My friends just doesn't care about pledge to protect.

Please fix the pledge to protect in brave new world


I've had a good relationship with babylon for the entire game and i've made verry good trades with him give luxuries halve price beeing friends from ancient era we olso bot choosen to fallow freedom but then he goes beserck.



suddenly he start declaring war at my city states that I pledge to protect(there are plenty other city states to dow but he picks the one who I ally with)
Why does he do that if he is my ally?
He keeps saying we sorry we atacked you're city state But he doesn't want to make peace (sometimes for a large sum)


Just when I was going for a peacefull culture victory I gues I will have to teach im a lesson getting tyred of this Ai that doesn't care about pledge to protect.
Why ad gamemechanics if the Ai doesn't care?

I've had a higher military then him the hole game . So he should actualy know that I am stronger olso i am his trading partner shouldn't he care?
The same goes for bullying they just don't care

Hope they are going to change this wierd behavior especialy with the new trading system. It could become verry annoying...



Getting tyred of this war game

It seems it is just not worth to make friends in this game . Why should I it has no benefits because they don't care

Me suspicion is that they are trying to provoke you into a war and vice versa

Either you can try pay them off to make peace with said CS, gift said CS tons of military units (think US involvement in Vietnam before they fully participated) or just deal with the fact that said CS may or may not become a Babylonian puppet

I would suggest to just go with DOWing Babylon, but that would be a tad escalation too far...

There's a couple of things you can do to protect your allied CS.

1) send some units over and plop them around the city so Nebby can't touch it.

2) denounce Nebby (do this prior to DoW)

Gift the CS units. They will fight Babylon.

Gift them money. They may buy defensive buildings.

Generally, the AI's bullying of city-states is a good way to earn influence with them. They will either: A) go bankrupt and ask for money, B) ask for a pledge of protection, C) ask you to denounce their attacker, or D) ask for units or direct intervention.

It seems, however, that once you pledge protection, the CS won't offer some or any of these quests.

Eagle Pursuit said:

There's a couple of things you can do to protect your allied CS.

1) send some units over and plop them around the city so Nebby can't touch it.

2) denounce Nebby (do this prior to DoW)

Click to expand...

Well there you have I just wanted to go for a peacefull game but the game forces me to go kcik some ass i'm just gonne play a other game untill this is fixed

Yes i say that a lot but i'm serious right now Maybe I try the expansion..

good that I live in europe So I can see how the expansion is when it comes out in america if diplomacy is changed I doubt it . Thought it changed in gods and king but probarbly not

apocalypse105 said:

Well there you have I just wanted to go for a peacefull game but the game forces me to go kcik some ass i'm just gonne play a other game untill this is fixed

Click to expand...

No need for war dude

Just ring the city-state with your units so Nebby's stuff can't touch it. Or if you are lazy and its too faraway, just gift them everything but the kitchen sink.

There, a peaceful game where the only war happening is your city-state fighting some superpower

Eagle Pursuit said:

There's a couple of things you can do to protect your allied CS.

1) send some units over and plop them around the city so Nebby can't touch it.

2) denounce Nebby (do this prior to DoW)

Click to expand...

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

GoodSarmatian said:

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

Click to expand...

I thought the civ that is on the receiving end of the denouncement from a friend got the diplo hit, not the denouncer.

GoodSarmatian said:

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

Click to expand...

This could easily fixed by adding a defensive pact option with a city state which gives some extra influence however when a Ai declaes war on the city states you automaticly decare war ( no penalty implied ) ( Only if you're allied )

And my point is that it isn't possible to be a builder at civ 5 It allways taunts to war because the Ai is tautned towards agression against you.
it spreads it religion towards you it spams a city right next to you. Atacks you're city states and bully them. and so on...

GoodSarmatian said:

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

Click to expand...

I agree that they should have some additional modifiers on declaring wars, but the problem when AIs can't demand tribute from any CS is that it really, really gimps the whole personality thing. Turns it into a predictable boring fest where if you are top dog, nobody will ever dare touch you blah blah. It's already like that in the game when you have folks revving up for war (denounce - go Neutral - DOW), no need to make it even more sterile.

GoodSarmatian said:

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

Click to expand...

Agreed on all points

Eagle Pursuit said:

I thought the civ that is on the receiving end of the denouncement from a friend got the diplo hit, not the denouncer.

Click to expand...

In earlier versions both would get the hit. The denouncer for being a backstabber and the denounced one because your friends found a reason to denounce you. The latter was fortunately removed by patch when somebody at Firaxis came to their senses.

apocalypse105 said:

This could easily fixed by adding a defensive pact option with a city state which gives some extra influence however when a Ai declaes war on the city states you automaticly decare war ( no penalty implied ) ( Only if you're allied )

Click to expand...

That's kind fo the point if you pledge to protect a CS.

And my point is that it isn't possible to be a builder at civ 5 It allways taunts to war because the Ai is tautned towards agression against you.
it spreads it religion towards you it spams a city right next to you. Atacks you're city states and bully them. and so on...

Click to expand...

OK, but when I'm constantly provoked and the continued existence of an allied CS under my protection is threatened I should not be branded a warmonger when I finally lay down the law.

smallfish said:

I agree that they should have some additional modifiers on declaring wars, but the problem when AIs can't demand tribute from any CS is that it really, really gimps the whole personality thing. Turns it into a predictable boring fest where if you are top dog, nobody will ever dare touch you blah blah. It's already like that in the game when you have folks revving up for war (denounce - go Neutral - DOW), no need to make it even more sterile.

Click to expand...

The problem is that the AI seems to be playing by different rules than humans not only for global happiness but also the ability to bully city states. If I don't have troops near a city state's borders I can't demand anything because they don't fear me, but AI players seem to be able to demand tribute from half a continent away even when I have the largest military in the world.
Hopefully the world congress will make it possible to ban the bullying of city states.

I'd just as soon they remove pledge to protect from the game entirely.

In Vanilla, it was completely meaningless.

And in G&K, it's just used for the +10 free influence to stack with the +20 policy for free friendship with every city state on the map.

The AI doesn't even care if you tell them "you will pay", when the popup occurs; it shows a negative modifier, but has no effect on trade value. (If AI was willing to buy a luxury for 240 gold, it still is even if they tell you three turns in a row they've attacked one of "your" city states.)

On AI bullying city states: Their advantage doing so is tied to Chieftain difficulty level; "promoting" the AI to Prince to get them playing the same happiness rules as a side effect also gets them to the same rules for bullying city states.

A large part of the AI wanting to bully city states though has got to be city state quest related. Humans will tend to ignore "bad" quests; the AI though will try to fill them.

GoodSarmatian said:

Yeah, denounce him and get a massive diplo hit for denouncing your 'friend'. Diplomacy really improved with G&K, but this is one thing that still really pisses me off. If they attack a CS under my protection I should be able to declare war while they count as the aggressor. An AI also shouldn't even be able to demand tribute from a CS that is under the protection of a friend with a powerful military. I think that's a major oversight.

Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. This game punishes the player who likes to play as a nice guy and protect people.

And when I say 'the player' I mean 'me'.

Sometimes the player gets dealt a tough hand. This is not punishment. It's a test of decision-making, which is critical to the game.

steveg700 said:

Sometimes the player gets dealt a tough hand. This is not punishment. It's a test of decision-making, which is critical to the game.

Click to expand...

Then why add the Protection Announcement in the first place? Filler?

Bechhold said:

Then why add the Protection Announcement in the first place? Filler?

Click to expand...

Critical decision-making - denounce your friend, make him angry or just let him be?

Critical decision-making - denounce your friend, make him angry or just let him be?

Click to expand...

Yes, but you shouldn't get a negative modifier with the rest of the world for protecting your allied City-State.

I would like to see it personality based. Some leaders will see it as "Protecting a city-state over a friend, such a disgrace" and negative penalty.
Or, "You waste resources on the feeble" negative modifier (of varying degrees, based on the Civ in question).
While others will have a "You protect the weak" positive modifier.
Or even a "We appreciate that you keep your word with your allies" positive (of varying degrees).

But, you should never get a You Denounced a Friend, or a Warmonger, just for fulfilling the terms of your Alliance, when you are not the aggressor. You should get a big negative hit with the Civ that you got to war with, but that's it.

Bechhold said:

Then why add the Protection Announcement in the first place? Filler?

Click to expand...

It's intended to create a source of friction. The only thing I think is wrong with it right now is that the CS, once protected, doesn't ask anything more of me. It doesn't demand troops or a denouncement, as long as I tell the attacker that I don't approve of their attack.

It would be nice to see more personality-based differentials though. Some civ's want to see CS's protected, others see them as meat.

Moderator Action: Thread closed. Not about Brave New World.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889