Not beeing able to cancel pact: shish

Trifna · August 19, 2001, 21:53

How many of you have been obliged to attack without canceling his treaty or pact because that the opponent didn't accept to speak to you?... It's odd, since it seems pretty easy to cancel such pacts. Isn't any need to beofficially received by the other civ's chief to cancel it. He doesn't accept to receive us.... he's the cause, not us. So it should be accepted that we simply send a messenger to yell them that we cancel all this peace stuff, wether their chief talked to us or not. Am I right or not? Any comments?

Timeline · August 19, 2001, 23:13

Yep, you’re right.

In SMAC it was possible to send some types of messages (Cancel peace, Declare War, Withdraw Troops, etc) even if that leader refused to talk to you. This was a really nice feature, and if it was in SMAC, then I am sure it will be in Civ III.

Urban Ranger · August 20, 2001, 00:20

The good thing is, of course, you can do the same thing to the computer players. Let's say you have the Great Wall and is in the process of beating the daylights out of somebody. Now, if you talk, the Great Wall forces peace. If you don't, you can continue on your own merry way.

campmajor! · August 20, 2001, 07:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Trifna
How many of you have been obliged to attack without canceling his treaty or pact because that the opponent didn't accept to speak to you?... It's odd, since it seems pretty easy to cancel such pacts. Isn't any need to beofficially received by the other civ's chief to cancel it. He doesn't accept to receive us.... he's the cause, not us. So it should be accepted that we simply send a messenger to yell them that we cancel all this peace stuff, wether their chief talked to us or not. Am I right or not? Any comments?

Yes, that has happened many times. Usually in civ2 I just attacked them. Because whether your reputation was good or not, in the end the AI players will all attack you!

So it doesn't matter if your rep gets damaged. Just kill or be killed!

Grim Legacy · August 20, 2001, 07:33

Still I always kind of enjoyed having a good reputation.

The trick was that I used to wage war under primitive forms of government and never made peace once at war with an opponent.

Timeline · August 20, 2001, 08:55

Quote:

The good thing is, of course, you can do the same thing to the computer players. Let's say you have the Great Wall and is in the process of beating the daylights out of somebody. Now, if you talk, the Great Wall forces peace. If you don't, you can continue on your own merry way.

I think you may be wrong about that Urban Ranger. If you have the great wall then all civs must offer you peace, it does not force you to make peace. If they have it on the other hand then it would be a bit more like what you were saying.

Also, in early versions of Civ 2 it was possible to avoid being forced in to peace by your senate if you were a democracy by simply avoiding contact with that civ. That was fixed later though in a patch. “Senate meets behind your back and signs peace treaty” - I just have’em all executed, and declare martial law to keep my people in line. Sure my government will collapse, but I always make sure I am the one standing after the dust clears

Democracy isn’t good for war anyway, well not for starting them.