10-09-2002 20:53									#1
	Refresher needed - How maintain reputation? Enter the AD-FREE zone

After last game, I think I need a refresher in how reputation is maintained and destroyed.

Obvious reputation wreckers are:
-- combat without declaration of war
-- breaking MPP
-- being top dog way way above other civs.

But what about these?

1. Short war: Settling for peace with Egypt before 20 turn Military Alliance with Rome vs Egypt expires?

2. Embargo: Setting up a trade embargo?

3. City capture: Taking a few cities and then settling for peace?

4. Resource grabbing: Building a city taking a resource near another civ border, or superceeding a colony?

In last game, I think I did #1 and haunted me for entire game. Ugh.

More Questions:
A-- How do you monitor your reputation?

B-- How much will a "bad" reputation hurt?

C-- How can I repair a poor reputation?

D-- Is there a way to wreck a targeted AI civ's reputation?


Thank you for your suggestions.

-- PF

	10-09-2002 21:00									#2
	Re: Refresher needed - How maintain reputation? Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by planetfall After last game, I think I need a refresher in how reputation is maintained and destroyed. Obvious reputation wreckers are: -- combat without declaration of war -- breaking MPP -- being top dog way way above other civs. But what about these? 1. Short war: Settling for peace with Egypt before 20 turn Military Alliance with Rome vs Egypt expires? 2. Embargo: Setting up a trade embargo? 3. City capture: Taking a few cities and then settling for peace? 4. Resource grabbing: Building a city taking a resource near another civ border, or superceeding a colony? In last game, I think I did #1 and haunted me for entire game. Ugh. More Questions: A-- How do you monitor your reputation? B-- How much will a "bad" reputation hurt? C-- How can I repair a poor reputation? D-- Is there a way to wreck a targeted AI civ's reputation? Thank you for your suggestions. -- PF

1: I find it it makes the rest of the world furious or annoyed with me

2: If you mean the trade emargo pact, yes. Putting ships around a harbor, IDK, never did it.

3: See #1

4: It would only offend that civ in question.

A: Reguarly press F4 and find out.

B: I'm not sure, ask Firaxis.

C: Charity, time, and more Charity.

D: AFAIK, you can't. There is no "third party" way of doing anything in this game. I could see exposing an enemy spy would but how often is that.

	10-09-2002 21:10									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Do not forget to establish embassies with everybody. Those you forget tend to dislike you... Trade as much as possible, while not bleeding AIs dry.

	10-09-2002 21:15									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Actually, there are many ways to ruin a targets rep.

The easiest is to cause him to break a trade deal. You can remove the luxury or resource he is trading either by cutting the trade route, blockading harbors, nuke his capital, or grabbing the tile yourself.

If he declares war on you while having a unit in your territory, this will count as a ROP infraction (whether or not there was one in place). This is very easy to achieve. You can also do this by asking him to ally against someone else when you know he's got units there already. Since the AI only loosely follows the guideline of stay in your own country these are easy.

One of my favorites is to get them into a war with someone they just got a peace treaty with.

	10-09-2002 21:19									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

How about demanding tribut until they declare war on you and let them give the first punch.

That would ruin it to I guess.

	10-09-2002 22:12									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

You're confusing two distinct game concepts here: attitude and reputation. From a recent post in the Strategy Forum:

Reputation is driven by your diplomatic and trading history. Made a peace treaty and then declared war again with 20 turns? Bad. Made a military alliance and then made peace with the enemy within 20 turns? Bad. Agreed to a gold-per-turn trade deal and then had the deal broken? Bad. Attacked a civ without first declaring war and/or declared war with any of your units inside the enemy civs territorial borders? Bad. Basically, not honoring your commitments results in a black mark against your reputation. Black marks may prevent you from entering into any per-turn deals in the future -- break a treaty in the Middle Ages and you may still have trouble in the late Industrial Ages trading with a civ for that extra supply of oil that they have within their borders and/or for that extra luxury which could mean so much to your larger, marketplace-equipped industrial cities - they "would never accept such a deal" with someone known for breaking his / her word in the past.

Attitude is simply a civ's current state of mind regarding your civ. Develop your empire into the world's dominant civ? Expect some negative attitudes. Hold a seemingly insurmountable technological / military lead? Expect some negative attitudes. Refuse to trade with your neighbors? Expect some negative attitudes. Refuse to ever grant an RoP and insist, at the first opportunity, on expelling interlopers? Expect some negative attitudes. Fight wars against your neighbors? Expect some negative attitudes. Rule your empire under a government that is a "shunned governement" for the AI civ? Expect mildly more negative attitudes. I don't fully understand the implications of a negative attitude - I'm pretty certain that it strongly affects an AI civ's decision regarding a UN vote; I suspect it makes certain trade deals harder to strike; I suspect that it makes alliances against you easier to secure; and I suspect that it makes war more likely. In at least certain circumstances, I have noticed that attitude does not affect the price of trade deals, but it certainly could in other circumstances.

Reputation and attitude are not joined at the hip -- you can have a sterling reputation and still have the entire world furious with you; and you can have a despicable reputation, but still have the world Gracious to you (I really enjoy seeing "Gracious" Elizabeth, in her most charming and gracious manner, say "We couldn't possibly accept that deal after the perfidy you displayed in your dealings with the Aztecs").

Catt

	10-09-2002 22:17									#7
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

And so was it attitude or reputation that caused the Romans not to offer any of their 4 techs for peace, even though they were down to one city and 3, then 2, and then 1 defender?

I would think with 2 armies at their doorstep and having a 4 tech lead, before dying the AI would trade a least one tech for peace.

--PF

	10-09-2002 22:24									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Catt, I just love posts like this...

BTW - seemingly, there is no way to tell one's reputation at a glance, right? One can just guess considering reactions of trading/negotiating partners?

	10-09-2002 22:31									#9
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by planetfall And so was it attitude or reputation that caused the Romans not to offer any of their 4 techs for peace, even though they were down to one city and 3, then 2, and then 1 defender? I would think with 2 armies at their doorstep and having a 4 tech lead, before dying the AI would trade a least one tech for peace. --PF

Don't know. Could be both. I've found that AI civs are less likely to make peace if I've previously broken peace treaties (i.e., I've blackened my reputation and proven my "peace treaty" isn't worth the paper it's written on). I've also found AI civs unwilling to make peace when my reputation is spotless - usually when I have waged multiple successful wars against that particular AI (we're "traditional enemies").

I prefer to think of such a circumstance as either: (1) an heroic AI choice to fight to the death rather than surrender to me; or (2) that particular AI knows it has lost, but doesn't have the option of reloading, restarting, or just turning off the game to go outside and do something else -- it chooses to commit suicide and retire to the AI civ lounge to b*tch and moan about the unfair tactics employed by the human player.

Catt

Edit for spelling.

	10-09-2002 22:37									#10
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by vondrack BTW - seemingly, there is no way to tell one's reputation at a glance, right? One can just guess considering reactions of trading/negotiating partners?

The only way I can tell is if I offer up a resource / RoP / gold-per-turn deal and my trade advisor warns me that the would "never accept such a deal." If I propose the deal anyway, depending upon the nature of the black mark on my rep and the attitude of the potential trading partner, I can get seemingly polite declinations or vicious denunciations of my proposal. I try very hard to preserve my reputation, but sometimes I ruin it inadvertantly -- when I do I like to make unacceptable proposals just to see the funny responses (I haven't looked in all the text files to see the possibilities).

Also, PF - there may be exceptions (like just before extermination), but I can't recall an AI civ even consenting to see my envoy during the first 5 turns of war. I don't know if your specific case was a refusal to agree to peace or a refusal to even see your envoy.

Catt

Edit for spelling.

	10-09-2002 22:43									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Catt,

Agree to Peace. Would accept Peace for Peace but not ( Peace+1 tech ) for ( Peace ). Everyone kept complaining about "we remember what you did to Egypt" so I guess it was reputation. Like I mentioned earlier, I think it was because on turn 19 of war, Egypt offer peace + X gpt and I foolishly accepted it.

I was just annoyed because I was tried a series of shorter wars vs Rome and was hoping I could set up a situation where at each peace I would get at least ( 1 tech + Peace ) from Rome. Did not happen, even once. Don't know if it was because of the Egypt mistake or something else was going on.

Basically tired of that game with bad reputation so started a new one but trying not to make the same mistakes.

-- PF

	10-09-2002 22:46									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I wonder if there actually is "put the AI civ out of its misery" code?

	10-09-2002 22:57									#13
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by planetfall Everyone kept complaining about "we remember what you did to Egypt" so I guess it was reputation. Like I mentioned earlier, I think it was because on turn 19 of war, Egypt offer peace + X gpt and I foolishly accepted it. I was just annoyed because I was tried a series of shorter wars vs Rome and was hoping I could set up a situation where at each peace I would get at least ( 1 tech + Peace ) from Rome. Did not happen, even once. Don't know if it was because of the Egypt mistake or something else was going on.

I can't recall getting a gigantic black mark for terminating a military alliance a few turns early - yes, it hurts your rep, but not nearly to the degree that RoP abuse or a new declaration of war before 20 turns have passed in the initial peace treaty seems to do. Did you have (1) a RoP with Egypt, (2) troops in Egyptian territory when you declared war, or (3) initiate war during a 20-turn peace treaty with Egypt? That will really cause problems - and your peace while in turn 19 of a military alliance was actually a betrayal of Rome (your ally) not Egypt.

Also, be aware that because technologies have become more "expensive" under 1.29f, it seems to be harder to extort techs than it was under 1.21.

Theseus - I doubt there's a "put me out of my misery code" but I like to imagine that there is.

Catt

	11-09-2002 00:19									#14
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I just wanted to make an addendum to what Warp said. My personal experiences in Civ3 have caused me to ABSOLUTELY, AT ALL COSTS avoid two things. They are:

1. Attacking a Civ while having a unit stationed in their territory. Regardless of a formal declaration of war, this is viewed as a ROP violation and REALLY REALLY sucks. It'll eventually bite you in the butt later on in the game, GUARANTEED.

2. Attacking a Civ during a 20 turn trade deal also REALLY REALLY sucks, especially if you were paying him/her for a Tech. I found myself 1.5 AGES (not Techs) behind the rest of the world because I accidentally did this. On Emperor and Deity this is very bad. I'm still playing through this game and have closed the gap to 1 Age and have been busy kissing everyone's asses until I get MAs.

	11-09-2002 00:28									#15
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I wish there was an option that would tell that certain civ what you think of them.

I'm sure many of you came across a civ that was Gracious towards you but you pretty much had enough of them.

IDK, I guess just blowing them off the earth is just as good.

	11-09-2002 00:48									#16
	Support Apolyton

I've always wanted a listing of the various civ's reputations, ala CivII.

I think there is one thing you left out of your excellent post, Catt:

Razing cities hurts that civ's attitude toward you in a BIG way. I noticed this not to long ago. I often raze cities (usually ancient era auto-raze), but once or twice I've fought wars w/o any razing, just city capture and then peace. After those wars, the enemy will after drop back to "annoyed" and can be worked up to a better attitude. Civs whose cities you have razed, on the other hand, seem to hate you forever.

I also believe that abandoning captured cities counts just like razing. I remember (several months and patches ago) a chinese city that flipped to me, that I wished to move 2 tiles over. It was a size 2, so I figured "no problemo, buy a settler" which I did, disbanding the city. The Chinese dropped from "polite" to "furious" that turn.

-Arrian

	11-09-2002 00:52									#17
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Theseus I wonder if there actually is "put the AI civ out of its misery" code?

I think there is, but that's just the impression that I get from several bizarre sneak attacks late in the game (ala the "Sword of Damocles" game where Alex committed suicide for no apparent reason, Theseus).

That's scientific proof, though.

-Arrian

	11-09-2002 02:34									#18
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Maybe I did not read this close enough, but I thought the advisors shows you their attitude. When I look at my advisor, it said things like they admire our culture and then it has more. If you wait it will tell you the more and one thing it may say is the Greeks are annoyed or whatever with us.

	11-09-2002 02:55									#19
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I thought that if a city doesn't have enough population to build a settler or worker, it just waits until it does to complete it?

You can see a civ's attitude, and your Foreign Advisor will warn you if they have a bad rep if you are in negotiations with them. There is no simple list of these things, though (as with so many things ).

	11-09-2002 03:05									#20
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by JohnM2433 I thought that if a city doesn't have enough population to build a settler or worker, it just waits until it does to complete it?

Not really - you have the possibility to finish building your settler/worker without waiting for the city to grow big enough, disbanding it in the process. But you do have a point - the game will sometimes automatically delay the production in order not to disband the city. I am not 100% sure, but I believe this happens if the city is growing. If not, you get a prompt, whether to finish or postpone production.

Anyone to comment on this? I am not sure about when one gets the prompt and when the game simply delays the production without letting the player know...

	11-09-2002 03:18									#21
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Catt Did you have (2) troops in Egyptian territory when you declared war, That will really cause problems - and your peace while in turn 19 of a military alliance was actually a betrayal of Rome (your ally) not Egypt. Catt

Probably had troops inside boundaries. Egypt "get out". Nah, I don't like your attitude, declare war.

Guess I will have to declare and then move inside boundaries. Thanks for the advice.

	11-09-2002 04:56									#22
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Arrian I think there is one thing you left out of your excellent post, Catt . . . . I also believe that abandoning captured cities counts just like razing.

You're right - I didn't try to capture all of the triggers on "attitude adjustments" (anybody ever a Hank Williams Jr. fan?) nor on reputation -- I'm sure there are other "bad acts" as well.

And you're also right on razing - I believe the same thing - I have noticed (all in gameplay, not testing) that razing does have an effect on others' attitudes towards me. I tend to avoid razing when possible for a variety of reasons, but when I go on a raze fest, the world opinion turns against me just about every time.

I also hope (and think!) you're right about abandoning cities -- if you don't take a "razing" hit because of it, it's quite the exploit. I don't have enough experience with it to say for sure, but I lean towards your view that it acts like a razing in terms of world opinion.

quote: Originally posted by vmxa1 Maybe I did not read this close enough, but I thought the advisors shows you their attitude.

The advisor does show AI attitudes, but doesn't show your reputation (other then saying "They'd never accept such a deal" at the trading table which could be due to reputation or to inability to complete the deal for other reasons).

quote: Originally posted by vondrack Anyone to comment on this? I am not sure about when one gets the prompt and when the game simply delays the production without letting the player know...

IIRC (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), you're prompted to switch production if the city is generating a surplus of food, and will therefore eventually be capabale of producing a settler or worker. If the city is only producing enough food to feed the 2 (or 1) current residents, you are prompted to "Abandon the City" or not.

	11-09-2002 05:15									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

*waves at everyone*

Hey, one of the wierdest, (and unfairest) reputation brekers is this.

If you have a on going trade with a civ (weather its luxeries or gpt) and they get destroyed by another civ, YOUR reputation will be tarnished. The game treats it like you broke the deal...ect..ect.. you kniw the rest.

	11-09-2002 11:52									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Catt IIRC (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), you're prompted to switch production if the city is generating a surplus of food, and will therefore eventually be capabale of producing a settler or worker. If the city is only producing enough food to feed the 2 (or 1) current residents, you are prompted to "Abandon the City" or not.

This is exactly what I believe (and what I clumsily tried to describe as "if the city is growing") - I remember that several times, when disbanding the city was my intention, I had to rearrange worked tiles in order to stop generating surplus food and get that prompt...

	11-09-2002 12:45									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by trickey *waves at everyone* Hey, one of the wierdest, (and unfairest) reputation brekers is this. If you have a on going trade with a civ (weather its luxeries or gpt) and they get destroyed by another civ, YOUR reputation will be tarnished. The game treats it like you broke the deal...ect..ect.. you kniw the rest.

I have had this happen with a twist. I had an alliance for incense deal and I took the last city of our mutual enemy before the end of the alliance and my ally went from gracious to annoyed. Also I could no longer make a per turn trade agreement after this.

As for things to improve your reputation I believe that only time can do this. However, if it is attitude you wish to repair I can help you out there. I should note though that I generally do not worry about attitude until I get United Nations (hopefully). Then I become mister nice guy--wouldn't hurt a fly--with an average military--and gifts for everyone!
In the later game when my cities grow beyond 20 I will sometimes build a settler and deploy him somewhere on the map. In particular I do this after a war when there is more open space and resources. I then call up an annoyed or even furious civ and offer it as a gift. I have noticed that if the city has a strategic resource the recipient civ may immediately go up a level in attitude toward me. I usually plant these cities far away from the intended civ so they will never be productive. I also put them next to their traditional enemies and will put several cities close together so they are crowded.
When I played at the lower difficulty settings I used to sell captured cities in lieu of razing them. They would never agree to that at Diety level. I just started playing this game again since the patch and have not played a lower difficulty so I don't know if this is still possible.
A twist on this is to put the "free gift" city in a dead space in the center of your territory. The benefits of this is you can make them cross your territory to get to it and demand they leave. This will make them mad at you and may eventually start a war and since they are on your territory their reputation is damaged. OR you can just wait a while and your culture will absorb the city. This way you get a free military unit and can sell or give the city to the same or a different civ!
I will call up civs and give them my world map. I do this once the world is completely visible and while it offers nothing new to either of us they seem to like it.
If I can't find a buyer for a luxury I may sometimes give it to an angry civ.
Joining an alliance is a good way to improve another civs attitude toward you if only temporarily. I just gave up on a game where everytime a war ended everyone was furious at me even though I broke no alliance or even had no alliance. I gave up because the AI's kept nuking each other and 80% of my territory was desert due to ecological damage.
While in a war if you which to seriously damage others attitude toward you use nukes.
BTW there is a "suicide code" for the AI. This is implemented when an AI is the first to nuke another civ. MAD is guaranteed.

	11-09-2002 13:02									#26
	Support Apolyton

I read somewhere in this forum that your reputation will get worse if you declare war and attack "in the same turn". If this is true, then moving fast units in after declaring war and attack will damage your reputation.

However, there seems to be a conclusion here that declaring war and moving in won't affect reputation. So can anyone confirm which is correct? I normally declare war and wait one turn before conducting business. If declare war and move in is okay, I won't have to waste one of my precious turn.

	11-09-2002 19:33									#27
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Lintamacil I read somewhere in this forum that your reputation will get worse if you declare war and attack "in the same turn". If this is true, then moving fast units in after declaring war and attack will damage your reputation. However, there seems to be a conclusion here that declaring war and moving in won't affect reputation. So can anyone confirm which is correct? I normally declare war and wait one turn before conducting business. If declare war and move in is okay, I won't have to waste one of my precious turn.

I think it only hurts your rep. if you declare war while you have units in their country. Have your units based outside, then declare it. It wouldn't make sense to give them the option of first strik on your units by waiting a turn.

	17-09-2002 16:04									#28
	your enemy is my enemy, therefore I like you Inflate your Upload Space

I have just discovered something I can't recall seeing mentioned in any reputation/attitude thread here @ Poly.

I have started a new game yesterday night and soon found myself being blackmailed by Liz. Gimme 23 gold, she said. As I was unable to even see where she lived, so distant England was to my empire, I thought it would do no harm if I just show her the door. She promptly declared war on me. A turn or two later, Bismarck knocks the door, apparently inspired by what Liz did... This time, I agreed to his demands, as he was pretty close and I did not feel strong enough (still REXing).

OK, I was waging this "war" with Liz, actually bringing it to her country. I happily pillaged here and there, making good use of my fast horsemen, outmanoeuvring the slow English swordsman. Not forgetting to maintain friendly relations with everybody I do not currently fight with, I made a round-trip to meet all the other leaders... and guess what! Bismarck just LOVED me! Well, mean 23 gold and see... it can do miracles, I said to myself.

Several turns later, I noticed one of the English towns was gone, even though I did not touch it... One more turn and I realized that Bismarck was also busy crushing poor Liz... It was at that time that I started suspecting that his graciousness had something to do with the fact we were fighting a common enemy. I checked on the turn when I finally decided to take all of the English techs and head home. Prior to signing the peace with Liz, Bismarck was Gracious. Immediately after signing the peace (on the very same turn), he went Cautious.

I did not have an alliance or trade embargo signed with Bismarck, we just fought the same enemy and that was it. Therefore, I conclude that the AI does understand the concept of a common enemy, even if there is no formal tie and you are only "de facto allies" - it will like you more (i.e. will improve its attitude towards you).

If you want a save, just ask, I do have it.

	17-09-2002 18:53									#29
	Suffering from ads?

I just finished a game where I ruined my reputation by declaring war on France while I had troops in their territory (circa 1AD). We were both playing cross border violations to annoy each other (at least I got annoyed). I couldnt fix my rep at all, and it turned out to be virtually a continuous world war for the entire game. I finally forced peace with everyone by around 1980. I'll be more careful in the future.

	17-09-2002 21:25									#30
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It makes sense when you realize Bismarck is a sorely guy anyway. So you moved up a bit in his eyes by going after Engalnd. After that ended, it was back to your prior relationship.
You could even move down a notch considering that he could be upset that you got stronger than you had been.