Diplomacy Neutrality

Is it worth while to be added ?

  • Yep

    Votes: 18 81.8%

  • Nope

    Votes: 4 18.2%
  • Total voters
    22
Pitboss

Pitboss

Prince
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
309
Location
Belgium
Keep in mind that the first post is a work in progress, and changes regularly based on the contents of the posters suggestions.

[URL="http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4631678&postcount=8]Stylesrj"[/URL] said:
Everyone else on the map was neutral to me
Click to expand...
I was just reading this, and it gave me an idea, that hasn't been mentioned before I think ?
Couldn't it be interesting to add the posibility to be neutral to the diplomacy features of civ4 ?
This doesn't mean that it can't be broken by others. History is full of examples of that anyhow.

Neutrality*

Enforcement
You would declare neutrality with each individual civ via the diplomacy screen - both civs would have to agree upon it. Lasts 20 turns. Relations to AI must be affected by Diplomatic Attitude (Pleased or better) or based on Power (a less powerful country will sign neutrality, unless it's Furious). In addition you can sign a "neutrality protective pact" which basicly is a defensive pact that will only be invoked if you're to be attacked.

Advantages
+1/2 Trade Route in Capital City**.
Diplomatic security.

Disadvantages
Military units, can only get defensive promotions.
Disables the possibility for Defensive Pacts and Open Borders***.
Increases Unit Support/Upkeep 25% per Civilisation, would stop at 100% after 4 Declarations of Neutrality****.

Additional Effects
Declaration of war results in a -6 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from the neutral civ, and a -2 Diplomacy Penalty fDeclaration of war results in a -6 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from the neutral civ, and a -2 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from all other civs in friendly relation to the betrayed. Neither neutral party can demand or ask anything from each other. All proposals must be done in a trade format (i.e. 1 banana resource for 3 GPT). Relations to AI must be Pleased or better.

+ When a neutral civ gets attacked it automaticly loses his neutrality status, without any penalty.
+ You're able to ally with another neutral civ (that borders yours).
+ Possibility for a neutrality protective pact, ... why ?
  • Priviliged trade relationship
  • To use the neutral civ, as a buffer against other civs.
  • To make sure, that enemy civs won't attack the neutral civ, and use it's strategicly located cities and resources against you.
  • ...


* Kudos to King Flevance, Ceritoglu, Pitboss, Swedishguy, ProfessorK and Aussie_Lurker for their input.
** The Additional Effects are the main advantages to this - I'm not sure if it ought to be 1 or 2 additional trade routes.
*** Hague Convention of 1907, Section 5 (Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land), Article 2: "Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of either munitions of war or supplies across the territory of a neutral Power."
**** This is done so that declaring neutrality makes it harder to warmonger - I think this would be the peacenik's tool of choice.

Assuming it were abusable on MP, then a human player wouldn't sign it.
It should stay in for MP, although how much it would be used, would be interesting.
Click to expand...
 
In what sense would this be different from refusing to either help or attack either side in the existing game?
 
MrCynical said:
In what sense would this be different from refusing to either help or attack either side in the existing game?
Click to expand...
Ceritoglu said:
No diplomatic penalty I imagine.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's like Ceritoglu says, or something along those lines.
Their would ofcourse also be a downside to doing this, like most things in civ.
 
Neutrality

Enforcement
You would declare neutrality with each individual civ via the diplomacy screen - both civs would have to agree upon it.

Advantages
Open Borders, +5 to 10% commerce in all cities.

Disadvantages
None if neutrality is maintained.

Additional Effects
Declaration of war results in a -4 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from the neutral civ, and a -2 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from all other known civs. Declaration of war within ten turns of finishing the Neutrality Agreement will cause the same penalties. Neither neutral party can demand or ask anything from eachother. All proposals must be done in a trade format (i.e. 1 banana resource for 3 GPT).
 
Ceritoglu said:
Neutrality

Enforcement
You would declare neutrality with each individual civ via the diplomacy screen - both civs would have to agree upon it.

Advantages
Open Borders, +5 to 10% commerce in all cities.

Disadvantages
None if neutrality is maintained.

Additional Effects
Declaration of war results in a -4 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from the neutral civ, and a -2 Diplomacy Penalty for the betrayor from all other known civs. Declaration of war within ten turns of finishing the Neutrality Agreement will cause the same penalties. Neither neutral party can demand or ask anything from eachother. All proposals must be done in a trade format (i.e. 1 banana resource for 3 GPT).
Click to expand...
Seems pretty interesting, but perhaps being neutral could also mean that your culture won't get further then at the moment you declared yourself to be neutral ? Just seems like their has to be some downside, or every single not to warmongery AI will put himself on this stand.
Unless the AI realy starts to care about his diplomatic relations.

I've added your suggestion to the first post, if you don't mind me doing so ?
Swedishguy said:
None said nope! Maybe because only 4 have voted...
Click to expand...
If you call that a reason ...
SkippyT said:
I said no!
It just wouldn't work for Multiplayer...
Click to expand...
Well then you should be able to disable this option in your menu, before starting the game. Or it should just not be integrated for multiplayer games.
 
I agree a disadvantage would be useful, I just couldn't think of any historically significant disadvantages to being neutral. Maybe +25% Unit Support Cost for every civ you're neutral with.

100th Post!!!
 
Ceritoglu said:
I agree a disadvantage would be useful, I just couldn't think of any historically significant disadvantages to being neutral. Maybe +25% Unit Support Cost for every civ you're neutral with.

100th Post!!!
Click to expand...
Congrats with you 100thiest post :D
Why not disable the posibility for defencive pacts, while in neutrality.
Since being neutral means not interfering, just minding your own :)
 
I think it is a good idea for single player games but it has to have some penalty attached or else it would basically disable the diplomatic aspect of the game. I would think that trade routes wouldn't be affected because I would think that such a stance would be good for commerce because you wouldn't have to spend as much money for upkeep on your military. That might be the the penalty, some additional percentage cost for military units or perhaps better still, slower promotion which would reflect the lack of interest in military and more emphasis on trade and culture. It would be a good stance for players who were seeking cultural or diplomatic victories and be of little interest to players who were seeking conquest and domination victories. Perhaps a slight increase for commerce and trade and a penalty for building and promoting military units. I'll leave the percentages and +s and -s to others.
 
Swedishguy said:
Less trade routes, maybe?
Click to expand...
Logicaly, it can only keep trade at the same level or improve it.

ProfessorK said:
I think it is a good idea for single player games but it has to have some penalty attached or else it would basically disable the diplomatic aspect of the game. I would think that trade routes wouldn't be affected because I would think that such a stance would be good for commerce because you wouldn't have to spend as much money for upkeep on your military. That might be the the penalty, some additional percentage cost for military units or perhaps better still, slower promotion which would reflect the lack of interest in military and more emphasis on trade and culture. It would be a good stance for players who were seeking cultural or diplomatic victories and be of little interest to players who were seeking conquest and domination victories. Perhaps a slight increase for commerce and trade and a penalty for building and promoting military units. I'll leave the percentages and +s and -s to others.
Click to expand...
I agree, that it must have a downside as well.
But not directly on trade or military.

Perhaps some of these ?
  • You could grant less military promotions, or none at all ?
  • Perhaps a small taxation on the extra trade income, you're making because of your neutrality.
    Those small amounts could then be refunded to the neigbouring civs ?
  • Cancelling the neutrality stand, could take 20 turns, instead of the standard 10 ?
  • No open borders, for military units, only everything else ?
 
Well very simply :
  • You can't be forced or asked to stop trading with someone
  • Since you're neutral to all other parties, they won't object you trading to them (unless, they've got a good reason)
  • All other reasons that I haven't thought about ...
Btw how about only enabling defensive promotions for the military units of neutral nations ?
 
I like the idea of only enabling defensive promotions. It makes sense that only offensive or aggressive promotions should be penalized.
 
Pitboss said:
Well very simply :
  • You can't be forced or asked to stop trading with someone
  • Since you're neutral to all other parties, they won't object you trading to them (unless, they've got a good reason)
  • All other reasons that I haven't thought about ...
Btw how about only enabling defensive promotions for the military units of neutral nations ?
Click to expand...
I meant limiting commerce from trade routes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
4x idea - inspired by 6 - current government type modifies some research rates
Replies
0
Views
116
DeckerdJames
D
sTAPler27
Ideology System Concept
Replies
10
Views
1K
luca 83
luca 83
W
Re-Label City State Units and Mark Hostile ones
Replies
0
Views
198
wordcreatr
W
R
Ideologies should remove settlement limit cap
Replies
0
Views
129
Renouf
R
D
Future Civ Changing Mechanic Suggestion
Replies
0
Views
380
desk
D
Back
Top Bottom