diplomatic solution to AI encroachment

Ray K · November 6, 2001, 16:05

Yes, I've dealt with the problem of AI settlers trying to cross my land to get to a 1-2 square "open" spot in the middle of it. One frustration is when you finally get the diplomatic option to force them to leave, they are often placed right into the spot that they are trying to get to!

Here is the most straightforward and, I think, best solution. Once an AI crosses into your land, you can tell him to leave just like it is now. But after that warning, you should have the option to tell him, via the diplomacy screen, that any more encroachment into your land by military units or settlers will be considered an automatic DECLARATION OF WAR -- by them. This would be the exact opposite of the "Right of Passage" agreement.

That will keep out the AI 95% of the team, and it gives you the right to attack anyone that encroaches.

Of course, the AI will have the option to place the same restriction on you.

Grundel · November 6, 2001, 19:50

I must admit, I rarely have a problem with this. When the Computer decides he likes a little spot in my country and plops down a city, my borders usually swallow the city up.

David Weldon · November 7, 2001, 17:19

You can also simply place units on the "open" squares to prevent the AI settler from getting there. If there are too many open areas, you can just use 3 units to from a moving wall and prevent the settler from moving towards you.

Kinda cheesy, but think of it as providing an "escort" for their diplomats who are touring your lands...

David Weldon · November 7, 2001, 17:22

Double Post. Friggin connection....

Jeff George · November 7, 2001, 17:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Ray K
Yes, I've dealt with the problem of AI settlers trying to cross my land to get to a 1-2 square "open" spot in the middle of it. One frustration is when you finally get the diplomatic option to force them to leave, they are often placed right into the spot that they are trying to get to!

Here is the most straightforward and, I think, best solution. Once an AI crosses into your land, you can tell him to leave just like it is now. But after that warning, you should have the option to tell him, via the diplomacy screen, that any more encroachment into your land by military units or settlers will be considered an automatic DECLARATION OF WAR -- by them. This would be the exact opposite of the "Right of Passage" agreement.

That will keep out the AI 95% of the team, and it gives you the right to attack anyone that encroaches.

Of course, the AI will have the option to place the same restriction on you.

The computer players do have this option, I think. After multiple transgressions they will tell you that if you do not move it will be considered an act of war.

Hey, come my avatar doesn't show up on my posts?

Xerxes137 · November 7, 2001, 20:54

I still think they should add a Monroe Doctrine that would make it an act of war for the AI to place cities anywhere on your continent. But nobody else seemed to like that idea.

Xerxes

AceCiv · November 7, 2001, 21:00

Settlers become immigrants after 3 turns.

or diplomatically...

"Welcome to . A visa has been issued to you for a temporary stay within our borders. Your extended stay will be taken as a desire to immigrate."

old dog · November 7, 2001, 21:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Ray K
Yes, I've dealt with the problem of AI settlers trying to cross my land to get to a 1-2 square "open" spot in the middle of it. One frustration is when you finally get the diplomatic option to force them to leave, they are often placed right into the spot that they are trying to get to!

For all the complaining on the board, this is the ONLY thing that has really bugged me in my playing so far. It definitely gives me the feeling that I am playing a different game than my opponents.

I don't know about a solution, though, other than to consistently give the civ (human or computer) a choice between declaring war or being take back to the last square he passed through in his own territory.

General Ludd · November 7, 2001, 22:36

There already is an option of telling them to get out or go to war.

The only sollution for this that I can think of is to make it so that when you tell them to go out, they leave the quickest way possible, and will not enter again untill the "get out of my land" wears off. (standard 20 turns) Maybe this should only happen with the get out or go to war option, though.

godeater · November 7, 2001, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by old dog
For all the complaining on the board, this is the ONLY thing that has really bugged me in my playing so far. It definitely gives me the feeling that I am playing a different game than my opponents.

I don't know about a solution, though, other than to consistently give the civ (human or computer) a choice between declaring war or being take back to the last square he passed through in his own territory.

While I unfortunately will have to wait until the Christmas holidays before I can play Civ3, I can honestly say this kind of constant micromaging fills me with dread.

I don't want to have to keep track of countless encroaching enemy settlers *every turn* to shoo them out!!

Grunthex · November 8, 2001, 01:07

After many many hours of playing, I've come to realize one thing. As much as we HATE the trespassing, the AI suffers the same way. Ok, so it demands YOU live HIS territory. You do. Next turn, you go back. He demands again, you leave. You go back. Repeat ad nauseum. He's unlikely to declare war over it, unless he feels he can stomp you a bit (much like you on him), but he can't stop you any more than you can stop him.

The difference is the AI has the patience. It doesn't mind demanding you leave every turn. In my last game, I made myself happy to demand withdrawal every turn, and things were fine.

Xard · November 8, 2001, 01:35

Personally, I think they need to check the AIs coding on borders, because the AI seems to have NO qualms what-so-ever with just tromping through your backyard, and building right up against your borders. It's about the only major problem I've found with the AI so far, and it makes me sad. I've gone to war in my games many times because some random civ wouldn't get the hell out of my territory, then after I toss them around some, and then make peace with them, the next turn they're running around in my borders again, and bam war is redeclared

I think the settlement rule should be changed so that its war to settle right along the border, because theoretically then you can get their city, but generally those cities really blow, and I, being a perfectionist about my cities, hate to have overlap because it's obnoxious when it comes to urban planning.

Mercani · November 8, 2001, 03:11

Yes, I also don't like AI settling near my border or between my cities. But I do the same to HIM. And, I think only a settler is not considered a "troop"(worker also), so you can pass through his borders and found a city on his backyard.

LaRusso · November 8, 2001, 04:58

whenever i ask AI to leave for the second time, it leaves, because there IS an option that further tresspassing is war.

old dog · November 10, 2001, 05:34

Two things:

1. Godeater, just my opinion, but I don't think it's as bad as Civ2 in this regard. I have often told a settler to leave twice, and after the second time seen it turn around and go somewhere entirely different, typically a totally undisputed area.

2. I think people are complaining about three entirely different things in this thread.

First, that encroaching settlers cause a lot of wars... I agree, but I see this as realistic and far better than "arbitrary" wars over nothing at all.

Second, that this encroachment causes a lot of micromanagement... I agree, but don't think it's that bad unless your map is so big that no particular area means that much to you, in which case I would blame the size of your map. (I like the idea of huge worlds, but they really make move-to-move decisions feel less important.)

Third, that settlers are jumping forward through your territory when told to leave... I really believe this shoud be fixed.