Effect on Reputation of losing luxuries.

Cort Haus · July 20, 2002, 09:32

Losing a luxury-cluster city, when you are using that lux in several trade deals is a real rep-buster. All I did was get attacked repeatedly by Bismark and now they're all angry at me and won't do gpt deals. Haven't they heard of mitigating circumstances?

That tempting but distant cluster of luxuries will become highly contentious, especially if bordering a powerful, aggressive and culture-rich civ. The city could fall to weapons or culture, so this is worth including on the early land-grab strategy consideration.

aside : it's tough trying a peaceful lighthouse-rex strat as the English on Monarch/Standard/Island when you're on a sliver of land between Russia and Germany

Ijuin · July 20, 2002, 13:08

The diplomatic effect is the same any time that you fail to deliver a promised resource or luxury, regardless of the cause. Personally, I would like to see your trade partner's anger directed at the civilization that takes the resource/luxury away from you if the reason for you failing to deliver is because you have lost control of the resource. I mean, when Iraq invaded Kuwait and stopped the flow of Kuwaiti oil to the USA, did the USA get angry at Kuwait for no longer sending the oil, or at Iraq for taking control of the oil supply?

The Mad Monk · July 20, 2002, 13:41

England as Poland?

Cort Haus · July 22, 2002, 14:00

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
England as Poland?

He he - maybe I should rename London as Warsaw.

Rust · July 23, 2002, 00:02

Now I know why the other civs became tight with their goods after I declared war on a civ with 44 g pt deal. I did this because I could no longer afford to pay him without selling buildings or destroying units. I had made the deal during my golden age, see.

Cort Haus · July 25, 2002, 12:23

This rep hit could be a good wound to inflict on an AI opponent. A limited war aim, but with a very long-term consequences.

Hit an enemy luxury-cluster. You don't have to hold on to it - as long as you take the city you can raze, disband, give it away or anything, and the war aims are achieved. This will basically mean an end to gpt deals for that civ with anyone it was trading that lux for, if not everyone.

Txurce · July 26, 2002, 01:13

Does the rule apply to the AI as well, then?

vulture · July 26, 2002, 05:49

Although it's annoying to have civs get annoyed at you for breaking a deal due to circumstances beyond your control, it pretty much has to be that way to avoid some bad exploits. There would be pretty easy ways of destroying your access to resources or cutting of the trade route that wouldn't be your fault. The obvious one is picking a civ to go to war with that will break your trade route. If breaking a deal like this didn't have some kind of penalty, you could use it to trade gpt for techs, start a war, and get the tech for free. And then repeat as often as possible. As it is, you can do it once, and once only. But you can guarantee that whatever criteria was used to decide whose fault it was that a trade was broken, it would be a matter of minutes before someone found an exploit that essentially meant that you could rake in free techs on a fairly regular basis.

So although the current implementation can be frustrating at times (like when you lose three luxury imports because your neighbour decides to attack you, or th civ you are trading with) its posibly the least damaging to game play.

Ijuin · July 26, 2002, 07:32

Yes, that could become an exploit. How about you get half the diplomatic penalty if the loss of the resource/luxury is due to circumstances beyond your control?

Harovan · July 26, 2002, 07:42

I'm not quite sure, but in my opinion the reputation hit does not occur, when the treaty is broken only to the aggressor in the war. In a game quite a while ago, I was in the late ancient age and saw a sneak attack force approach. It was too late to block it, so I bought Monarchy for 25gpt (IIRC) from the obviously attacking civ. It was granted. The next turn they attacked though, and I had the tech just for 25 gold.

I may be incorrect, but I didn't see a reputation hit in the game after this. Anyone out there with similar experiences? Would be interesting to know if this is really the case.

Cort Haus · July 26, 2002, 09:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Txurce
Does the rule apply to the AI as well, then?

Er, I had assumed so, but maybe I was being naive in assuming that the AI has to play by the same rules...

Killerdaffy · July 27, 2002, 08:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I'm not quite sure, but in my opinion the reputation hit does not occur, when the treaty is broken only to the aggressor in the war. In a game quite a while ago, I was in the late ancient age and saw a sneak attack force approach. It was too late to block it, so I bought Monarchy for 25gpt (IIRC) from the obviously attacking civ. It was granted. The next turn they attacked though, and I had the tech just for 25 gold.

I may be incorrect, but I didn't see a reputation hit in the game after this. Anyone out there with similar experiences? Would be interesting to know if this is really the case.

Yep, works for me every time. There is a slight deterrence effect for the AI to break deals that give him lots of gold but if the invasion force is on its way already they are rather single-minded...