.

    What difficulty level do you play? Im usually on warlords, prince or monarch. (depending on how much trouble I want to "bite off") and if I have another human partner.

    They are stinkers for close neighbors!
    nolan

  • #2
    You're best off taking them out early. The closer they are, the earlier they need to go.

    If you start near a psycho just build your army and wait - because you know he's coming. Otherwise have the same religion and you might be able to make friends for a while...

    Comment


    • #3
      I've been able to get to +14 but eventually it doesn't matter, they will attack. SO I like to take them out earlier so their worthless cities have some time to become usefull. Even though occasionally if you pin them in early and get to that +14 they'll wonder whore and you can grab something usefull.
      It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
      RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

      Comment


      • #4
        They're predictable. Like wind-up toys. Which is half of the battle. You can prepare the terrain, prepare your defenses, prepare your counter-attack units. You don't need numerical superiority. The AI fights stupid.

        Comment


        • #5
          That's why MP is soooo much more entertaining. Especially when you have 2 aggressive neighbors since if you go after one, the other will backstab you if given the chance.
          It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
          RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

          Comment


          • #6
            The real psychos will attack as soon as no real land to settle is available. They will, especially from that point forward, fall behind in techs and, as rah noted, will virtually stop internal city development. They will continue to alter the land but no more buildings and such that do not enhance the military.

            If the first nation the psycho attacks fall to them, the juggernaut has started. You want the all-winning, all-choosing juggernaut to be you, at least until the aggressive types are gone, so you will have to intervene. If you are the first neighbor, the attack will fall on you no matter how positive your previous relations. Plan on it. Use it to your advantage.
            No matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
            "I played it [Civilization] for three months and then realised I hadn't done any work. In the end, I had to delete all the saved files and smash the CD." Iain Banks, author

            Comment


            • #7
              Sorry to ask a question that most likely has been asked before, but I haven´t had time to play CIV4 much yet ... WHO are the most aggressive AI in the vanilla version?

              I have started my first marathon game (large map), and only neighbor so far is Tokugawa. If he is one of the psychos, I am pretty happy about my production of war elephants

              ybrevo

              Comment


              • #8
                Monty and Tok head the list of agressive psychos.
                It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
                RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

                Comment


                • #9
                  The Viking and Carthaginian leaders (Ragnar and Hannibal) will also opt for early war. Shaka, Tokugawa, and Montezuma will build huge stacks of units and always attack as I described above. Both Mongolian leaders (Ghenghis Khan and Kublai Khan) are also quite aggressive. The psychoness of all of these leaders is turned up by selecting Agressive AI in setting up a custom game (a step most of us recommend). On consideration, Montezuma is incredibly crazy with or without that switch, but the rest amp up a bit.

                  Edit: Boudica is also pretty aggressive but the Celts aren't usually much of a threat. Obviously the threat level of all these leaders depends on terrain and how well they dealt with the barbarians.
                  Last edited by Blaupanzer; July 2, 2009, 09:43. Reason: Addition
                  No matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
                  "I played it [Civilization] for three months and then realised I hadn't done any work. In the end, I had to delete all the saved files and smash the CD." Iain Banks, author

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Usually for me Hannibal is the worst of all of them because he appears more reasonable. When he makes his move he usually waits till he has a a huge SOD and it's a touch more of a surprise.

                    Monty's first attack is not only predictable but usually just a handful of jags or axes or spears. Hannibal's will be 25 units.
                    It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
                    RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I love Monty

                      Originally posted by rah View Post
                      Usually for me Hannibal is the worst of all of them because he appears more reasonable. When he makes his move he usually waits till he has a a huge SOD and it's a touch more of a surprise.
                      Hannibal is a reasonable guy. I played an Emperor game as Elizabeth where he was on the same landmass and developed much faster than me and completely chocked me off. I tend to fall behind in military power as well. He could have crushed me between his fingers for most of the game, if he wanted too. But I tend to be a nice and likable guy and give the AI sweet deals tech-wise, so we stayed best buddies all game long. In the end I jockeyed into the lead (overall, not militarily) and won the space race. He never declared on me despite the close borders and all that.

                      Originally posted by rah View Post
                      Monty's first attack is not only predictable but usually just a handful of jags or axes or spears.
                      I just loooove Monty because he's soooo desperately bad at fighting and keeps declaring, looking for punishment. I do not care much for military so I only build the minimum number of units I deem necessary. My current game is Emperor Hatshepsut, I'm trying to wean myself off Financial and off Organized leaders. Monty started to south west with me as his only neighbor. He declared early, came as rah described and withered against my defenses. From there on he kept declaring every 50 - 100 turns or so which served as a very useful exercise in training up my military and allowing my to avoid building settlers - I keep conquering an Aztec city at a time, then ask him whether he had enough. He usually pays me to make peace, then comes back for more punishment in due time.

                      On the other hand, I did have to concede defeat in a game I started sometime back, as Emperor Huyana of the Inca. I had Brennus as only neighbor. He founded Buddhism, I founded Hinduism (and Judaism, etc.). He got annoyed very soon. Despite trying to navigate skillfullly I was unable to manage : he builds cities fast, brings them up in pop then starts cranking out military units, I simply can't keep up. On the other hand, I can't exchange techs with anyone while he has a couple of neighbors, so he advances faster than me. I reckoned the situation was desperate.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by sorinache View Post
                        I had Brennus as only neighbor. He founded Buddhism, I founded Hinduism (and Judaism, etc.). He got annoyed very soon.
                        I've noticed that about him, too. All AIs look favorably if you're the same religion, but Brennus is one of the ones that get really cross.

                        The way out of this is to adopt his religion. Spread it among your cities as needed, along with your own religion (for happiness and gold both).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by wodan11 View Post
                          I've noticed that about him, too. All AIs look favorably if you're the same religion, but Brennus is one of the ones that get really cross.

                          The way out of this is to adopt his religion. Spread it among your cities as needed, along with your own religion (for happiness and gold both).
                          Yeah, well, how do I do that ? I can't steal his religion, can I ? When I gave him open borders very early he traversed my territory with settlers and celtic warriors, settled in my back yard and choked me off. If I wait (to give myself some time to settle the good spots), his anger increases and he refuses open borders. None of my cities has buddhism, I can't adopt his religion whatever I do.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sorinache View Post
                            Yeah, well, how do I do that ? I can't steal his religion, can I ? When I gave him open borders very early he traversed my territory with settlers and celtic warriors, settled in my back yard and choked me off. If I wait (to give myself some time to settle the good spots), his anger increases and he refuses open borders. None of my cities has buddhism, I can't adopt his religion whatever I do.
                            An obvious way is to not find early religions, or at least not _adopt_ them, if you notice your starting spot is next to a religious fanatic. It's usually not very necessary to get the happy bonus very early on while still building workers and settlers for the first expansion wave. As a bonus any religion gives the +1 culture/turn if you don't have a state religion.

                            If you stay without religion you should be able to still make friends with the religion-nutcases after you have settled the good spots. Then you can open borders for the missionaries if the religion has not spread to you already.

                            In general, in my opinion founding religions is overrated; it's only beneficial if you can get it to become very widespread, which you must devote a lot of precious early game resources for. If your neighbors don't have your religion, you really can't use it yourself because of the hate you get.

                            I find myself only founding the occasional Oracle-> CoL, or more often a bulbed Philosophy. An early philo also offers a handy way to grind that pesky prophet, in the form of Angkor Wat.
                            It's a lowercase L, not an uppercase I.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by slnz View Post
                              An obvious way is to not find early religions, or at least not _adopt_ them, if you notice your starting spot is next to a religious fanatic. It's usually not very necessary to get the happy bonus very early on while still building workers and settlers for the first expansion wave. As a bonus any religion gives the +1 culture/turn if you don't have a state religion.
                              I've tried various tactics. The thing is, playing Emperor level, I run out of money very quickly unless I found religions. Believe me, I've tried to ignore them but nothing works nearly as reliably as the religions. To the point that even when I don't start with Mysticism I still try to be the first to get Judaism at least. Judaism + Oracle (and Writing) means Theology and a Great Prophet in a number of turns (from the GP points of the Oracle). The Great Prophet builds Temple of Solomon or Church of Nativity and from there on I'm on easy street, money-wise. Any other thing I've tried I find myself in 500 AD forced to run 60% money - 40% research or worse and producing 40 - 60 bulbs per turn, which is far from enough to stay in the race.

                              Besides, I do not adopt them for the happy bonus, but for the culture ! As a concrete example : capital builds oracle, I choose Theology and Christianism is founded in my second or third city - I adopt Christianism as state religion which gives this latest, smalles city of mine a boost of +5 culture per turn and relieves it from the need to build a monument.

                              Originally posted by slnz View Post
                              If you stay without religion you should be able to still make friends with the religion-nutcases after you have settled the good spots. Then you can open borders for the missionaries if the religion has not spread to you already.
                              It's a trade-off. I really like the +5 culture in founding city and +1 in all others and usually also take advantage quickly of the +1 happy bonus by increasing the population in my cities. In this specific game in which I start next to Brennus I would probably be better off without religion, at least until he spreads Buddhism to one of my cities ...

                              Originally posted by slnz View Post
                              In general, in my opinion founding religions is overrated; it's only beneficial if you can get it to become very widespread, which you must devote a lot of precious early game resources for. If your neighbors don't have your religion, you really can't use it yourself because of the hate you get.

                              I find myself only founding the occasional Oracle-> CoL, or more often a bulbed Philosophy. An early philo also offers a handy way to grind that pesky prophet, in the form of Angkor Wat.
                              As I said, I do not share your opinion. I realized my game were much more enjoyable the more religions I managed to found. My current tactic involves founding 3 religions including Islam, spreading my state religion to my neighbors' capitals in the hope they'll adopt it and then build Apostolic Palace (this is why being first to Cristianism is such a prize) for me, then building Spiral Minaret myself. Believe me, when each and every one of your, say, Jewish temples and your Jewish monasteries bring +2 and +2 per turn in addition to their standard benefits, you can really sit back and enjoy a pleasant game.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X