Diplomatic Effects of Denouncing, Spying, and DoFs

Hey everyone, I've got several questions about diplomacy which are driving me crazy right now.

I'm playing a game as Korea (small map/pangaea/7 civs/17 CSs) and am currently having trouble with spies. There are two countries I have a DoF with, Carthage and Japan. Now, at the moment we're all close (hovering over friendly shows several green with the majority being dark green, and no red text), but I've caught Japan trying to spy on me several times. The first time he did it I didn't realize you could do anything (since I didn't think to actually click the icon that showed up to the side), but the second time it happened I let it slide, giving me a pretty good diplomatic boost.

Now comes the problem. The third time they sent a spy, I demanded they stop spying on me, and they agreed (of course, I fully expected them to continue, but I at least wanted to make sure I had the moral high ground before denouncing them). Then, I killed another spy they tried to send. Of course, since they had broken their promise, and worse spied on a country they had a DoF with, I of course chose to publicly denounce them. Which seems to have completely backfired.

Now, I can't see how the AI feels about each other, but it seems wrong that doing this caused me to get a big penalty with every other country for denouncing a friend. Why is that the case? It seems like that shouldn't apply since it was done under a certain situation that the game itself sets up (allowing you to denounce them after catching a spy), yet instead of them suffering a large penalty with everyone else with me getting a benefit of some kind (after all, they spied on a friend even after I demanded they stop), the opposite seems to be true.

Seriously, can anyone tell me how any of the diplomacy in this game makes sense? I'm getting sick and tired of this happening and me getting screwed in diplomacy even though I stick to my promises, don't denounce without reason (that the game gives me), provide gifts, etc. Is there a mod or something that changes this? Because right now, you're basically screwed if a friend spies on you, since the horrible diplomacy in this game doesn't seem to care why you denounce a country which had offered a DoF.

Well, denouncing a friend anytime will get you a major negative diplo modifier ("backstabber") with everyone, not just the civ you denounced.

The game isn't going to (and shouldn't) save you from yourself. You get the option to denounce anyone you like everytime you click on "discuss"; the game doesn't remove that option because you are friends, and it shouldn't remove that option from the spy screens because you killed a friend's spy.

Denunciations should be reserved for civs that are not going to be your friends anyway, and where the denunciation will enhance your relationship with other civs (sparking a nice round of visits applauding your perspicacity in recognizing how evil the denounced civ is). Denunciation is not a good tool for encouraging the civ you are denouncing to "play nicer."

Yes, the AI can lie (or, more likely, immediately change its "mind") about not spying on you. Many the time I've been caught spying, promised the AI to remove my spies, completely forgot to follow through on my promise and then got caught stealing another tech -- bad juju there, and I deserve the hit to our relationship.

What I find to be effective with friends is to forgive their thefts and their killed spies. My friends are the only ones I have RAs with and my RA output depends in part on my friends' bpt. So, their thefts can indirectly benefit me longer term. In fact, for killed spies I forgive them twice -- first, when I get the initial notice of the killing, and then in the AI's turn, when they come expressing remorse -- double diplo benefit.

Before anything else, thanks for the detailed response.

Browd said:

Well, denouncing a friend anytime will get you a major negative diplo modifier ("backstabber") with everyone, not just the civ you denounced.

The game isn't going to (and shouldn't) save you from yourself. You get the option to denounce anyone you like everytime you click on "discuss"; the game doesn't remove that option because you are friends, and it shouldn't remove that option from the spy screens because you killed a friend's spy.

Click to expand...

I certainly don't expect the game to save me from myself, and I'm sorry if that's what it sounded like from my post (I didn't intend for it to sound like that). Also, I'm not sure why you mentioned having the option to denounce after clicking discuss, since that's not what I did. When you catch someone's spy (doesn't matter if the spy is killed or not, only that you know who sent them), you can click the message that drops down from the side and it automatically brings up the leader's screen with him mentioning if you're there because of the spy getting caught, and it gives you the option to go to war, denounce, demand to stop, or forgive.

Denunciations should be reserved for civs that are not going to be your friends anyway, and where the denunciation will enhance your relationship with other civs (sparking a nice round of visits applauding your perspicacity in recognizing how evil the denounced civ is). Denunciation is not a good tool for encouraging the civ you are denouncing to "play nicer."

Click to expand...

That's the problem though. I wish I did know which civs I'll always remain friends with, but that's impossible. Considering the great relations I had with Japan, I didn't think it would be a problem to become friends (also, they are friends with Carthage, who I also had great relations with). If I used that kind of logic, I would never be friendly with anyone since I could always imagine a situation where something like this would happen. For your last statement, I wasn't using denunciation to encourage the civ to play nicer. The way I understand the game is that something like the option to denounce should be saved when there is no way it should look bad for you to use it. With that understanding, I thought that since I had kept from doing it the first several times it happened (forgiving them three or so times, then demanding they stop, ignoring a final time, and then denouncing) that it would be me denouncing them for a good reason (that reason being non-stop spying on a country you're friends with).

Also, remember that all of this was done by going to the screen which only comes up when the spy is caught (so before the next turn even starts). This isn't me going to the diplomatic screen, clicking discuss, and then denouncing (in case that's what you thought I was doing). Since this situation is the only time it comes up, there should be a difference between the two (otherwise, why have it in the first place?).

Yes, the AI can lie (or, more likely, immediately change its "mind") about not spying on you. Many the time I've been caught spying, promised the AI to remove my spies, completely forgot to follow through on my promise and then got caught stealing another tech -- bad juju there, and I deserve the hit to our relationship.

Click to expand...

That's my point exactly. The one doing that does deserve the hit to relations, so why is the one who calls them out on it after several occurrences the one to suffer the global penalty? If nothing else, the DoF should automatically be removed once it happens at least after demanding they stop. That way you won't suffer a huge penalty with everyone else when you denounce them for, well, deserving to be denounced. Afterall, you can't cancel deals with other leaders, so the only other option is to wait nearly 30 turns before you can even do anything, which seems highly unfair.

What I find to be effective with friends is to forgive their thefts and their killed spies. My friends are the only ones I have RAs with and my RA output depends in part on my friends' bpt. So, their thefts can indirectly benefit me longer term. In fact, for killed spies I forgive them twice -- first, when I get the initial notice of the killing, and then in the AI's turn, when they come expressing remorse -- double diplo benefit.

Click to expand...

That's what I did. I forgave them several times (which of course improved relations), then told them to stop after I had done so. It was only after they continued (and I even gave them a final chance) that I chose to denounce them.

Yet another reason I would like the ability to cancel agreements before they are up.

Such as Declarations of Friendship.

adsin15 said:

Yet another reason I would like the ability to cancel agreements before they are up.

Such as Declarations of Friendship.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is exactly what I wish was in the game. I can understand not canceling regular trade deals because of how easy it would be able to exploit. What I can't understand is why we shouldn't be able to cancel more important deals, such as Declarations of Friendships. Obviously doing something this should have consequences, but those consequences shouldn't be static. What I mean is that the consequences of constantly backing out of DoFs for no reason should be different than only doing so when a certain situation comes up (if someone is constantly spying on you and goes back on their promise to stop, then you shouldn't suffer a penalty at all for breaking off the DoF at that point).

Think about it. If you make a promise not to buy land near a leader and then break that promise, you suffer a large diplomatic penalty. Why then doesn't the AI suffer a large diplomatic penalty when they break a promise not to spy on me?

That reminds me, I've made several of those promises (not to settle/buy land near a country), and after many turns (not sure how many), I got a message saying that enough time had passed that I could consider my promise kept. However, it doesn't seem to change anything. What are the effects of keeping those promises long enough to have that message come up? Do you get a bonus to relations or something?

I did understand what screen you were talking about, but used the discuss screen reference to make a broader point.

Anyway, I think you need to think about this in human terms, rather than AI terms.

Denunciations are the loudest expression of hatred short of a DOW, and should be used cautiously in general. In your case, the only thing the other civs knew was that you have publicly declared friendship, so it should be unsurprising that a public denuncation (or DOW) of that friend should shock the other civs, and greatly embarrass your former friend. Yes, you've asked him to stop spying, he promised to stop, and then violated your trust, but up to that point, it has all been private--just between the two of you. Going public with "I caught you spying, so now you are dead to me" isn't going to play well with the civ you caught or other civs watching this little drama play out. If you saw another civ backstab a friend, would you trust them?

Whether its bad programming or reflective of real human behaviors (I know I've gone back to spy on civs after promising not to), other civs won't always do what you want them to do. As in the real world (the history of international relations is replete with examples), sometimes you have to look at the larger relationship and decide whether the benefits from the relationship outweigh the negatives (whether the negatives are spying, settling cities in your face, bullying your allied city states, or whatever). If the benefits outweigh the costs, use their transgression as a way to tie them closer to you. If the costs aren't worth it, you should ask what's the least-costly way of ending the friendship. Denunciation (or DOW) is quick and definitive, and the game gives you that immediate option, but the knock-on costs may not be worth the short-term gratification. You will almost certainly be better off if you waited for the DOF (and your pending RA) to expire, ... and then crushed the lying SOB.

Browd said:

I did understand what screen you were talking about, but used the discuss screen reference to make a broader point.

Anyway, I think you need to think about this in human terms, rather than AI terms.

Denunciations are the loudest expression of hatred short of a DOW, and should be used cautiously in general. In your case, the only thing the other civs knew was that you have publicly declared friendship, so it should be unsurprising that a public denuncation (or DOW) of that friend should shock the other civs, and greatly embarrass your former friend. Yes, you've asked him to stop spying, he promised to stop, and then violated your trust, but up to that point, it has all been private--just between the two of you. Going public with "I caught you spying, so now you are dead to me" isn't going to play well with the civ you caught or other civs watching this little drama play out. If you saw another civ backstab a friend, would you trust them?

Whether its bad programming or reflective of real human behaviors (I know I've gone back to spy on civs after promising not to), other civs won't always do what you want them to do. As in the real world (the history of international relations is replete with examples), sometimes you have to look at the larger relationship and decide whether the benefits from the relationship outweigh the negatives (whether the negatives are spying, settling cities in your face, bullying your allied city states, or whatever). If the benefits outweigh the costs, use their transgression as a way to tie them closer to you. If the costs aren't worth it, you should ask what's the least-costly way of ending the friendship. Denunciation (or DOW) is quick and definitive, and the game gives you that immediate option, but the knock-on costs may not be worth the short-term gratification. You will almost certainly be better off if you waited for the DOF (and your pending RA) to expire, ... and then crushed the lying SOB.

Click to expand...

You have great points, and normally I'd agree, but similar situations in the game have a different outcome. When you make a promise not to do something, you eventually get a message saying that so much time has passed that you can consider the promsie kept. If you break that promise, you get a diplomatic penalty for doing so, yet it seems like the AI can do the same thing with no penalty at all. Also, I'm a bit confused by the part about going public with them spying. Yes, it isn't going to play well with the civ I caught, but why should I care? I'm doing this because I want to punish them. I'm warning the other civs that they shouldn't trust this civ because they are so eager to backstab their friends. Also, I certainly wouldn't trust a civ after seeing them backstab a friend, so why then am I the one suffering the penalty? I wasn't the one who backstabbed a friend, I'm the one who was backstabbed, lied to, and then called them out on it.

At the very least, them breaking their promise after backstabbing me should have automatically broken the DoF or at least given them a penalty (afterall, the same thing happens to the player if they do the same thing). As it stands, they can keep backstabbing me with no penalty at all, since forgiving them lets them keep on backstabbing, demanding they stop has them breaking their promise (with no negative consequences), denouncing them ends up causing the player to suffer a large global diplomatic penalty, and going to war would probably end the same way. I can't cancel the agreement, so until it ends I'm basically stuck. That's incredibly unfair.

I take it you don't use spies yourself? Besides, Friendship only lasts 30 turns. If you don't like what AI is doing, don't renew DoF.

Denouncing a friend for epionage is nothing more than punishing yourself. These are the programmed rules. There are other ways to hurt your opponent, if you are really into this kind of stuff. Paying someone to DoW him would be an equally destabilizing action, don't you think?

Browd makes a very good point. A Friend is both an asset and a liability.

Maybe the problem is that you can't keep up in technology with the AI? I mean, playing on levels below Deity i get such a lead in science that AI is snatching tech. from me every few turns. And i am happy, because if they don't steal my tech i ll have to pay more for research agreements. Also, if AI players and city states are far behind in tech, no one is going to sell/provide me with much needed coal, oil, uranium and aluminium outside borders.

So, why the negativity on spying?

Well, this probably falls in the category of AI "advantages" that are intended to substitute for their inability to think around corners they way humans can. No AI could have a discussion like this (or the computer equivalent), and the programmers can only get them so far. Why does the AI get such groteque happiness, production and growth bonuses? Why can the AI spam out cities and units so much more easily than I can? Well, because I'm still going to whip the AI's pants off without those same advantages. I know how to optimize my build order to achieve a desired outcome, I know where best to apply my more limited forces, I know (or at least can pretty easily predict) how the AI will react to my moves, and I can develop a focused, highly customized plan for victory (hmmm, mountain range on the west, swamp by that river, my next battle site is ... here, and I will crush the unsuspecting AI).

Same applies in the diplomacy arena. Many complain (with good justification) about the limited diplo options, and I'm not one to defend the design decisions that were made (I hate that you can't demand that the AI stop trying to convert your cities--it's an option for them, but not the human player -- why?). But, design decisions they were, and we have the ability as players to learn how to adjust.

Promises won't stop the spying, denunciations won't stop the spying, even the Great Firewall (who builds that, by the way?) still leaves a 0.1% chance spies will succeed. So, learn to love those backstabbing spies, and figure out how to use them to your advantage.

Moriarte said:

I take it you don't use spies yourself? Besides, Friendship only lasts 30 turns. If you don't like what AI is doing, don't renew DoF.

Denouncing a friend for epionage is nothing more than punishing yourself. These are the programmed rules. There are other ways to hurt your opponent, if you are really into this kind of stuff. Paying someone to DoW him would be an equally destabilizing action, don't you think?

Browd makes a very good point. A Friend is both an asset and a liability.

Maybe the problem is that you can't keep up in technology with the AI? I mean, playing on levels below Deity i get such a lead in science that AI is snatching tech. from me every few turns. And i am happy, because if they don't steal my tech i ll have to pay more for research agreements. Also, if AI players and city states are far behind in tech, no one is going to sell/provide me with much needed coal, oil, uranium and aluminium outside borders.

So, why the negativity on spying?

Click to expand...

I don't use spies against friends.

Maybe I'm not being clear enough. I know denouncing them only hurts me because that's how it's programmed. What I'm saying is that this doesn't make any sense. Yes, paying someone else to DoW them would be better (and that's what I'll do), but that shouldn't be the only option. I should be able to call them out on what they did and warn the other civs about them. What annoys me so much is that I can do this in the game, and the game goes out of its way to give me that option, yet instead of giving me any benefit (such as a small boost with other friendly civs for warning them about an untrustworthy civ), I just get penalties. And not just a penalty with the civ I call out (which I understand, and expect), but a penalty with everyone else. Am I seriously the only one who thinks that doesn't make sense?

The problem is that I'm too far ahead in tech, so the AI can steal all they want and get the full benefit of spying, while I can only sit and watch as they constantly steal my tech while I can't do anything to stop or punish them. I don't like that. If I could trade techs like I could in Civ4 (why did they get rid of that?) then it wouldn't be an issue. I could actually use my tech advantage by gifting them tech, or trading my tech. But there's just nothing I can do right now.

I don't have a negative view on spying. That's not my point. My point is that I find it unfair that I'm the one being punished for the AI spying on me, and there's nothing I can do about it. Yes, I could just refuse to renew the DoF (although knowing the diplomacy in this game, doing that will probably just give me another penalty), but that means I'll have to let them get away with backstabbing me again and again until the agreement finally ends, and then I'll have to wait for them to do it again before I can even denounce them. And to be honest, it won't feel quite as strong then, since it seems like backstabbing a civ you currently have a DoF with should bring more severe consequences than being caught spying on a civ you have no agreements with.

Basically, I have to let them get away with backstabbing a friend before I can do anything about it.

Browd said:

Well, this probably falls in the category of AI "advantages" that are intended to substitute for their inability to think around corners they way humans can. No AI could have a discussion like this (or the computer equivalent), and the programmers can only get them so far. Why does the AI get such groteque happiness, production and growth bonuses? Why can the AI spam out cities and units so much more easily than I can? Well, because I'm still going to whip the AI's pants off without those same advantages. I know how to optimize my build order to achieve a desired outcome, I know where best to apply my more limited forces, I know (or at least can pretty easily predict) how the AI will react to my moves, and I can develop a focused, highly customized plan for victory (hmmm, mountain range on the west, swamp by that river, my next battle site is ... here, and I will crush the unsuspecting AI).

Same applies in the diplomacy arena. Many complain (with good justification) about the limited diplo options, and I'm not one to defend the design decisions that were made (I hate that you can't demand that the AI stop trying to convert your cities--it's an option for them, but not the human player -- why?). But, design decisions they were, and we have the ability as players to learn how to adjust.

Promises won't stop the spying, denunciations won't stop the spying, even the Great Firewall (who builds that, by the way?) still leaves a 0.1% chance spies will succeed. So, learn to love those backstabbing spies, and figure out how to use them to your advantage.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I completely understand that. I know it will never happen, but I wish there was a game which was a combination of Civ, with the diplomacy of a game like Europa Universalis.

It looks to me you are talking about realism. In reality, would all civs in the world trust you if you told them out loud on the UN Security Council that Alexander the Greek is spying on you? Backstabbing a friend is what you did in the eyes of general public, and the world rightfully disapproved of your decision.

The issue is that you assume that denouncing someone should give that someone unfavorable modifiers. In reality and in game this action of disapproval will hurt both of your countries, since the world is interconnected with friendships, religions, etc. He has the same option and to save his good standing (for example) he is going to denounce you back, and all his friends might too.

My point is that you expect too much from a denouncing tool. If you suggest to rebalance it, point out where it should become harder, because with an option to 'denounce for spying' the whole experience is going to become even easier for humans than it is at the moment.

Also, 'driven crazy' sounds a bit too powerful for a trivial issue like this.

NewOne said:

Now, I can't see how the AI feels about each other, but it seems wrong that doing this caused me to get a big penalty with every other country for denouncing a friend. Why is that the case? It seems like that shouldn't apply since it was done under a certain situation that the game itself sets up (allowing you to denounce them after catching a spy), yet instead of them suffering a large penalty with everyone else with me getting a benefit of some kind (after all, they spied on a friend even after I demanded they stop), the opposite seems to be true.

Click to expand...

The sad truth is that it doesn't make sense. The way denounciations is implemented is probably the most destructive thing for AI diplomacy at the moment. The fact that you can denounce anybody at any particular time at will means that there can't be any value in the denounciation other than the message you send.

To clarify what I mean by this, imagine that your neighbour has been acting like the best guy the whole game, never doing anything to offend you. That doesn't prevent you from denouncing him. Therefore, the way the other AI's react to the denounciation will depend solely on how their relation is to you: If they like you better than him, he will get a negative modifier, conversely if they like him better than you, you will get a negative modifier.

What it should work like would be that certain actions merit a denounciation - this could be breaking a promise not to spy, not to settle, or not to convert, or it could be certain acts of war (whatever qualified would have to be penned down). The point here is that if you can only denounce someone after he does something bad, you can implement a much more sensible feedback to the denouncement: If someone gets denounced, he will get a negative diplomatic modifier with others (the modifier size can still depend on the third party's relationship to you and him), but specifically if someone does something that merits a denounciation from you while you are in a DoF, this should reflect back badly on them and not on you. The latter can't be implemented with current system because you can just form a DoF with someone and then denounce them at will to throw them in bad standing with others, since there is no requirements for when you can denounce someone.

To add salt to the wound, the AI's obsession with spamming denounciations all over the place is what causes all long-term diplomatic relationships to deterioate over time, because AI players within any faction (i.e. if you have multiple friends that are also friends with each other) will eventually denounce each other for whatever random reason and then they will start to dislike you because you are friends with someone who denounced them and then they will denounce you etc. etc.

kaspergm said:

The sad truth is that it doesn't make sense. The way denounciations is implemented is probably the most destructive thing for AI diplomacy at the moment. The fact that you can denounce anybody at any particular time at will means that there can't be any value in the denounciation other than the message you send.

To clarify what I mean by this, imagine that your neighbour has been acting like the best guy the whole game, never doing anything to offend you. That doesn't prevent you from denouncing him. Therefore, the way the other AI's react to the denounciation will depend solely on how their relation is to you: If they like you better than him, he will get a negative modifier, conversely if they like him better than you, you will get a negative modifier.

What it should work like would be that certain actions merit a denounciation - this could be breaking a promise not to spy, not to settle, or not to convert, or it could be certain acts of war (whatever qualified would have to be penned down). The point here is that if you can only denounce someone after he does something bad, you can implement a much more sensible feedback to the denouncement: If someone gets denounced, he will get a negative diplomatic modifier with others (the modifier size can still depend on the third party's relationship to you and him), but specifically if someone does something that merits a denounciation from you while you are in a DoF, this should reflect back badly on them and not on you. The latter can't be implemented with current system because you can just form a DoF with someone and then denounce them at will to throw them in bad standing with others, since there is no requirements for when you can denounce someone.

To add salt to the wound, the AI's obsession with spamming denounciations all over the place is what causes all long-term diplomatic relationships to deterioate over time, because AI players within any faction (i.e. if you have multiple friends that are also friends with each other) will eventually denounce each other for whatever random reason and then they will start to dislike you because you are friends with someone who denounced them and then they will denounce you etc. etc.

Click to expand...

Sad, but true. It made me think, if denouncing someone for breaking a promise and spying on you only gets you a penalty, then why does the game even include the option to denounce someone after you catch them spying? When I see that option provided in such a specific situation, I'm obviously going to assume that the denouncement is for that specific thing. Yet it turns out to be just as bad as a regular denouncement.

Oh well, guess I'll just load up the save I had before I chose to denounce them. It kills my SoD, but I don't really have any choice.

Moriarte said:

It looks to me you are talking about realism. In reality, would all civs in the world trust you if you told them out loud on the UN Security Council that Alexander the Greek is spying on you? Backstabbing a friend is what you did in the eyes of general public, and the world rightfully disapproved of your decision.

The issue is that you assume that denouncing someone should give that someone unfavorable modifiers. In reality and in game this action of disapproval will hurt both of your countries, since the world is interconnected with friendships, religions, etc. He has the same option and to save his good standing (for example) he is going to denounce you back, and all his friends might too.

My point is that you expect too much from a denouncing tool. If you suggest to rebalance it, point out where it should become harder, because with an option to 'denounce for spying' the whole experience is going to become even easier for humans than it is at the moment.

Also, 'driven crazy' sounds a bit too powerful for a trivial issue like this.

Click to expand...

First, you do realize I wasn't seriously being driven crazy, right?

See, this is the main problem I have. I'm friends with them, but they keep spying on me and breaking their promise but I can't do anything. Yes, I get that to the AI the only thing that's happening is me denouncing a friend for seemingly no reason, but that's because the option to denounce is pretty much broken and can't be used for specific situations. What I mean is that denouncing a "friend" after they do something to try and screw you over should automatically cancel the DoF (considering it's impossible to cancel it yourself).

But like I said, I guess I'll just have to deal with it and constantly forgive them for stealing my stuff until the agreement ends.

Well, other options are possible too. You can try making your thieving friend denounce you by befriending his enemy, stealing his city states and planting a citadel. That way he will end up as a backstabber.

Moriarte said:

It looks to me you are talking about realism. In reality, would all civs in the world trust you if you told them out loud on the UN Security Council that Alexander the Greek is spying on you? Backstabbing a friend is what you did in the eyes of general public, and the world rightfully disapproved of your decision.

The issue is that you assume that denouncing someone should give that someone unfavorable modifiers. In reality and in game this action of disapproval will hurt both of your countries, since the world is interconnected with friendships, religions, etc. He has the same option and to save his good standing (for example) he is going to denounce you back, and all his friends might too.

My point is that you expect too much from a denouncing tool. If you suggest to rebalance it, point out where it should become harder, because with an option to 'denounce for spying' the whole experience is going to become even easier for humans than it is at the moment.

Also, 'driven crazy' sounds a bit too powerful for a trivial issue like this.

Click to expand...

In real life, at the UN, your accusation of Spying would be taken more seriously coming from a friendly nation than from an enemy nation. A friend accusing a friend of spying would have negative effects for the nation being accused. Not the nation doing the accusing.

Moriarte said:

Well, other options are possible too. You can try making your thieving friend denounce you by befriending his enemy, stealing his city states and planting a citadel. That way he will end up as a backstabber.

Click to expand...

If you are denounced by the AI you will suffer diplomatic penalties with all AI civs.

adsin15 said:

If you are denounced by the AI you will suffer diplomatic penalties with all AI civs.

Click to expand...

Yes, you might become unfavorable with some, but in this particular case, so will he. A lesser price to pay if you want to teach someone a lesson.

adsin15 said:

In real life, at the UN, your accusation of Spying would be taken more seriously coming from a friendly nation than from an enemy nation. A friend accusing a friend of spying would have negative effects for the nation being accused. Not the nation doing the accusing.

Click to expand...

And you know this how? Care to give example? I used UN example because no one would stand up and say such thing out loud in the UN, knowing no one is going to take him seriously. There is media for such things.

Moriarte said:

Yes, you might become unfavorable with some, but in this particular case, so will he. A lesser price to pay if you want to teach someone a lesson.

Click to expand...

So basically, he has the choice between a) getting a negative modifier with other AI's or b) getting a negative modifier with other AI's or c) do nothing, because his proclaimed friend broke his promise and continued spying on him? That's some great game layout right there.