Why vassals are useless after 1.29

Chemical Ollie · October 8, 2002, 19:03

I am playing a nice Egyptian emperor game where I have thrown Alex off my continent by capturing Athens, full of wonders and razing the other 7 cities. He is down to 4 useless cities on tiny islands around the continent and still he refuse to give me, the most powerful civilisation of the world, any tech or cities in the peace deal. How could he be so stubborn?

And have someone ever been able to extract anything, goods, tech, gold, whatever from the AI by using the "Take this deal or suffer" button? The AI tries blackmail on you all the time, but you can never do it on them. Or can you? Anyone who have seen it?

Explorer579 · October 8, 2002, 19:13

Vassals are like Saddan Hussein. Despite all threats of use of overwhelming force he did not withdraw from Kuweit. We had to apply serious pressure to convince him we meant business.

That is why you need to wage war and hurt the vassal state a little than offer peace for bounty of war. The smaller the vassal state, the sooner its leader realize you mean business and give you what you want.

Why is civ3 designed this way? Probably because in many cases you cannot realy execute your threat even if you are a superpower. Under a democracy, even if threatening, your senate may not let you wage warn (or your mad people revolting). Much like what may happen to Bush! He can threatens as much as he wants, unless the vassal state sees that he is waging war through power of Congress/Senate, it won't surrender!

Smart implementation of civ3 designer!

Chemical Ollie · October 8, 2002, 19:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Explorer579
Vassals are like Saddan Hussein. Despite all threats of use of overwhelming force he did not withdraw from Kuweit. We had to apply serious pressure to convince him we meant business.

That is why you need to wage war and hurt the vassal state a little than offer peace for bounty of war. The smaller the vassal state, the sooner its leader realize you mean business and give you what you want.

Why is civ3 designed this way? Probably because in many cases you cannot realy execute your threat even if you are a superpower. Under a democracy, even if threatening, your senate may not let you wage warn (or your mad people revolting). Much like what may happen to Bush! He can threatens as much as he wants, unless the vassal state sees that he is waging war through power of Congress/Senate, it won't surrender!

Smart implementation of civ3 designer!

Blackmail was built into the game, so why does it never work on the AI, just the other way around?

War for tech was possible before the 1.29 patch, so this stubborn attitude Alex is showing is a quite new feature.

I am playing the religous Egyptians, so I could fire the senate crown myself as king any time I like. Actually I was under monarchy at the time of the screenshot.

Sheik · October 8, 2002, 20:01

I have gotten a Take this deal or suffer. I was the most powerful and went to Rome, the least powerful, and asked them for something like ten gold and they gave it to me. But not with 1.29

Inverse Icarus · October 8, 2002, 20:12

i've actually gotten things by threatening (monarch). but the AI has to really not want a war with you.

i think at a certain point the AI "gives up".

or perhaps Greece knows you continually declare war on people? they may not be as "stupid" as you probably think they are

Wormwood · October 8, 2002, 22:17

I've gotten cities, tech or gold through threats when at "peace"

Random Passerby · October 8, 2002, 22:18

I have gotten some pretty nice stuff out of blackmail, actually. I think part of getting stuff from blackmail, as well as wringing the AI in peace negotiation, is not just how much more power you have but how much power you can bring to bear. It seems having 30 Cavalry across the border from a city makes the AI much more willing to appease, and if you've got forces poised to take a city the AI will be more desperate to secure a peace treaty.

Of course, this may just be my imagination. Also, this definitely doesn't seem to be reciprocal, since the AI will make threats--and go to war over them--even if you're halfway across the map and they don't have a single ship nearby.

bbaws · October 9, 2002, 02:30

I get a lot through threats as well. This might be my imagination but I find that if I am WAY more powerful than the AI I am threatening I never seem to get anything.

ChrisiusMaximus · October 9, 2002, 14:10

You must have a visible show of strength if you want to scare the AI ,even then it is not always possible to blackmail them.I think sometimes even when faced with overwhelming odds the AI will choose death rather than cede to your demands,some will say this is the stupid AI but I think not.
If youve exiled them from your continent to a small island you will usually need to get some units their to show you mean business or they will never give in to your demands.
On most occasions when you really have them over a barrel they will concede defeat and give tribute but even at these times they have a limit that they will not pass which is variable almost every time.
When I was quite new to civ3 I told Babylon to go suck eggs early on in a game when threatened by them for some tech and Hammy promptly had me hung drawn and quartered,the AI trys threats quite frequently esp early on but theyre usually trying suss out your strength/willingness to go to war.
I always keep an eye on the histograph during early game to see whos who in the power stakes.

igloo_boy · October 9, 2002, 14:55

I think Alex may be so stubborn because you pose no immediate threat to him. In my experience, an exiled civ (one who posseses only tiny island cities) will not cave to your demands for gold and tech if you arent in a position to wipe them out immediately. Usually this means I dont have a transport navy to send military units over to his remote islands. IMO the AI seems to have a knowledge of how many turns it will take you to reach his cities. Without calvary at his city walls, Alex will be a stubborn bastard.

Explorer579 · November 27, 2002, 20:56

When you manage to reduce a civilization to a thirld world status by war, its leader will give you what you want for peace. That is once. Few years or centuries later, you can wage war again and ask them to give you what you want if you are clearly winning. That is twice. After that he vassal state will not succumb to your demands no matter how much you hurt them. They can have their last soldier and city and they won't give in to your demands.

Waging war is important on the vassal state. Threatening is not usually useful with the AI. You have to clearly hurt them. Before you make peace the first or second time, make sure they hurt real well otherwise they won't give you everything you ask for (money, tech, maps). The second time you make them hurt, they will also give you a city.

That's what I found with civ 3 PTW.

Chemical Ollie · November 28, 2002, 07:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Explorer579
When you manage to reduce a civilization to a thirld world status by war, its leader will give you what you want for peace. That is once. Few years or centuries later, you can wage war again and ask them to give you what you want if you are clearly winning. That is twice. After that he vassal state will not succumb to your demands no matter how much you hurt them. They can have their last soldier and city and they won't give in to your demands.

...

This was the first time, and still they refused.

bongo · November 28, 2002, 09:58

Where are your units now? If they are to far away from his island/cities he may feel safe. At least until you move them closer.

The Pioneer · November 28, 2002, 10:41

Well, being a Greek myself the reason why Alex is holding on is because he's a stubborn and proud one

!

Mattaba · November 28, 2002, 11:27

And how about rengotiating a peace treaty?
You can do that every 20 turns and they will give in if you're powerfull enough.

Mad Bomber · November 28, 2002, 11:43

Heck, I have had even more rediculus AI's. Once Rome threatened me for a tech, they were the only ones left, and researching Steampower. I was researching Future tech (yeah don't ask me why I know its useless) and had 95% of the map strewn with american cities. The poor AI, they just NEVER LEARN!

ProPain · November 28, 2002, 11:53

MAd Bomber: I had that once too. Told the comp 'no way' and he declared war. I end up with incredible war weariness but my weak neighbour refuses to make peace. It was a competitive game that could only be entered when a certain vic condition was met... and it wasn't conquest. Sucked.

Mad Bomber · November 28, 2002, 19:03

Quote:

Originally posted by ProPain
MAd Bomber: I had that once too. Told the comp 'no way' and he declared war. I end up with incredible war weariness but my weak neighbour refuses to make peace. It was a competitive game that could only be entered when a certain vic condition was met... and it wasn't conquest. Sucked.

That must have sucked big time. I wish that I could tell you that mine ended the same way, but It didn't. Rome was ethnic cleansed three turns later, and I was looking forward to a little game milking.

Chemical Ollie · November 29, 2002, 17:45

I won the game by culture a perhaps a 100 turns later. This was the last time I played with cultural vic on.