 |
|  |
 |
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001 time: 23:21
|
|
I have been attacked by countries, usually the more aggressive ones but not always, using RoP, so that isn't a guarantee. True, sometimes, a RoP will prevent an attack. I wouldn't want to count on Persia not using it to attack.
Several times I have triied this experiment. The turn after I was attacked, I saved the game; went into the autosave and played from the point either just before the attack or several turns before; and played more than a dozen different games in each of the cases; some starting several turns before the attack. All to see if anything would prevent the attack. The first thing I did was make a RoP with the civ; it still attacked. When I was done experimenting, I went back to playing the original save. The RoP itself never, by itself, stopped the attack. It even accelerated the attack in some cases.
The AI has done(RoP abuse) this to other AI civs in a number of my games.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Epistax

|
 |
of Bananas
May 2001 time: 00:21
|
|
Personally I do not have a problem with ROP agreements, because.
IF another civilization settles a city close to our area, our culture will deliver it into our hands.
IF the civilization settles a city far away from our area, then it will not last.
Additionally, a ROP agreement almost never allows a civilization to walk on new territory boxed in. We do not have an inpenatrable wall of culture.
Also, a ROP agreement promotes conflict between rival civilizations as they have freer access to eachothers cities (that is, if we were to sign it with greece, they might declare war on germany).
Currently we do not have a wall of culture, so a ROP agreement would have zero negative effects. They can get to the other side already, and they wont declare war while the ROP is in effect. Additionally, we can extract funds from such agreements.
Simply put: ROP insures safety from a civilization, gives whatever it was traded for, and it improves our intelligence on the enemy (seeing new units, seeing wars, etc).
Finally, there is nothing funnier than signing two ROP agreements with rival civs and then to see them duke it out in your territory. Pull up a chair.
For the sanity of this thread, when you reply, don't quote this whole message.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
We don't need right of passage at this moment.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001 time: 06:21
|
|
Sorry to be dissonant, but I think we should sign RoPs with every Civ which is not a direct and obvious threat to us (and I don't deem the immortalless and REXing Persia to be an immediate threat).
RoPs are not intended to avoid wars. But they can be used to ruin the reputation of an attacking Civ (effectively limiting its likeliness to ally with other Civs). Tehy're also very good to raise AI's behavious towards us, which means the sell cheaper and buy higher.
It also means their prices to ally against us will be higher, especially if they don't want to ruin their reputation.
Let's face it : after the war with France, and the Finishing-off war with America, we'll be the largest Civ, and the first power after developing our infrastructure. But the odds won't be outstanding. Beating one AI will be pretty easy, beating 2 would be tricky, and beating 3 AIs allied against us would be near impossible.
We need polite / gracious neighbours to avoid being attacked by several of them, unexpectedly. It will also give us the initiative of war, as soon as a RoP treaty is over.
(of course I favor an absolutely spotless reputation over the whole course of the game)
EDIT : but I agree, RoPs are currently unnecessary, as the Ais didn't create embassies towards each other. Once AIs begin to sign RoPs among each other, we'll have to do the same.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
This is to summarize what has been discussed till now on the right use of ROP agreements.
Feel free to indicate any error (material or interpretation), I ll edit it as required.
Preliminary synthesis
- Everybody agrees on sneak attack during a ROP agreement : Strictly forbidden.
The cost of ROP agreements
- Binds us during 20 turns (Gepap, Davout) ; Spiffor says, in his positive style, that we gain freedom to attack at the end of the 20 turns ! 
- A ROP agreement does NOT prevent an AI to attack (tested by Kring and Togas).
The value of ROP agreements
- Increase the chances of conflict between the AI civ (Epistax, Kloreep, Spiffor).
- Improve intelligence on enemy civ (Espitax, Robber Baron).
- Raise trade conditions we obtain from our partner and deteriorate those granted by our partner to our enemies (Spiffor).
Preliminary conclusion
Right now there is no need to sign ROP agreements (Gepap, JD2007, Sheik, Spiffor, MrPresident, Davout, Skywalker). Nevertheless, considering the above, this is far from precluding an appropriate use of ROP agreements in the future.
ROP agreements with Abananaba Minor civs are to be considered (Shiber).
Everything of importance has certainly not yet been noted, so all comments, either by those presently taking part or by new ones, will still be appreciated.
Last edited by DAVOUT on 05-08-2002 at 22:23
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
Shiber,
Edited.
Skywalker,
Edited.
Last edited by DAVOUT on 05-08-2002 at 22:45
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|