Should the AI respect your borders?

[Adagio]

Let's say you kick the AI out once, shouldn't that make it an act of war if the AI crosses the borders again (unless of cause you have made a right-of-passage agreement)???

[Grumbold]

I certainly don't understand why border agreements do not last a few turns like the others. 20 turns is too long but even 10 would give some surcease from the endless wandering unit problems. Of course that concept came from CtP and we know Firaxis didn't look at the competition to see if they had any good ideas worth adopting.

[D4everman]

Perhaps it should be changed so that if the AI violates your border after you've told it not to the player should be able to declare war with no penalties on their reputation.

[Blackadar1]

Yes. Something needs to be done b/c borders only apply to the human player in Civ III as it stands.

[Robert Plomp]

if the AI crosses your border it IS an act of war,
but you can decide to not declare war. It's your choise.

Like the countries in East Europe suffered the presence of Russian troops. The population wished the russians would go, but they weren't at war.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by CyberShy
if the AI crosses your border it IS an act of war,
but you can decide to not declare war. It's your choise.

Like the countries in East Europe suffered the presence of Russian troops. The population wished the russians would go, but they weren't at war.

But why do they ACCEPT the agreement to stop violating the borders? If the diplomacy answer was "I'll go where I like" then fine, lets have a war. It is not acceptable to have them go "Certainly, we're leaving" only to repeat the violations next turn. The words do not match the actions.

[Grim Legacy]

Hmmm not sure. I haven't been really bothered by frequent AI intrusions.

I did note the Germans keeping to move their settler+spearman through my territories to found a city on the polar region of the continent in one game. But they don't interdict movement, they don't inhibit food/resources harvesting, basically, they are harmless.

Come to think of it, the americans stationed some defensive troops in my lands too, but they were of no hindrance until pollution came to be on the square they occupied. They left upon request though.

[Robert Plomp]

But why do they ACCEPT the agreement to stop violating the borders? If the diplomacy answer was "I'll go where I like" then fine, lets have a war. It is not acceptable to have them go "Certainly, we're leaving" only to repeat the violations next turn. The words do not match the actions

yeah, that's what the germans said to the dutch as well in 1945,
don't worry, we'll leave you out of this..........

the AI is evil
kill them for their evil lies !
declare war on them and raze their cities !
They'll learn to handle you with respect !
Lying bastards !

[MarkG]

i dont respect the ai borders either

[Dev]

Originally posted by CyberShy
if the AI crosses your border it IS an act of war,
but you can decide to not declare war. It's your choise.

I fail to follow your logic.

To use a real life example then you're saying that the netherlands declared war on germany in 1940 when the germans crossed the border, and that the they could have avoided being occupied by not declaring war because it was their choice.

?

/dev

[Adagio]

Originally posted by CyberShy
if the AI crosses your border it IS an act of war,
but you can decide to not declare war. It's your choise.

Yes that can be that way, but what if I want to keep peace with them, but I don't want them inside my borders. It's really annoying telling them to leave, they say "sure, we'll leave", and the next turn they enters my country again

They shall stay out of my country

[Robert Plomp]

To use a real life example then you're saying that the netherlands declared war on germany in 1940 when the germans crossed the border, and that the they could have avoided being occupied by not declaring war because it was their choice.

Well, the germans didn't only cross the border,
they started to shoot as well.

I fail to follow your logic.

keep on trying !

Yes that can be that way, but what if I want to keep peace with them, but I don't want them inside my borders

Seems they don't want to have peace with you.
If you want to play a game in which the AI does what you want to do, buy a 16 pc-netwerk and wait until the mp patch shippes. Then play against yourself 16 times

[Zizka]

>>Like the countries in East Europe suffered the presence of Russian troops. The >>population wished the russians would go, but they weren't at war.

Err.. NO!

The COMMUNIST governments of many EE countries accepted the presence of Russian troops under the aegis of the Warsaw Pact treaty. Indeed not all EE countries had Russian troops in them. By thsi logic it was an intergovernemental access agreement. (Yeah ok the population wasnt too happy about both the Russians and communism..) but this was hardly trespassing. Threspassing is more like the US sticking troops in China, despite china telling the US to find some other form of self-gratification.

THE AI should repect the same logic as humans.. Trepass #1 = warning Trespass #2 -= war.. end of story I hate doubel standards .. teh AI just trespasses.. on .. and on..

It just make sit soo hard to play benelovent power when the AI refuses to stop rampaging through you and YOU have to declare war to stop despiteteh fact that they are the ones who are commiting acts of war..

Heh he.. oen cute solution a friend suggested.. any non-access granted unist in your territory are considered "free-lunch" and attack them gratis without declaring war...

"ahh they are 'renegades' and/or you 'could not care less' .. well I guess that means you could care less I clobber them"

Z

[Vytae]

"But why do they ACCEPT the agreement to stop violating the borders? If the diplomacy answer was "I'll go where I like" then fine, lets have a war. It is not acceptable to have them go "Certainly, we're leaving" only to repeat the violations next turn. The words do not match the actions"

You must not be thinking clearly or not remebering history. Plenty of times in our history have people said " Sure,well go away" only to invade next day,or do some other annoying politico thing.


Heres a rough example,when Hitler was starting his rise to power Churchill (British prime minister at the time) talked with Hitler and basicly asked him are you going to invade or what? Hitler said naw,just reuniting germans we wont cross any more borders we promise we bo good lil boys. Little while later Poland was occupied and WW2 starting to rage.

The Very randomness of the Ai's diplomacy makes it realistic,you cant trust any politico to do ANYTHING they say they gonna do.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Vytae
Heres a rough example,when Hitler was starting his rise to power Churchill (British prime minister at the time) talked with Hitler and basicly asked him are you going to invade or what? Hitler said naw,just reuniting germans we wont cross any more borders we promise we bo good lil boys. Little while later Poland was occupied and WW2 starting to rage.

The difference here is that the AI don't want to attack me (only the enemy in the other side of my country). It's not like I tell them to back off, they agree just to attack me next turn. It's like I tell them to go back, they go back, they crosses the borders, I tell them to go back, they go back again, they crosses the borders again, etc...etc...etc...And this keeps going this way until one of those countries are wasted

[Dev]

Originally posted by CyberShy


Well, the germans didn't only cross the border,
they started to shoot as well.

THEY declared war and that by just moving their troops across the border.

Hitler didn't go "hahah our troops is on your soil, now you can either live with it or declare war and take the world opinion hit"
Which is basicly what the AI does by not removing its units or moving them back next turn-

Edit:
Of course this should go for the human player too, no treespassing without declaring war.

/dev

[dr.charm]

1) There were no German troops in the Netherlands in 1945, the Canadians had liberated the country by that time.

2) Churchill was not the Prime Minister of Britain until mid way through 1940, almost a year after the war had actually started with the invasion of Poland. The Prime Minister who 'allowed' Hitler to 'reunite provinces' was Neville Chamberlain.

3) IMHO, if requested to leave, the AI should have to keep his troops off your territory for at least a few turns.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

[Zizka]

Ie Hitler analogy

Yes The reference to the Rhur and rhineland occupations are good. But you have to realize that withe the exception of the Rhur issue most of the occupations were after some diplomatic messages and assurance were made. Yet the moment a german army entered a nation which distinctly told the germans to "go bugger off" (Poland) we had the merry old tiem called WWII begin.

In terms of history people conveniently remeber only outcomes not process. Hitler did not enter Austria or Czechoslovakia (sudetenland) without the explicit (if gruding) ok of France and Britain (and Russia for Cz). Yes there weer a few momenst (mostly 20th century) wheer some "border violations" did occur, but in general, throughout history the presence of military force, on one's sovereign territory, without invitation was simply viewed as an act of war and teh relatiosn of teh "agressor suffred as a result.

Here's an example teh Duc D'Eghien masterminded a plot to try to kill Napoleon. nappy promplty sent a company across the rhine into Baden to capture him and bring him to trial 9and execution). the rest of europe reacted rather badly (and in part this action was cited as a part of the cuasus bellis on France hereafter)

Another example (from caesar's gallic war). Why did Ceasar lead an army into Helvetia and southern gaul .. to keep the helvetians (and later Germans) from making foothold (a bit generalized). Same for marius and sulla .. they hardly let teh Cimbri-teutones and Pamphalogians romp at will through roman territory.

The issue for me isnt "are you strong eenough to repulse me. them kick me out." The issue should be "why do i have to suffer the penalties of declaring aggressive war on someone who is clearly the aggressor!"

At a minimum I'd liek to see an option after the second transgression "Declare war for treaty /trespass"
A simple check (which is already in the game) wil do
IF -DOES X HAVE UNITS IN MY BORDERS
and
-DID I PROTEST THAT VIOLATION ALREADY
then
I HAVE THe right to declare war WITHOUT penalty (in essence the trespassing power should be seen as the agressor)

Z

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Vytae
You must not be thinking clearly or not remebering history. Plenty of times in our history have people said " Sure,well go away" only to invade next day,or do some other annoying politico thing.

Heres a rough example,when Hitler was starting his rise to power Churchill (British prime minister at the time) talked with Hitler and basicly asked him are you going to invade or what? Hitler said naw,just reuniting germans we wont cross any more borders we promise we bo good lil boys. Little while later Poland was occupied and WW2 starting to rage.

Incorrect analogy. Germany did not invade any country more than once, get asked to leave and come back later. They stormed in, declaring war or the right for lebensraum, and stayed. That is not the same thing.

If the Civ wants a rights of passage agreement (which exists in Civ 3) it should ask for one, and declare war if it does not get it and thinks it worth fighting over. The treaty exists in the game it just is not implemented properly.

[TheDarkside]

In the hundreds of hours of gameplay I experienced so far, borders are fine. The only times I experience blatant border intrusions is when I am a weak civ compared to the others, and that is really rare with the way I play (usually on regent though... monarch frightens me). There is one problem with escorted settlers though, apparently the AI does not consider his escorted settler as a tresspassing, since it will never stop marhcing his settlers though your land to get to that open field on the other side of your empire... Just use your units to block him from going