Why dont they want peace?!?!?!?

nutriphat · January 22, 2003, 06:50

I play at regent, large, continents, 8 civs as the french.

I started on the largest continent with england and russia. Wiped out russia quite early, and I left England with a crappy city. Then i made contact with another continent where rome, egypt and greece were.

I was quite strong and started with the romans. I left them with three cities and made peace with them.

in 1700 AD, (give or take) i had artillery and tanks. Egyptians and greece enter my borders and i ask them to leave or declare war. We have equal size forces, but they have only riflemen and cavallery against my tanks and artillery and infantery. SO THEY DECLARE WAR!!! I used the opportunity to run over some cities and take what is rightfully mine. Their forces are no match for me, but i try to make contact with them every turn to make peace as i suffer from WW, but they wont even meet me.

This goes on and on. Capturing 3-4 cities every turn, and continue airlifting new units from 1.continent each turn.

Currently in 1850 AD i im the definately most powerful nation. I have modern armor, and can take them out quite easily, and they know it. How come they do not wanna talk to me and make peace? People should know when they are conquered!!!!

MoonWolf · January 22, 2003, 08:41

It's simply because you are powerful... What happen during the wars against Russia and England? Did you do anything that could hurt your reputation? Also, if you've been fighting against a civ long/ many times, they dislike you and won't have peace with you no matter what. I've been in simular situations myself especially when I want badly peace as the war weariness is bankrupting my empire (maybe that's why they keep it going?)

"send gjerne gaver til meg." --> dette er min gave til deg

The Pioneer · January 22, 2003, 08:48

Take the Germans for example the allies had to capture all of Germany and Berlin before they capitulated.

So long...

nutriphat · January 22, 2003, 09:27

takk for gaven!

I guess my only alternative is to wipe them out, all of them!

ruby_maser · January 22, 2003, 10:07

Quote:

Originally posted by nutriphat
People should know when they are conquered!!!!

Try telling the AI that. Anyway, I'd rather be wiped off the face of the earth than surrender to you too, you warmonger

latka · January 22, 2003, 11:24

The Germans are a bad example of not wanting to make peace. They actually did want to make peace. You may recall the battle of the bulge. The purpose for this offensive was to force the allies back across the Rhine so that they would be put into a sitiuation where they would be willing to make peace, or suffer heavy losses trying to regain what they had lost.

There were many high level English and American commands that did want to make peace, at this point in time. Not for the purpose of ending the war with Germany, but so that the Germans could turn around and put all their forces to the east against the Russians. It was quite clear that by the time the D-Day invasion came, the Russians were going to prove to be a political problem for the westerners.

It was the bureacrates and politicians that chose to uphold the alliance, which in hind site was a stupid move on their part. The failing of a government that is freely elected. If you make peace, you are admitting defeat. You can not preach total victory and then settle for peace without an unconditional surrender. You would be committing political suicide.

Don't get me wrong, this is in no way a justification or an attempt to defend the Nazi government or their ideas.

A better example would be the North Vietnamese. Out gunned, out teched and out supplied, they refused to capitulate. They were successful. The WW was too much for the USA.

Perhaps, if one wishes an opponent to make peace, they should let them take back a couple of cities and then try to negotiate. This may be an appeasment to the defeated.

Datajack Franit · January 22, 2003, 13:36

PILLAGE AND BURN!!!

DuncanK · January 22, 2003, 13:43

To make peace would basically be to surrender. They don't do that in this game. Try SMAC if you want them to surrender

wilbill · January 22, 2003, 15:20

Here's a thought.
Stop attacking. Consolidate your gains. Pull all your units back into your territory in good defensive positions. Let the AI batter itself trying to counterattack for a few turns, let its war weariness set in, then try to contact him.
It's worked for me before.

nutriphat · January 23, 2003, 05:38

Well - i played last nite and, after wiping out the egyptians, and conquered all greeks except one city, they wanted peace (the greeks). But now im facing a new war. The rest of the nations (USA, Iroqois and Babylon) are at war with me, but they are on another continent. I guess i just wait for a couple of turns, if they wont speak with me, i just have to liberate their people too (whooohaa haa haa haaaa haaaa).

The Pioneer · January 23, 2003, 07:51

Sounds like a Bush plan to me?!

So long...

Jamski · January 23, 2003, 08:04

Quote:

Originally posted by The Pioneer
Sounds like a Bush plan to me?!

No a Bush plan involves Trade Embargos untill the target civ is suffering, then precision boming of all the citys to remove the hospitals and aquaducts. Then pillaging all the desert tiles which have oil.

Of course the USA is a hereditary monarchy, so they don't have to worry about WW in this plan.

(I'm just joking, before anyone starts)

-Jam

MoonWolf · January 23, 2003, 10:49

(Why do I think of Metallica's "Sad but true"?) Sorry, just had to...

Quote:

Originally posted by nutriphat
I guess i just wait for a couple of turns, if they wont speak with me, i just have to liberate their people too (whooohaa haa haa haaaa haaaa).

Liberate the people, I use the same reason myself! They are so much happier with me (using investigate city, they often are actually!)

Jamski · January 23, 2003, 11:00

I don't want my people to be happy. I like them just to stay "content". I'm running a civilisation, not a holiday camp.

And I don't want to make forgieners happy either !

-Jam