Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

angering other civs

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

  • angering other civs

    what criteria do computer civs go by to determine that you've pissed them off? I've figured out that with MMP or Alliance against X that if you make peace with the enemy, you pal won't look to favorably upon it. . . but other than that i can't figure it out.

    reason i ask . . . me (viking) england and mongles (= had a great little trifecta runnin with mmp and clear movement. the mongles one day decided they were tired of the whole thing, made peace with our enemy and attacked me with england jumping in on my side. . .

    several turns later, England dropped from gracious to polite (which was fine) and stayed like that for the longest time, we traded techs, etc. . .

    Then, out of the blue they attacked me. They went from polite to attack over the seam of 1 turn. I went over that turn several times, even starting another mmp and WAY overpaying for it, and STILL they attacked.

    So maybe if i know what potentially could set em off . . .

    [edit] oh uh i searched for a thread/faq about this and couldn't find. if anyone has a link, i'd appreciate it.
    Last edited by Monsto; May 14, 2004, 20:59.

  • #2
    Author: Bamspeedy; Date Added: 2/21/03

    I spent a few weeks with an unpatched version of PTW and no internet access (to dowload the patch), so I decided to spend some of that time testing AI attitudes. This test was with the 1.01 version of PTW, so there might be a slim possibility that some of this was changed in a patch, but most likely this all still applies to the latest patch.

    Attitudes
    In the debug mode of PTW there are numbers beside the attitude to give a more accurate rank of the AI attitude towards you. I ran my test on a map made entirely of desert (to prevent the AI from building cities), sometimes making an island to determine whether being on the same landmass made a difference. The test was sometimes with 24 civs, but most of the test was with 2 AI civs. I did some of this test with every civ starting with the same techs, so the value of techs wouldnít alter power rankings, although map exploration would affect power rankings, especially for expansionists.

    If you consider that the default attitudes of AI towards you starts at 0 the following things will affect this number.

    KEY NOTE: Good things actually give you a negative number, and bad things give you a positive number.

    Here are the attitude ranks:
    -11 and lower = Gracious
    -1 through -10 = Polite
    0 = Cautious
    1-10 = Annoyed
    11 through 100 = Furious

    At the very start (4000 B.C. before ending your turn), power rankings are equal, so the following determines the Ďdefaultí attitudes before power rankings affect things or if the AI has a power lead:
    Remember, negative numbers are GOOD.

    Starting attitudes:

    Start (no factors taken into consideration): 0

    -1 You are in the same culture group
    Example: So the Americans would have -1 for the Iroquois and Aztecs (all in the ĎAmericaní culture group), France would have -1 for all civs in the European culture group.

    Aggression level of AI:
    Chieftain-Warlord
    5 = +2 (Germany, Zulu, Mongols)
    4 = +1 (9 Civs)
    3 = 0 (6 Civs)
    2 = -1 (China, Iroquois, Carthage, Korea)
    1 = -1 (France, India)
    Regent-Monarch
    5 = +3
    4 = +2
    3 = +1
    2 = 0
    1 = -1
    Emperor-Deity
    5 = +3
    4 = +3
    3 = +2
    2 = +1
    1 = 0
    You could look at it as Regent-Monarch is the default level and Chieftain-Warlord decreases the aggression levels by 1, and Emperor-Deity increases the aggression levels by 1 when figuring out attitudes.

    On Chieftain-Warlord, only Germany will automatically start out as annoyed (+1), unless you are in the European culture group, then there are 5 civs or so that will be cautious with you. Everyone else will be polite.

    On Emperor-Deity, everyone starts out annoyed with you, except the 5 civs that have despotism as their favorite government (explained below), and the 2 civs with the lowest aggression level (India, France), and there are 4 civs who will be cautious (because of aggressive level of 2, but will be polite if you are in their culture group)- Iroquois, China, Carthage, Korea. But once the AI has a culture lead (explained below), India and france will be cautious and the 4 civs who were cautious, will be annoyed (unless you are in their culture group).

    Situational/temporary Attitudes (may change during the game).

    -1 You are in the same government as the AI (of course at the start, everyone is in despotism).
    Because everyone is in despot in the beginning, this gives the impression that a higher aggression level gives the default 0 (cautious). Start at 0, -1 for same government, then +1 for aggression level of 4 on chieftain for example, brings it back to 0.

    AIís favorite/shunned governments:
    -5 Favorite government (only applies if both you and the AI are in this government)
    +4 Shunned government (only applies if you are in this government and the AI is not)

    The worst that can happen is you switch from the AIís favorite government, that you both are in, then only you switch to the AIís shunned government (net result +9). An example would be if you switch from despotism to republic and Egypt, Zulu, or Celts stays in despotism or goes to Monarchy. Or you go to Monarchy and the Aztecs stay in Despotism or goes to Republic. Mongols is the other civ that favors despotism, but democracy is their shunned government.

    Favorite governments:
    Despotism: 5 AI
    Republic: 6 AI
    Monarchy: 6 AI
    Democracy: 4 AI
    Communism: 3 AI

    Shunned governments:
    Despotism: 7 AI
    Republic: 7 AI
    Monarchy: 4 AI
    Democracy: 2 AI
    Communism: 4 AI

    For the most part, the AI is in Republic-Democracy while at peace and monarchy-communism while at war, regardless of what their favorite/shunned government is. So even though there are an even 6 AI for both republic and Monarchy, the Republic would apply more often for favorite government because the AI would also be in that same government. For attitude purposes, republic would only be bad for you if most of the other AI is still in despotism or going to a war-time government because of wars. If you are still in despotism, while the rest of the world has switched governments (more frequently seen on higher levels), youíll see the AI attitudes worsen.

    -1 if you have done any recent trades (maps or techs) or currently have a 20 turn deal with them (gold/turn, trade embargo against another civ). Trading maps every turn does not help improve attitude! It would only help if the map knowledge is being the decisive factor in who has the power lead. Offering very generous trades (example: giving them 5,000 gold for Alphabet) does not help. You sometimes lose this point every once in awhile usually due to some tiles that you have uncovered/improved, or simply as time goes by. You usually lose it more often than every 20 turns, but certainly not every turn or two in most cases. Just remember to trade maps once in a while. Multiple trades does not increase this bonus, either you get the point or you donít. If techs or gold is used in combination with another treaty this point will apply.

    -1 If you sign a trade embargo against another civ. This counts in the same category as having a recent trade, so if youíve already recently traded maps/techs, signing a trade embargo wonít help.

    +10 for the victim of the trade embargo.

    -1 If you have a culture lead. +1 if the AI has the culture lead.

    -1 You pay tribute to the AI.

    +1 If you call the AIís bluff when he demands tribute (and he doesnít declare war of course).

    -5 If you have a Right of Passage with the AI.

    -10 If you have a Mutual Protection Pact with the AI. Just remember that a MPP is risky, because they can get you into a war you donít want to be in.

    -3 if at war with a common enemy.

    -2 If you then sign an alliance.

    So a -5 if you sign an alliance and go to war with that enemy.

    -1 to -3 for each enemy unit (of common enemies) you destroy and tiles you pillage, -7 for razing an enemy city, but all of this is temporary - AFTER the war or the civ is destroyed, you will get the +1 penalty for each razed city added back on, plus the +1 penalty for declaring war (even if you had joined the alliance). Any damage you did prior to signing the alliance (but during that same war) gets immediately added on. The total effect seems to cap at -15 for doing damage and having an alliance, -13 if you do everything else, but donít have the alliance in place. This decays at -1 each turn, unless you destroy a unit or pillage a tile each turn to keep it at the maximum. So when peace comes and the -15 Ďtemporaryí points is automatically taken off, it may seem like you took an attitude hit by signing peace or destroying the civ, because the other AI have a worse attitude towards you.

    -5 If you trade or donate a resource. Trading multiple resources seems to have no effect.

    +1 If they ask you to leave their territory, +4 if you are given the orders to leave or declare war. These are only temporary, and as long as you leave when forced to, you get the points back the next turn. You can continually send 1 troop in, spend 1 turn there and claim you will leave, leave when you are forced to, but go back into their territory the next turn, and the AI attitude will not drop in the long run, just keep cycling between +/- 5 pts. Or sending a large stack in every single turn just to get booted out every turn does nothing in the long run.

    Any recent wars can add a penalty, seemingly depending on the casualties the AI took. Most of this decays after being at peace for awhile (and the AI re-builds lost troops).

    Permanent Attitude Changes

    Note: Some of the attitude changes you do to a victim during war is hard to test, since itís hard to find the difference between acts, because you canít find the attitude level until the war is over with. And figuring the difference between what penalties are just from being at war, and what was caused by breaking treaties, razing cities, etc.

    Most penalties are temporarily erased if the civ is at war with the civ who you broke a treaty with. Example: Say the Aztecs have added +10 points because of things I have done to the Iroquois. If the Aztecs go to war with the Iroquois, those 10 points are taken away, so the Aztecs will feel better towards me, but once they sign peace with the Iroquois the 10 point penalty is added back on. So penalties are only added for friendly civs, not enemies.

    -10 maximum for any gifts. You can get -1 point for every 10 gold worth of techs/gold that you DONATE to them. Giving them a tech for 1 gold piece or map (even if the map is íworthlessí) does not count as a gift. You canít get more than -10 points from gifts. Giving gifts on the next turn, or next few turns, has no effect once you reach the -10 cap. It does not look like this decays over time, or that giving more gifts centuries later helps at all., if youĎve exceeded the cap.

    -2 If you have an embassy with the AI

    +2 You demand tribute from the AI. Whether they actually pay the tribute or not. If they have a good attitude towards you, this will be +1, but once they are annoyed/furious it will be +2 each time you demand tribute. You can make 50 tributes in one turn and get a civ at +100 towards you (very, very furious).

    +1 if you raze the city of another AI. +12 if you raze a city of that civ. Other civs donít add any more penalties than the standard +1 if the city had contained any Great wonders. It doesnít look like the victim adds more than the +12 permanent penalty either, but there may be a temporary penalty.

    +4 if youíve declared war on that civ before. If the AI had declared war on you, it is possible to get the attitude back to pre-war levels, providing you donít raze any cities or other bad things.

    +12 for breaking an alliance. +2 is what other civs will add.

    No penalty for destroying the last city of an AI (unless you raze it, then just the +1 for a razed city). But the Ďtemporaryí effects of doing damage to a common enemy, alliances, etc. will disappear since no one is at war with that civ anymore.

    +1 You declare war on a friendly civ (all civs who are at peace with this civ will add on the point, others will add the point if they ever sign peace with this civ). The trick is to get others to declare war on you. Example: Aztecs were at -17 with me, I declare war on the Iroquois, so now Iím at -16 with the Aztecs. If I get the Aztecs into the war via an alliance I now am at -22 (-5 for the alliance, then recover the +1 point since Iím no longer at war with a civ that is friendly with the Aztecs). But after war, the +1 penalty is added back on.

    +4 if you break a trade route (like pillaging your own road) that cancels a treaty. In addition to the -5 you lost since you are no longer trading resources, it will feel like +9. Other civs will add +1.

    +1 If you sell them one of your workers (not sure why this is, maybe itís confused and thinks you were at war at one point and thinks that is how it got your slave?). You restore the point if you buy the worker back.

    +1 for each captured worker you disband (of their nationality). Think of it as disbanding = killing. Using the slaves, selling them, or joining them into cities (even if they starve off), seems to have no effect.

    Breaking a ROP treaty:
    +4 If you have no units in their territory when declaring war with a ROP treaty in place, other AI will add +1, but will still sign ROP with you. +6 If you have any units in their territory when you break the ROP treaty, and other civs wonít sign ROP with you anymore and will add +2.

    +4 for breaking a peace treaty with that civ. +1 is what other civs will add on for breaking a peace treaty with another civ. These numbers are doubled if you figure in the fact that you are declaring war-(example: +4 for breaking the treaty +4 for declaring war).

    +4 for failing at an espionage mission (any mission or attempting to plant a spy). Other civs donít care, just the civ you tried to plant the spy in, or perform a mission in.

    Other factors

    Having resources that the AI does not have doesnít seem to affect things (although it would affect power rankings and might affect the possibility of war, but not attitude). Nor does being on the same landmass affect attitude. Making a Ďculture attackí (building a city right on their border and rushing culture to try and flip their city) does not affect attitude, but they do sometimes respond to this threat by rushing their own culture or declaring war.

    Power lead: If you have a power lead, most of the good effects (negative numbers) are halved. ROP is one of them that still gives you the full points no matter who has the power lead. Example of what is affected: Maximum of -5 for donations instead of -10. So the Americans start off with the Aztecs at -6 (-5 for favorite government, -1 same government, -1 for same culture group, +1 for agression level) with them at 4000 B.C. on Chieftain, but this drops to -3 at 3950 B.C. on the lower levels, because already the human has a power lead. If the AI has a lead in power, youíll see the full effects, or normal numbers (all numbers IĎve listed in my study). If I give myself 5000 gold and donate everything I have that turn, the donation part of the formula will be at -5, but when I end my turn, the power rankings are calculated and the AI now has the power lead, so it will jump up to the full -10. If the civ is extremely furious, positive things seem to have less of an effect.

    Summary : This could be used as a checklist for anyone concerned about AI attitude.

    Theoretically, the best you can get a civ is -58 (maybe more due to random factors or something I havenĎt figured out yet). By having the following:
    AI has power lead.
    You have a culture lead (-1).
    AI Civ with aggression level of 1 on Chieftain-Monarch, or aggression level of 1-2 on Chieftain-Warlord: (-1)
    Same culture group: (-1)
    Traded maps/techs recently (-1)
    Recently paid them tribute (-1)
    Donated enough gifts (-10),
    You and the AI are in the AIís favorite government (-5).
    Same government as the AI (-1)
    You have an embassy with that civ (-2)
    You have a ROP with that civ (-5)
    You have a MPP with that civ (-10)
    You have an alliance against a common enemy and have done enough damage to the enemy this turn (-15).
    You are trading resources (-5).
    You have never declared war on anyone, disbanded slaves, broken treaties, razed cities, demanded tribute, refused to pay tribute, sold any of your workers to them, or get caught doing espionage.
    Theoretical maximum: -58.

    The maximum you can get a civ mad at you is 100. There are countless ways to get it this high. Ways civs could be mad at you:
    You have a power lead.
    You havenít been trading with the AI.
    You havenít given any gifts.
    You donít have any embassies, ROP, or MPP.
    Selling your own workers.
    AI has a culture lead.
    Your not in the same culture group.
    No alliances in place (or not doing damage to the enemy during the alliance) , or not at war with common enemies.
    You are in the AIís shunned government, and the AI isnít in that government.
    You are in a different government than the AI.
    You have razed cities.
    You disbanded slaves.
    Not paying tribute.
    You have trade embargos against them.
    Youíve declared war (youíre a warmonger).
    Youíve been at war with that civ before/recently.
    Youíve broken treaties (ROP abuse, peace treaties, trades, etc).
    You got caught using spies.
    You demand tribute from the AI.
    AIís aggression level (it is higher on higher difficulty levels for attitude purposes, this does not mean it will affect sneak-attack possibilities and other things).
    ĎBorder infractionsí (this is only temporarily applied for 1-2 turns).

    If a civ is very furious with you (above +20 in most cases if you have the power lead, +40 if you donĎt have a power lead), you can see there just isnít enough positive things you could do to realistically get them back to annoyed or better.

    Comment


    • #3
      no, that's not what i meant that's all wrong.

      (= jk . . . i think i'll read it now heh.


      [edit] yeah dude that's good stuff. thanks. I'm sure there some diffs between that and Conq, but it gives me a good frame of ref.
      Last edited by Monsto; May 14, 2004, 22:40.

      Comment

      Working...
      X