Triangle Diplomacy

Great thread. Thanks.

I have always been a little unsure about how to handle diplomacy. I seems those I want to kill often want to be friends with me.

By the way, any of you having any backstabbing problems with attacking a long time friend (in Civ4). I dont like it, but before backstabbing them I usually get them to give me whatever tech they can. It s a mean game!
 
I'm fairly new to this game but i've noticed that certain Leaders are more likely to backstab than others, also, some leaders without the aggresive trait favour war more than leaders with the trait. Isabella for example.I hate her and i ALWAYS try to get rid of her ASAP if she is my neighbour. I have also noticed that it is sometimes good to have a Warmoger as your friend that way u have added protection from the bullies ;) .
 
Good thread, and comes at a good time for me as I'm using the 'triangle' approach myself on my first Warlords game. I have Huayna wedged on my border and have made an effort to befriend two middle-of-the-road civs on my other border. Spammed missionaries to my allies and have cemented a good relationship as we all are 'brothers of the faith' :religion:

It was just a matter of time, and sure enough Huayna declared war. Must of been those 'close borders' or something along those lines :king: That's okay, it just gave me an excuse to test the waters and drag my buddies into the conflict. I let my allies soften the cities up, then I followed up and took em'. This whole approach is working out rather nicely! And I'm getting a unit up to Lv5 xp so I can build WP, bonus.

For the longest time I tried to either be nice to everyone or screw em' & war with everyone. Something in the middle seems to be a better approach, especially when you start to up the difficulty levels.

Anyway, thanks all for the great thread & input :cool:
 
Perhaps I missed it, or perhaps it wasn't stated.....

Do you consciously try to make sure that the triangle does NOT include the civ with the largest population?

I've had a few attempts at a true diplomatic victory ruined because I and the civ with the largest population had the same good friends. The votes would get split (or go in his favor), and I couldn't get the number I needed to win.
 
I find a lot of players fall into the bad habit of trying to be friends with everyone. I tend to start choosing my allies based on how I see the religious picture developing. And even then, I'm cautious.
 
For the longest time I tried to either be nice to everyone or screw em' & war with everyone. Something in the middle seems to be a better approach, especially when you start to up the difficulty levels.

Anyway, thanks all for the great thread & input :cool:

My diplomacy is poor, but I'm getting a little better now that I know some fundamentals. I was in this camp too, I was nice to everyone when I was weak, then rude as hell when I was strong. This "strategy" got my head handed to me on several occasions. For me: I've found that playing the waiting game is best, but I can't be a fence-sitter (neutral) forever. Eventually I'll have to chose sides and let the chips fall where they may.

What I've learned so far (and I welcome corrections/comments, my diplomacy still needs a lot of improvement):


1. Do your homework

"Nobles, knowing their minds, is the key to ruling Scotland"
- Braveheart

For experienced players it's usually not necessary, but for those players (like me) who don't know every leader like the back of their hand, it's a must. Just who are these guys and gals, and what motivates them?

Are they greedy, with a love for coin, and want to build huge financial empires, crushing their enemies by using economics as a weapon?

Are they tech-heads with a love for new toys, and worship science?

Are they fanatics, figuring they've got the lock on the Gods, and everyone should share their view?

Are they warmongers? Do they love that smell of napalm in the early mornings?

What is their personality like? Are they hot tempered? Cold blooded? Passionate, or calculating?

Upon discovering, meeting a civ for the first time and learning of their existance, it's time to put the learning cap on and be all smiles. Or, even better, review all in advance and be prepared.


2. Trade is a double-edged sword

“Rivalry is the life of trade, and the death of the trader”
- Elbert Hubbard


My problem was that I was of the mentality that "trade benefits everyone". It shouldn't matter who I trade with, or what, it's goods for gold, and if you're not the one I'm trading with, it's none of your business. Who in the hell are you to tell me I can't trade with someone. Yes, I know Monty's an ass, but he's giving me lots of nice gold for that iron.

I'm learning the hard way that is far from the truth, and a losing strategy. Trade is a tool and potential weapon.

It's sure nice to get that gold, or benefits from goods they trade you. However, it's equivalent to getting in bed with someone - you're establishing a relationship, that's how the civ you're trading with sees it, and how the other civs see it. You've got a new girlfriend (or boyfriend). Also explains why they get upset when you cancel deals ("we need to slow things down") or cut them off entirely ("I'm dumping you").

What you trade them is important! Even the most innocent goods can have dramatic effects on the other civ's society and actions. Of course the most obvious is trading outright military goods like horses and iron. However, food and other goods can have pronounced effects, particularly luxury items. If that gold or spices you're trading means Monty can build far fewer temples, and focus more on making a lot more jaguar warriors, well he's gonna be lovin' that, and other civs are going to be feeling the pain, possibly you, too! The simple strategy is: only trade with your friends when you can, and your enemies when you must. Note that "your enemies" includes your friends haters, too - until it's time to make your grab for ultimate power, it's a group effort, your triangle against the world.

Bottom line, there are NO innocent trade goods, no meaningless deals, and no free lunch.

3. Religion

"We have lobbed verses of Scripture, like hand grenades, into the camps of others, convinced we only have truth."

- Archbishop George Carey, Episcopal Church


Having a state religion early can provide nice benefits, and make your people happier. However, it's probably one of the biggest elements involved in getting you into an early (or late) war. Oftentimes a war you're not planning on having.

Knowing the enemy seems to be the key here. Friends too. Certain groupings of civilizations will allow you to take that religion early, and of course if you're planning on a cultural / religious campaign it's necessary. More often than not, however, religion is the make-or-break point in determining who's your enemy, and who's your friend.

I try to use religion as my "hole card" and not spend it early (but I've not yet tried a religious campaign, of course). I'd rather deal with unhappy folks in the early stages by other means (improvements and slavery) and wait. Then when I decide what kind of diplomatic triangle I want to join/form, that's the time I go for the religion.

Religion is the "hot button" affecting relationshops in Civ4, and draws some of the most dramatic reactions - for good or ill - from the other leaders. It becomes either the dividing line or bridge between you and them.

4. Power


"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

-John Acton

By power I don't mean military might alone. Namely, the attitudes of civ leaders can change when their various agenda's are affected. These changes can be for your benefit, although more often it's just the opposite. "True Friends" prove to be anything but when they get the upper hand in Civ4, and bitter enemies of your civilization can become sympathetic and willing to listen when weakened, when their agenda's are on the brink of being impossible to achieve. Of course, the ultimate agenda of every civilization is to rule the world, and their passions are a means to an end.

Simply put - only one leader gets to plant his or her posterior on that cushy golden throne, the Ring only answers to one master, and most of us would prefer it's US. Friends are friends, but if they are allowed to have their own way all the time, they start getting the idea that's the way things should always be . . . . and once they have the power they'll take steps to ensure that, including stabbing you in the back. It's generally a good idea to throw a monkey wrench into your bud's plans, make sure they don't always get what they want so they'll know their place - that is, making sure YOU get everything you want.

Of course, making sure they can't trace it back to you is the trick. Maybe even impossible most of the time. So be prepared with flowers and candy, and mollify them if it's necessary.

The opposite is true with enemies. Sometimes you gotta help them out, even make them a bit stronger so they can growl and snarl at your alliance. A strong enemy is actually a benefit
a lot of the times, because it aids your triangle's cohesiveness and comraderie. Of course, knowing when and just how much you can let them have is pretty important. Like giving ally's minor setbacks, giving enemies minor perks is best done as secretly, as non-obvious as you can.

Paying tribute to enemies isn't shameful. Yes, I'd prefer to tell them where they can stick it (and even provide a map), but if I'm not ready to war with them, if my allies are weak, or worse, don't exist . .. . it's time to knuckle under and cough up the goods.

I just tell myself, it's not a gift they're getting, but a LOAN . . . . and I'll be collecting it from them soon, with interest attached. :trouble:


5. You can't please everyone

"Well it's no wonder you don't have any friends."
"Wow, only a true friend would be that truely honest"

- Shrek

Unless you get one of those random combinations where everyone is inclined to like one another (almost impossible), you're going to make enemies. The game is designed that way. What takes work is making friends. How do you make friends? Much the same way as in RL; you develop common interests and concerns, you get to know one another, and you don't shaft them for momentary advantages. You stand by their side when someone tries to bully or threaten them.

In the early stages of the game you can be a fence-sitter and be cordial to everyone. Once the other civs get their agendas going (military for warlike civs, economies for financial, religion for culture builders, etc), that's gonna change. Be prepared to change with it, by doing your homework and doing it early. Then take the necessary steps to form the relationships you want, not have them foisted upon you.



6. Transience

"There is nothing permanent except change."
- Heraclitus


Relationships are dynamic and change over time. Thankfully in Civ4, most of the time this change is slow and steady. With practice you can spot or predict trends and take whatever steps necessary to keep things in your best interests. By trend I mean, friendships devolving into ambiguity or even hatred, and hate into friendship, or even love.

Being proactive is the key here, which includes keeping a wary eye on the other civilizations and their attitudes, not only towards you, but to others. If events and attitudes are shifting towards putting me (or an ally!) between a rock and a hard place, I need to do the research and take some proactive steps to halt and hopefully reverse that unwelcome trend.


Be aware, however, there ARE watershed moments in Civ4, times where relationships can suddenly and dramatically change. Many revolve around new resources found, new technologies discovered, and new weapons entering your or another civ's hands.

As an inexperienced player, one ignorant of many of the traits of various civilization leaders, I do wonder if it's possible to become "best buds" with a civ I've had a lot of early warring with. I also wonder if the penalties and bonuses applied to diplomatic relationships are transitory, if they fade over time. Is it always a case of "What have you done for me lately?" (friends) and "Sure, we fought, but that was long ago and no longer relevant" (enemies). That would make sense, but I've yet to see any dramatic examples of this.

I do know it's a hell of a lot easier to make enemies than friends.

EDIT: The penalities and bonuses do seem transitory over time, so I suppose it's possible you can become allies with a civ you had an early war with. I'd be interested in hearing from the more experienced players if this has ever happened.
 
Diplomacy advice

Interesting read, thanks.

One point to watch out for in the game is if/when you adopt Free Religion, or other civs do, as this can mean the removal of some rather large positive or negative modifiers depending on whether or not you have zealots like Isabella, Charlemagne, or Justinian in the game.
 
I realize a mistake that I have made is thinking of dip as a potential victory avenue rather than an essential element of the game. Unless I'm going to turtle up, build up a strong enough defense and tell the entire world to fly a kite, dip is an essential piece of the game.

I'm pretty weak at getting othe civ's to do my bidding.

A strategy I have used on prince is getting a religion (with shrine) and actively spreading it to other civ's. Get positive cash flow and some friend bonuses.
 
Pretty good strategy, actually.

Just wondering, if playing on a huge map, would this work with a diplomacy square or even pentagon?
 
Pretty good strategy, actually.

Just wondering, if playing on a huge map, would this work with a diplomacy square or even pentagon?

It can, but it gets much more difficult. If it's a triangle, you have to monitor 3 relations AB, AC and BC (A being you). If it's a square, you have to monitor AB, AC, AD, BC, BD and CD. Twice as many

Pentagon would be a tremendous number of relations. It is possible with a religious lovefest. Isabella is good here, because she spams missionaries. She's a backstabber, but you will usually have her at friendly, not pleased. Also, it's often handy to have a pariah nearby to keep those mutual military struggle bonuses coming. Some Civs care a great deal about your religion (Justinian, Charlie, Issy and Zara come to mind), others don't care so much.

Also, if it's a continents map, you probably only need to keep relations with your continent. AI's are poor at amphibious invasion, generally.
 
I just played a game where i went cultural victory on emperor, I had something like 2 archers per city up until feudalism, then i made them into longbows, and that was it for military. yet I made it out ok. I think it was because all the other civs were at war with each other so often. I had to make a choice at one point to take the religion that was not my neighbors' so as to get the +25% building production from OR to build a wonder, but I switched back ASAP.

How did I make it out alive with 2 archers per city? The whole continent was at war but I escaped unscathed.
 
Top Bottom