Does the AI put off war because it can expand?

[Miznia]

I've generally gotten the impression that the AI doesn't declare war early in the game because it still has room to expand. I'm starting to believe that I'm wrong about that: I think the AI will declare war on anyone sufficiently weak (in comparison). Thus the reason why there aren't many wars while there is still room to expand, is because the players are too equal in strength.

What do you think? I've been playing with modded rules designed to slow ICS; I've made myself the "Spanish", starting out in Australia, with a Super Hoplite UU (it's basically a Modern Armor). I just sit and watch with the "multi" cheat. There are basically never wars, until people get aggressive towards me because I'm not building enough Super Hoplites to impress them (it's incidentally obvious that the AI is not correctly assessing my strength).

I also suspect that as soon as one country declares war on me, other countries join in as part of a deal. For instance, I was Spain (in Spain), and Korea (in Korea) declared war on me; ultimately most of the world was at war with me, and I assume it's because the Aztecs made a deal like "we'll join your war against the Spanish in exchange for Mapmaking" or some crap. Do you think this is what's happening? Because I'm not sure it's a good thing.

peace

Miznia

[grapedog]

I am currently playing a game on Regent and oddly enough the Japanese were the first to get the shaft, I'm not sure what they did but about 5 Civ's jumped on them. I feel bad for that first weaker Civ to get jumped on. After a while they started making peace and turned to other civ's...like mine. I was playing the bab's as I really enjoy the Rel/Sci bonus's and had mostly some spearmen. As soon as I saw that little warmongering bastard Ghandi stacking troops I started mass pro-ducing units. In the end Ghandi got the English, Americans, Aztecs and French to attack me. THankfully I was at the end of a continent, so I had a good few turns before anyone but Ghandi was able to attack me and in the end I gained two indian cities and managed to turn all the other attackers away before they did any damage(does that make India more cross with them?)

Anyhow, I think the AI Civ's are really easy with going into war...it kinda sucks how at the drop of the hat they will do it. "No way!! You'll give me your territory map and all I've got to do is go to war for you!! Sweett! Lets Roll!"...I mean really.

[Jaybe]

This behavior can also apply when YOU attack someone. Had an MPP with Mao. Montezuma attacks me and Mao proceeds to basically get the whole world at war with the Aztecs. I have long since taken all their good land and made peace.

Some of the other countries have invaded, had some combat or razed some town and also made peace.

[spy14]

I dont think they always pay each other, i just got attacked by the russians so i paid persia and greece some dyes to attack them. Kept them off my back and gave them the kicking they deserved i thought. But then about 6 other civs all declared war on russia independantly, which makes me think the AI just senses potential weakness and moves to take advantage of it

[Jon Shafer]

Yes Miznia. I've only seen AI civs go to war with each other once before 1000 AD on a huge sized map.

[star mouse]

The early part of the game is a good time to take out an AI civ if you have a few advantages, such as good terrain with cows and stuff. In my current game, I took out the Russians early (but I left them with one city, and they've been a one-city state for 4000 years). That gave me more room to expand early.

he AI is hell-bent on expansion early, which leaves it weak. It's quite possible to take out a 6-city AI civ with half a dozen swordsmen before AD rolls around.