Stupid AI declares war....

[Spec]

The AI, before it declares war on another country, should take into consideration the military forces of the targeted civ. For example, I had about 60 Cavalry and the Celts still had Pikeman and they declared war on me...This is not realistic. They should be afraid of me instead and do as I say.
Just like if Congo declared war on the US today....

They should add this in the next patch.

Spec.

[Shogun Gunner]

maybe the AI's anger at your actions clouded their judgement...

Iraq should not have provoked USA...no contest their either.

[Cookie Monster]

If the ai craves a resource you have that it doesn't it may decide to go to war. Even if you have a larger military they will try to take from you by force especially if you are dominating the game.

[Dis]

the ai is not realistic in any fashion.

The ai only declares war on you to annoy you and cause you to divert your production.

basically the game is you against everyone. Even if that one civ gets wiped out, they may delay you long enough for another civ to surpass you in power.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Dissident
the ai is not realistic in any fashion.

The ai only declares war on you to annoy you and cause you to divert your production.

basically the game is you against everyone. Even if that one civ gets wiped out, they may delay you long enough for another civ to surpass you in power.

good point. Never saw it that way. Anyone here declared war to every 24 civs at the sametime just for the fun of it?


Spec.

[vmxa1]

Being unwise strategically is not the same as foolish. Some factors cannot be dismissed, such as the need for land or resources.
An extreme case occurred in a civIII game long ago. I was playing conquest and had them down to 1 city and it 2048. They declared war. This is both foolish and necessary at the same time.
They could not win, but they lose anyway, so the only play for them was to take a shot.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Spec


good point. Never saw it that way. Anyone here declared war to every 24 civs at the sametime just for the fun of it?


Spec.

In the Napoleon scenario I found myself at war with every civilization at a few points in that scenario. I fended them all off . Wasn't easy though.

[Snotty]

They could not win, but they lose anyway, so the only play for them was to take a shot.

This is it. Assume the AI wants to win. It's trailing in score and the only chance it has is to take you down. It's effort may be pathetic but you are going to win anyway. It's very realistic as it would be what you did in the same position.

[Spec]

The Ai could wait to get nationalism to get riflemen. It could also wait and try to get the UN for a diplomatic win. Many scenarios are possible (and probably better imo) than sending your troops on suicide missions and putting your cities in harms way. Suicide is never the best option.....unless a bear is running after you to mate with you and there's no way to evade it.

Spec.

[mrmitchell]

If an AI didn't have any Horse, and you had all the Horses, if it's desperate enough it will probably make a run for the Horses (even suicidal, who knows?).

[vmxa1]

Spec you have to accept that the AI is not super deep and will not make the optimal moves or even reasonable ones. It will at times do bad things. Cascade logic will lead the AI to dead ends some of the time.

[Saak]

Actually, I've noticed the AI sometimes uses war as a way to rid itself of weak units, rather then disbanding or upgrading. I've had my infantry defending cities from spearman and archers before and I knew the AI had equal tech to me... They'll send a swath of these ancient units and thats the last I'll see of any attack.

Entirely possible there's something else going on there, but I get the feeling the AI actually uses war to control their unit costs...

[Xorbon]

This is it. Assume the AI wants to win. It's trailing in score and the only chance it has is to take you down. It's effort may be pathetic but you are going to win anyway. It's very realistic as it would be what you did in the same position.

No. I'd quit and start a new game.

[Zevico]

Actually, I've noticed the AI sometimes uses war as a way to rid itself of weak units, rather then disbanding or upgrading. I've had my infantry defending cities from spearman and archers before and I knew the AI had equal tech to me... They'll send a swath of these ancient units and thats the last I'll see of any attack.

Entirely possible there's something else going on there, but I get the feeling the AI actually uses war to control their unit costs...

Unfortunately not. They really are just that bad--I have wiped out whole ancient armies with a few Cavalry in moments; I figured this would be a supplementary force at most. It was actually the whole army of the AI I was attacking.

If an AI didn't have any Horse, and you had all the Horses, if it's desperate enough it will probably make a run for the Horses (even suicidal, who knows?).

This is actually quite logical and good for an attacking AI, if that AI has sufficient numbers of units to hold off your initial all out assault. If it does, then it has gained a powerful (though not vital) strategic resource, with which it can afterwards hold its own properly against you (assuming it has a similar number of cities, to allow for it holding it out in a long term war).

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by Xorbon


No. I'd quit and start a new game.

How mad you would be if the AI decided to end a game of Conquests because you were getting so far ahead???? I know... a little silly, but how mad would you be?

Good thing these animated leaderheads to retain the knowledge of your past history and actions!