Hi Guys

I have a question regardign diplomacy. To be exact all of the negative effects like for example: "you declared war on us", " you started a trade embargo on us", " you brought a war ally" etc
Do them modifiers disapear with time or do you actualyl have to change the civilisation's stance towards you for them to forget about the cruelties you have done to them? ;-)

I would apreciate your help :goodjob:

This stuff will stay forever, or at least for a time that long, that it disappering does not matter.

The only ones you can count on disappearing are:
"This war spoils relationship"
"Close Boarders spartk tensions"
"Heathen religion"

Those go away, as soon as the offending condition is gone.

So in other words after starting 2-3 wars with the civilisation there is no way of going beyond annoyed/cautious stance?
Damn that asks for finishing civs rather than leaving them wounded soemwhere in the corner of the map...

You can try to "overpaint" those negative diplo by collecting a ridiculous amount of + points, but it rather hard and only rarely worthwhile.

Killing him - or making him Vassal - seems to be the easiest/best solution. When he become your Vassal you can trade with him even while he's Annoyed or something...

Sounds good, thanks for clearing that out!

Has anyone noticed that whilst the - modifiers stay forever the + ones disappear

The war modifiers, if you don't do peace-war-peace-war all the time aren't too bad, it the stacking on the "you razed one of our cities" that really pile up after awhile. Re: killing off, its either that or vassalize them. In the situation you mention (couple of cities in BFE), you are generally better off killing them off and wiping their culture off the map so those cities you did keep are not such a pain.

Has anyone noticed that whilst the - modifiers stay forever the + ones disappearThat's one of my favourite rant-reasons [pissed]. Some few + ones will stay as well i never seen "You gave us tribute / Helped Us" to disappear for example.

How is that any different than common human behavior? We are quick to forget acts of kindness (what have you done for me lately?) but will hold a grudge for a long time (think religious wars). Generally speaking of course, but it is not an unreasonable interpretation of inter-human relations, although obviously not always true.

You have a certain point there. However - the duration of a game exceeds the livespan of a human by far.... But the main reason i don't like it is - it makes me [pissed] and therefore the game a little bit less fun (from my personal point of view...)

Agree, but i think diplomacy would be tee beat easy if AI was so forgetful.

Whenever the general AI of the game isn't good enough, the AI "cheats".

You have a certain point there. However - the duration of a game exceeds the livespan of a human by far....

Well, the whole Middle East is still fighting over a bunch of crap that happened over 2000 years ago. Look at all the most troubled spots in the world right now, and most of them are where there is longstanding resentment. I think you underestimate grudges :). I agree that the game is a fairly good model of human psychology. But I also think that's not why we bought it. I'd much rather not be permanently denied Friendly relationships with anyone just because I sued Monty for Feudalism before finishing him off. And I can gift two great Ancient-Era techs to a civ only to get a +1 "Our trade relations have been fair and forthright" for a few measely turns?? Phhhbbbbhbhbbhh.

I have never seen a "You declared war on our friend!" disappear, even when I earn them in 3000 BC and play until 1800 AD. Has anyone ever played a game long enough to see one of those disappear?

I think these are the really irritating - modifiers; the you declared war on our friend and the you traded with our worst enemy
because they always last long after the 'friends' have fallen out and been to war themselves and their worst enemy has become their new best friend but they still hate you

Also the way if you want a war ally you have to bribe them with tech/ gold but they just demand it and sulk if you refuse

and of course the endless stop trading with civ x requests

excuse the rant...

does anyone know if the AI responds the same way to each other as they do to you?
I never see half of the modifiers I get on the lists between the AIs

and on the subject of in reality only remembering the bad stuff thats happened between civs is true, but England and France have spent most of their history fighting each other, then in the 1900s became allies and fought 2 world wars together.
so there is always potential for change and putting aside old differences and i think this should have been incorporated into the games diplomacy more

So your saying that killing someones friend should make them forget that friend ever exsisted? :lol: But i agree these things should fade.

The thing that really bugs me is when AIs keep asking you to go to war for them. I had 3 civs in the same turn all ask me to help them go to war agiants each other and ofcourse i said no to each of them.
That kills future diplomacy cuase i know have -2-3 modifiers with ab unch of Ais just cause i didnt want to kill them!?

Really, this is what i need to see happen... When a Civ asks you to go to war you should get a -1(id be fine with a -2 even) like it is now but the civ you decided not to attack should get +1.This way when you have each civ asking to go to war agiants each other it cancels out proving/showing your neutrality. +Why wouldnt you feel happy towards someone for not teaming up agiants you? That solves that. Makes sence!

How is that any different than common human behavior? We are quick to forget acts of kindness (what have you done for me lately?) but will hold a grudge for a long time (think religious wars). Generally speaking of course, but it is not an unreasonable interpretation of inter-human relations, although obviously not always true.

Going to have to quote you here...
I think perhaps we're so OVER-cautious, because of real dangers, that we may unfortunately and/or unfairly deter the "good" people (missionaries, boy scouts, devoted monks, etc.)...
Personally, I prefer to remember acts of kindness. :p
(But then, of course, there was hitler...)

So your saying that killing someones friend should make them forget that friend ever exsisted? :lol: But i agree these things should fade.

The thing that really bugs me is when AIs keep asking you to go to war for them. I had 3 civs in the same turn all ask me to help them go to war agiants each other and ofcourse i said no to each of them.
That kills future diplomacy cuase i know have -2-3 modifiers with ab unch of Ais just cause i didnt want to kill them!?

Really, this is what i need to see happen... When a Civ asks you to go to war you should get a -1(id be fine with a -2 even) like it is now but the civ you decided not to attack should get +1.This way when you have each civ asking to go to war agiants each other it cancels out proving/showing your neutrality. +Why wouldnt you feel happy towards someone for not teaming up agiants you? That solves that. Makes sence!

My point was more that once their friend is now their enemy, they should forget that you fought them before.
I agree that a you destroyed our friend isn't something you should forget

I like your idea, definitely something to balance out the fact the AI always demands that you help it fight, its not like anyone doesn't like switzerland for being neutral is it?

Here is a thing I have learnd:
Never declare a war on a civ and leave him with 1-2 citys.
If he has only those 2 citys, keep the war going on for 5 more turns and whipe that civ from the face of the earth.
If you will keep them alive you have 2 options:
1. you make that civ a state of yours. vassel can be useful but a civ that has only 2 citys wont be able to help you much at times of war. And you could just easly take those citys and produce what ever you want in them.
2. The weak civ will become a vassel of a big civ and then that big civ will get the extra points, become stronger and in times of war you will have that small civ attacking you and you will need to move some of your units there and you wont be able to attack with full fource the bigger civs.

So what in trying to say: START A WAR YOU WILL BE ABLE TO FINISH!

I completely gave up on diplomacy because i have too many principals preventing a successful diplomacy.

if another civ is friendly i keep making arrogant demands (why not?)

i REFUSE to be part of the worldwide religion, it's no fun it's way more fun converting the world to your own one.

i never ask the "what do you think of" question to see if i declare war on anybodies friends.

My point was more that once their friend is now their enemy, they should forget that you fought them before.

Yeah i definatly agree with you there.

I am a warmonger.
I always disable "diplomatic victory".
I know that every other civc will hate me, sooner or later.
What do I care about diplomatic relations ? Go on, guess !

sometimes play alone is boring even if you dominating . So atleast have a royal friend make a game more fun for me :D

Negative modifiers disappear too. I'm not sure what makes them disappear, whether it's time or what. Not sure if it's relevant, but i've noticed that if you're pleased or friendly for a long time, the negative modifiers are more likely to disappear.

sometimes play alone is boring even if you dominating . So atleast have a royal friend make a game more fun for me :D

I have to agree there - sometimes it's fun to see if I can take the world as part of a coalition, not just by myself (after all, sometimes it's easier by yourself!) Last game, I had defensive pacts signed with 4 of the 10 civs in the game - building and working relations between all 4 civs sort of became the game for me...

Eh, it's all in what you enjoy though - again, one of the things that, in my opinion, adds to the longevity of Civ as a computer game. I can't think of any other game that has stayed on my computers for even a tenth of the time that one version or another of Civ has been there - mostly because it's always fun, and can be played different ways for different goals.