Citizens, we must decide on a policy on how to deal with enemy demands. These demands could range from demands of gold, techs, religion switching, civic switching, or stop trading with an enemy. So how should we handle all these seperate categories? I'll put a little list on this post. if during the discussion we come to an agreement on any of them, i'll put our decision up here. if we can't agree on one of them, it will go to polling. So citizens, it's time to decide our first foreign policy!

How to handle demands?

Gold:
Envoy head on a pole

Techs:
Envoy head on a pole

Religion switching:
Yes, if friend. chop off head if foe

Civic switching:
Envoy head on a pole

Stop trading with Civ X:
Depends on who we are friends with, Civ X, or Civ Y demanding we stop the trading

For all ot them we must not give into their demands!:D

Gold:
undecided

Techs:
undecided

Religion switching:
undecided

Civic switching:
undecided
These will only be considered if the requestor is a freind (pleased or friendly). Demands from cautious, annoyed, or furious will be sloughed off.

Stop trading with Civ X:
undecided
These are in order, so if one of the conditions are met, stop there
if the resouces currently being traded meet any goal of ours, always no
if Civ X is our allies (pleased) the answer is always no
if the requestor is our ally (pleased) the anser is yes
if Civ X is our enemies (furious or annoyed), the answer is yes

tell all AIs to shove it up their... you know what. We shouldn't give into any demands.

If the demander is on our continent, the decision tree must consider if we wish to send missionaries into their lands. This is in the context of us "owning' a religion. There are times when tis good to cave

For all ot them we must not give into their demands!:D
This is of course the best decision. They are an inferrior nation and the fact that they wish to come to us proves that. Do we want to aid hostile inferrior nations? No, that is like giving wepons to the enemy.

This is of course the best decision. They are an inferrior nation and the fact that they wish to come to us proves that. Do we want to aid hostile inferrior nations? No, that is like giving wepons to the enemy.
Ah of course and that would be a crime against the party wouldn't it?;) :lol:

*sets up stump, since soapboxes don't exist yet* We as a NATION must not give in to any demands, either from blithering enemies masquerading as superior, or to begging freinds, who wish to exploit our mutual friendship. To them i wave my hand and proclaim begone, for it IS NO ROSE GARDEN OVER HERE!!!*steps down*

Ah of course and that would be a crime against the party wouldn't it?;) :lol:
The party is Political RolePlay. Becuase of that I would apreciate it if you did not mock us.

I still stick with the fact that it would be unwise to talk with any other nation that demands us give them "tribute". It sets a bad standard and keeps us from haveing a lead on them like we deserve.

As we discover other tribes, we need to decide which are likely to be useful as friends, which are likely conquest victims, and which are between the extremes. If our desired friends aren't on friendly terms in-game, we might have to actively manage our relationships. This may mean cancelling deals against future victims, when requested to do so by future friends.

The other key is always knowing where we stand. Instructions for each play session need to take all the existing relationships into account, and say what to do for every possibility.

Future, at least your respected enough to be mocked.:( no one likes the culturalists. Is it my colgne?:( :p :blush: ;)

P.S. You can join by clicking the first link in my sig

P.S.S. Never say yes to A.I. demands. The robotic heathens are trying to oppress us humans with there idiotic Giga-things and Mega-thats!!

P.S.S.S. I apoligize for getting a wee bit off topic for a moment

P.S.S.S.S But joining the culturalists would be a great move!

P.S.S.S.S.S I'm sorry for advertising the great party that is the culturalists.

P.S.S.S.S.S.S but if you see my P.S.S segement you will see i restaed my opinion, so the post was not entirely useless

P.S.S.S.S.S.S.S Mods, please don't censor my P.S (etc. )'s or for that matter the post. Much obliged!

P.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.S Thanks in advance, hopefully

P.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.S Support the Tri!!! (gets tackled by nomad police and dragged away screaming p s s s s s s s s until he is struck with a stick)

Swissempire: you've been drinking the cologne again haven't you! :lol:

I think that we have to be pragmatic and consider any demands as and when they're made. Hopefully, however, we'll never be so weak as to have to agree to change our religion or civics. If refusing a demand is likely to lead to war, then we should only refuse it if we're ready for war, or if our opponent lives a long way away.

I think that we have to be pragmatic and consider any demands as and when they're made. This is the way to go and in line with fellow Idiot Tubby's approach. We're playing AI here and not humans so feelings should, IMIO, be left out when making decisions. The Firaxis program doesn't think less of us if we cave when it serves our long term goals.

I believe in principle our answer should be 'no' to any demand by either friend, foe or anything in between. Sometimes circumstances ask for a different reaction though, so I believe we need to consider this on a case-by-case basis. My vote: How should we handle demands? "No, unless...."

P.S. Swissempire, your last line should read P.P.P.P.P.P.P.P.P.S., as P.S. stands for "Post Scriptum" which literally meands 'after text', so your last line is after your after after after after after after after after text ;)

Swissempire: you've been drinking the cologne again haven't you! :lol:

Anyone saying Post Scriptum Scriptum Scriptum Scriptum instead of Post Post Post Post Scriptum must have drunk at least something with alcohol ;)

On the matter now: I agree with DaveShack that we should analyze each rival first instead of making any all around decisions...

This is the first thing I thought of when I read the first post:

Every Demand made against our great nation should be responded to with a sharp stick poked into the eye of the messanger.

Why stop at stick poking? That may just make them annoyed. We should lop off the head of any such messenger immeidiately. That is unless we decide that just this once for secret reasons of our own that we won't lop off the messenger's head. But then we should definitely find a convenient scarecrow and lop off his head just to keep the executioner in practice.

based on what i gathered from this discussion i posted what the majority seems to favor for the seperate decisions. you'll notice i left civics switching undecided. that's because i havent' seen anyone else specifically mention civics and what to do about civic swtiching demands. so, what should we do about civic switching demands? handshake with messenger, or envoy head on a pole? :p

The majority should be rejected imo opinion, however we will need to revise that choice as the game progresses for friends etc.

Bah, friends.

If they were truly our friends, their cities would be flocking to our superiour civilization. Until that happens, I say let them eat cake.

Gold:NEVER

Techs:accept giving tech if they are very backwords or if they are at war with an enimy. Otherwise dont give them a tech.

Religion Switching:Never

Civic Switching:Only if the civic benefits the civilization or does not effect it that much.

Stop Trading:Get into a group of friends and dont stop trading with them, everyone else is ok to trade with.

P.S. I am in the party and i thought for myself.

Case-by-case is the way to go, in any situation, especially because the openess of the discussion demands it. Not only does the ai ask us to switch religions or civics, asks us to stop trading with so-and-so, or demand gold or tech (all of which if we decline affects the relationship negatively), it also sometimes asks for help in the form of gold and more commonly tech. The latter I consider helpful in building a relationship with a potential ally, and is not something that should be so easily cast aside with some all-encompassing policy.