AI refusing peace

[Legacy66]

Now, I know diplomacy in total war games is often non-existent and there is always an issue with AI's that just will not give up, but it is particularly bad in Rome 2 and in this mod too it seems. Playing as Macedon on normal, I have Rome, Carthage, Ptolemy, their client states, and the Syracuse Usurpers that Carthage liberated all fighting me. The only one of these I declared on was Rome, as they had taken Epirus, Larissa, and were besieging Athens by turn 30. I can totally understand Ptolemaioi attacking me, we are rival Diadochi after all, but does Carthage, Syracuse and Rome really need to be sending endless armies to attack Greece? So far here is the kill count by turn 65, all of these were full 20 unit armies or fleets.

-4 dead Roman armies
-5 dead Carthage armies, 1 dead fleet
-5 dead Ptolemaic armies, 2 dead fleets
-1 dead Nasamones army
-1 dead Syracusan Usurper army

Yet still, none of the AI aren't even remotely close to giving up and more armies are on the way. I've tried offering gold in the tens of thousands, yet they refuse. I control all of Greece and Thrace, thankfully I've managed to get some really good deals and relations with the Dacian and Illyrian tribes so I'm completely safe from that front. These constant invasions of Greece aren't so much a problem as an annoyance, as I can easily wipe out these enemy stacks with hardly any losses thanks to my pikes. It just becomes a slog to play this campaign because every other turn I have an army in Greece to deal with. All I want to do is march east and reconquer Alexander's Empire, but this relentless AI is forcing me to take a lot of time to fight these battles and leave armies back home. The AI should realize they are taking enormous losses in this war and are in no position to win it, not to mention Carthage and Rome are fighting a bunch of other factions as well.

Yes, I know I could just conquer west instead and destroy Rome, Carthage and Syracuse and put an end to it once and for all. But, I like to be somewhat historical in my games and it just feels so much more right to pacify Thrace, secure Greece and march east as Alexander did. I'm going to solve this by building two full fleets that will sink anything that attack Greece, but that's still a large drain on my resources that I really shouldn't be having to deal with. The only time the AI ever really seems to make peace is when they have only one or two provinces left and no real army. Larger nations like Rome, Carthage and Ptolemaioi hardly ever surrender. Perhaps this is just an issue with the beta patch, as I don't remember the AI being so stubborn like this last I played.

[Kolaris8472]

The AI only seems to care about two things: the balance of power bar, and besieged settlements. Armies don't appear to count for much in the balance of power bar either, at least next to economy and region count. So I wouldn't expect Rome, Carthage, or Egypt to ever accept peace unfortunately.

You could try a small expedition to go besiege something and then ask for peace without having to assault. It makes a huge difference. Though if they still decline then you're stuck out on a limb.

[Legacy66]

The AI only seems to care about two things: the balance of power bar, and besieged settlements. Armies don't appear to count for much in the balance of power bar either, at least next to economy and region count. So I wouldn't expect Rome, Carthage, or Egypt to ever accept peace unfortunately.

You could try a small expedition to go besiege something and then ask for peace without having to assault. It makes a huge difference. Though if they still decline then you're stuck out on a limb.

Yeah I noticed the balance of power bar seems to be what really decides if the AI wants to make peace or not, and besieging settlements doesn't seem to help unlike in say Shogun 2. In my Rome game, Carthage didn't care in the slightest that I had two armies besieging Carthage and continued to fight on long after that. I have thought about sending over an army or two to just liberate settlements, but it seems I would need to hit an awful lot of them to bring the balance of power bar down. Maybe once I take Asia Minor the AI will see a larger discrepancy in the balance of power and accept peace. I just wished crushing tons of their armies actually made them more likely to make peace, some sort of war exhaustion system would be nice but probably extremely difficult if not impossible to implement. Still this is a great mod and diplomacy does work well at times, like my dealings with the barbarians. Almost all of Europe has united against Rome at this point! But Italy in Turmoil triggered somehow, as Rome still has all their Italian settlements, and I have a feeling I know where those armies are going to be going...

[Kolaris8472]

Interesting, I guess at a certain point the AI stops caring about individual settlements, even if they're the capital. In my experience I can get small factions who have a 'low' chance of peace to accept confederation once besieged - even if I have little chance of actually winning the battle.

Your naval strategy should pay off eventually. The AI likes to send transports unsupported and their navies - especially Carthage - are heavy in support ships. Both go down easily to aggressive ramming tactics.

[nunz]

I've never seen the AI do that in my campaigns to be honest, at least with the constant naval invasions into Greece.

[geala]

From a certain point of view the AI acts rationally. Maybe they lose armies but they keep you from creating an even stronger empire. On what difficulty are you playing? I'm on h/n and I got a peace treaty with Carthage (as Epirus) after I eliminated Rome and freed Sicily from Carthaginian rule.

I'm more annoyed by suicidal AI not accepting peace when in dire straits. I cannot get a peace treaty with the Ardeiai for example which have only two weak regions left that don't even border my regions, have war with 3 other nations and are hard pressed. But I think that is the TW AI and DeI can do nothing about it.

[Michaliscrete]

I don't think ai not accept peace if it thinks it is stronger is bad. If it accept too easy the player can take two settlements and then ask peace, prepare and repeat. When attack someone prepare for total war or don't attack at all. If you have war with a very strong faction the others take advantage and declare war with you. This is very reasonable. Use deplomacy more. Join wars more and you will have an easier campeign. As makedon. Attack epirus so you will be friend with rome. If you declare war to rome celeucids egypt or carthage prepare fot total war and nothing else

[Meraun]

Yeah i got a smiliar issue. in my Rome H/N campaign i have Lusotanna, Cletici, Carthage and Basileon Ordyson on this Rage.

Thats the SituatioN:

-Lusotanna and Celtici keep sending fullstack wich are getting crush every time they land in Italy (They did conquer Corsica, i dont have the Power to get i back yet) wich forces me to keep and strong army in Latium.
This is not and Issue since they keep raiding me and i dont strike back, so why make peace? understandable

Carthage on the other hand just wont give up. i have taken Sicila, Carthage 3 other Regions in North Arfrica and destroy ther allies. Basicly they hood wahts Marocco Today plus their Iberian Regions.
They Refuse every Peace offer i make.

Same goes for Basileon, i have conquered Macedonia and set Athen and Sparta free They hold 3 Regions and getting pushed by myself and the Scordisi. The only reason they are alive is the War between Scordisi and myself, wich occupys every Army near. (Scordisi hold everything from Northrn Europe all the way down to Thracia)

AI shoud agree to peace sooner.

[Dresden]

The AI should agree as a "last stand" priority - basically when down to 1 (maybe 2) regions. If I set it up otherwise, we would be going back to where the AI would go to war then ask for peace and pay you every other turn.

[Felius]

The AI should agree as a "last stand" priority - basically when down to 1 (maybe 2) regions. If I set it up otherwise, we would be going back to where the AI would go to war then ask for peace and pay you every other turn.

Would it be possible to set the length of the war as one of the factors the AI consider when deciding about peace offers? Something to emulate a "war exhaustion" mechanic?

[Meraun]

Will if the old AI is the alternative, i preferre the system we have now

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Will if the old AI is the alternative, i preferre the system we have now

Arguably mate

[Maetharin]

is the balance of power bar in any way moddable?

[Dresden]

Not that I know of - although it seems to take into account treasury too much.

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Not that I know of - although it seems to take into account treasury too much.

I think that's true, as Rome with only half an army and only 2 regions, other factions avoid to declare war on me cause I usually have over 40K

[Borluc]

I'm seeing the same things in my macedon campaign. Factions across the map declare war on me. No one wants trade deals. Factions not even allied teaming up. My public order goes to hell but if ai captures a settlement they get high order for no reason. I'm not seeing lots of strategical options. It's more like you have to know the game's faults to exploit them rather than using logical decision making. I moved from hard to normal and it seems the same.

Why, for instance would a weak Sparta and Athens declare war on me? They had nothing to gain, but it sure gave Rome in roads. Rome had no stake in Athens but they ride an army down to break my siege then ride off.

I think the last version had much better strategy in that the ai seemed to weigh whether attacking you was good for their long term survival. I didn't have tiny factions itching for war or factions from across the sea drawing a target on me when I've had no contact with them.

[Dresden]

I think the last version had much better strategy in that the ai seemed to weigh whether attacking you was good for their long term survival. I didn't have tiny factions itching for war or factions from across the sea drawing a target on me when I've had no contact with them.

Yes they weighed the options, and most likely decided to do the wrong thing Thats why the more aggressive AI is better - in most campaigns they choose the better option to put pressure on the player. Also, difficulty is a real determining factor here.

[Daergar]

Personally I just embrace the Total War and stop looking for peace. If they have regions I don't want to own, I simply liberate every single one, creating a whole slew of one-region factions that I can trade with and can act as a buffer against other factions. Especially since they tend to end up having two full stacks and a garrison on that one tile of the board.

If those end up going to war or whatever, I simply take the hit to my reliability rating, which doesn't even matter at that stage of the game since your allies will remain allies and everyone else already hates your faction but remains docile due to your military power.

Peace is pointless, the old hurts are still there and I don't trust the AI at all. This is especially true if you go up from normal campaign difficulty, so either go back to normal or realize that hard means the board hates you.

[Borluc]

Yes they weighed the options, and most likely decided to do the wrong thing Thats why the more aggressive AI is better - in most campaigns they choose the better option to put pressure on the player. Also, difficulty is a real determining factor here.

First, I want to make it clear that what you do artistically (for no financial gain) I have the highest regard. I know I must come off as just . You have a huge amount of patience which is another admirable quality.

I agree that the ai makes a sound decision in a meta way. However individual countries suffer and die out which doesn't make sense for them. If the game becomes an 2-sided chess match you lose the diplomatic complexity that makes playing one of dozens of ancient factions intriguing. If a large part of the aim is creating a more realistic immersive game, taking that out doesn't make sense. A country that just lost its armies should not fight on and they rarely did with the enemy threatening total destruction.

Furthermore I see little reason for countries you've had no negative interactions with that share no bordors to declaring war. WHY not benefit from a trade agreement instead?

The only suggested strategies i see I see to counter this seem very gamey and frankly grindy. 1.1 felt like the ai was making decisions for each state. They felt ignorant of the factors they didn't see which saved my butt and also caused me to be overly cautious at times as well.

just to point out I've had the same experience in 1.2 on hard and normal.

[Dresden]

I didn't think you came off poorly at all - I was just explaining the reasoning behind it. I agree with you actually in that I would prefer a more varied and nuanced system where various AI personalities can add variety to the campaign. 1.1 had this and it was good in some ways. You had a bit more leeway in diplomacy and not every AI was aggressive.

The issue with that is the same one as always - decisions by AI are a weighted random factor. So, across 1000 campaigns and hundreds of factions, every decision the AI would be weighted more toward the passive route. This is okay in specific circumstances in some campaigns, but when you add it up across the game it leads to a passive AI overall. If we want aggression in the AI at all, we have at accept that decisions will be weighted toward the more aggressive side of things. This means that at times the AI will err on that side rather than the passive side, and have results as you described. Some people prefer the old system and I understand that completely. There is the softcore CAI submod that will lower their aggression settings back to 1.1.

I have found that on Normal if you manage diplomacy and keep an eye on it then it is actually quite rational. You have to work at it, use gifts, join wars, etc but you can have allies. On Hard it starts becoming a problem and harder to manage as you will get backstabbed, which I think is a good thing. Once again - if we want the AI to be able to backstab at all, we have to weigh their decision in that direction. Which means in various campaigns they will err in that direction (as with aggression).