Breaking 20 turn deals

columbro · September 28, 2003, 07:43

I was just in the early stages of a very enjoyable diety game when something very frustrating happened.

I currently had a 20 turn deal with France where I was sending them iron and silks and they were sending me wines (I got a tech out of the deal as well).

A couple of turns into the deal, the trade route is broken up some how. I'm not exactly sure how (it was a harbor-harbor route), but I do know I had nothing to do with it as I am not at war with anyone and have no naval units yet (and my harbor is still operational and connected).

So I go to the diplomacy screen and sure enough none of the A1 civs will do 'normal' business with me. ie, they won't accept my 20 turn deal unless it is for gpt or resource(s). In other words, I am known as a deal breaker and not to be trusted.

This stinks. I'm all for the A1 recognizing liars and cheaters, but this wasn't my fault. This also happened to me in a previous game when a MPP forced me to declare war on a civ I had a 20 turn deal with. I thought this was also kind of lame because it's the civ's own fault for declaring war...and the other civs could easily recognize this. But, it seemed a little easier to accept in that case.

Does anyone else think that the A1 should differentiate between a true back stabber and someone whose trade route was disrupted in a benign way?

Also, how do you go about repairing your reputation when it has been damaged in this way? I am playing as the Americans and am next to the Romans so winning a war is not in the cards any time soon. I need to use diplomacy to survive/prevail at this point, and my bad rep is going to make that tough.

Thanks for any help with this and I apologize if this topic has been covered already.

PeaSoup · September 28, 2003, 10:16

it's a part of the game, and you'll have to learn to deal with it and try to avoid it in the future.

signing MPP is an easy way to get into an unwanted war and as a result, breaking a per turn deal.

also, waiting until your ships can traverse ocean squares and then having harbor-harbor trades will be much safer since it will be nearly impossible for anyone to disrupt the trade route.

I've noticed something in 1.27f PTW that worked differently than before. The AI can actually use roads and harbors of civs they are at war with to trade for resources and lux. In one of my games, the Zulu and England shared one continent and were at war with each other. Now, Zulu had 20+ cities but did not have a single harbor, but I was able to trade with them. When Zulu took the last English city and destroyed the harbor in the process, they were cut off from the rest of the world!

So definitely install the latest patch as well..

Catt · September 29, 2003, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by PeaSoup
I've noticed something in 1.27f PTW that worked differently than before. The AI can actually use roads and harbors of civs they are at war with to trade for resources and lux. In one of my games, the Zulu and England shared one continent and were at war with each other. Now, Zulu had 20+ cities but did not have a single harbor, but I was able to trade with them. When Zulu took the last English city and destroyed the harbor in the process, they were cut off from the rest of the world!

So definitely install the latest patch as well..

I think think this was true pre-1.27f as well. Trading (and how trade networks are shared) is a bit screwy and I actually think that a non-belligerent can move goods through a civ's network to a neigbor at war with that civ, but that the neighbor at war couldn't move goods the other way.

In your example, I believe that your civ, being at peace, could move good through English harbors and over English roads right into the enemy Zulu lands -- the English (in the Civ III reality) wouldn't dare interfere with a neutral party's tradegoods. However, the Zulu would not be permitted to move goods through England to get to your harbors. So long as the Zulu were paying for your goods with cash, techs, maps, etc. (anything other than resources that require a trade route), your trade could go on with them even as you used the trade network of their enemy. If it had been a resource-resource trade, I believe the deal would have been broken by the war.

Catt

xinyue · September 30, 2003, 00:50

I have encounter the same question when I can trade luxury through habour-habour with AI in another continent, the trade route need across ocean and I hasn't enough tech to travel it. Thus cause I can trade it in this turn and break out in next turn, and re-trade next next turn, it's really very furious for me. :-)

The_Aussie_Lurker · September 30, 2003, 03:13

They really, REALLY, do have to fix up these trade 'glitches' in the upcoming XP, or I can see a lot of people with VERY angry 'emoticons' clogging up the forums

!!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

The Pioneer · September 30, 2003, 14:06

I don't mind that much the fact that other civs get angry if you break a deal up. What I do mind is

A. That if an MPP is in place I have to go to war once the ally goes to war!? I should have the option to go to war, support the civ with monwy per turn or something else or just nothing!

B. If you break the treaty, it wll be remembered eons later, that should definately go. Civ's should be able to forget after some time passes. If everybody held grudges in the real world we would still be in the stone age!

So long...

Panag · September 30, 2003, 17:10

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
They really, REALLY, do have to fix up these trade 'glitches' in the upcoming XP, or I can see a lot of people with VERY angry 'emoticons' clogging up the forums

!!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

hi ,

they have promised that its fully taken care of , .......

have a nice day

Paddy · September 30, 2003, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
They really, REALLY, do have to fix up these trade 'glitches' in the upcoming XP, or I can see a lot of people with VERY angry 'emoticons' clogging up the forums

!!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

now if only the designers were reading these comments

Rasputin · September 30, 2003, 23:46

Quote:

Originally posted by The Pioneer
I don't mind that much the fact that other civs get angry if you break a deal up. What I do mind is

A. That if an MPP is in place I have to go to war once the ally goes to war!? I should have the option to go to war, support the civ with monwy per turn or something else or just nothing!

the whole idea of MPP is that it is mutual protection. if you dont want to goto war then dont sign one in first palce.....

Quote:

B. If you break the treaty, it wll be remembered eons later, that should definately go. Civ's should be able to forget after some time passes. If everybody held grudges in the real world we would still be in the stone age!

So long...

you mean like the Irish ibn Northern Ireland not forgetting the past, The Balkan wars , the Mid east.....

No humanity never forgets sometimes.

WackenOpenAir · October 1, 2003, 13:36

well, i live in holland, and we certainly "forgot" german invaded us 60 years ago.

i don't think we have problems with the greek either, who conquered the whole world sometime long ago.

Or the spanish we have been at war with for 80 years.

Or the english.

Or the french.

PeaSoup · October 2, 2003, 02:49

well, the AI forgets deals you've broken in the past after a certain # of years (not turns)

In my recent game, my scouts got 3 warriors and popped a city next to Paris, so I sneak attaced and took the city.. Joan was mad at me for 4000 years and nobody would sign a ROP with me, but it's all good now and she is polite again.. after 4000 years..

Paddy · October 2, 2003, 04:25

Quote:

Originally posted by WackenOpenAir
well, i live in holland, and we certainly "forgot" german invaded us 60 years ago.

i don't think we have problems with the greek either, who conquered the whole world sometime long ago.

Or the spanish we have been at war with for 80 years.

Or the english.

Or the french.

You are too kind... far too kind to have these memories...

I have the memories of my Grandparents, of the treatment of a certain class of the Japanese Nation, and the way these people chose to treat the nations that they conquered throughout WWII, last century...

In addition, too this day I am very weary of my dealings with these people. I have some great Japanese friends, but these friendships were not entered into lightly, and have been tempered with time.

I also believe that there will be actual problems for the Japanese Nation in the coming decades, as China surpasses Japan in both technology and wealth. The Japanese committed an amazing amount of atrocities throughout the region, things that have lain very dormant behind the Bamboo curtain...

As they say... the curtain is going up...

Ecthy · October 2, 2003, 04:30

Now I know where panag gets all his post count from

As far as reputation kicks are concerned, I think CIV is way too unforgiving here. Can't be that 2000 years after sneaking on someone they're still angry at me

The Pioneer · October 2, 2003, 13:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Rasputin

the whole idea of MPP is that it is mutual protection. if you dont want to goto war then dont sign one in first palce.....

you mean like the Irish ibn Northern Ireland not forgetting the past, The Balkan wars , the Mid east.....

No humanity never forgets sometimes.

Well, let's see about that. How about the NATO alliance doing nothing in 1974 when Turkey invaded Cyprus. Two memeber States were involved so everybody stayed out of it. I didn't see the Germans or the French or any other nation(excluding the Brits) rushing to side with Bush when he waged an aggresive war against Iraq. They definetely had a choice and took distance form a war they did not agree on.

True some are never forgotten but I don't see Chirac being "Furious" at Schröder because of Hitler and the Nazi regime. Nor does anybody in Persia resent the Greeks because of Alexander the Great.

So long....