Are there diplomatic rewards for doing good?

[Sherlock]

In my current game I just liberated a city for Brasil.

Result? They won't even give me open borders.

Or if I'm England and Germany attacks France and I attack Germany to help France what happens? France calls me a 'war monger' and won't trade with me!

I certainly hope CiVI is better at letting you be a good neighbor and help other countries.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

It likely will encourage you more to play nice.

 

[bison21]

Well I think doing good should have both diplomatic rewards as well as repercussions. But yeah agreed that France should, instead of calling you a warmonger, pop a leader screen asking whether you joined the war to fight on their side (i.e. "I noticed we have a common enemy- what's in it for you?"). Here's to more waiting for details!

NB I always thought it'd be fun to have a "realm divide" (Shogun 2: TW) mechanic in Civ which basically turns everyone against you once you are dominant.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Civ V General Discussions

 

[Montezuma II]

Or if I'm England and Germany attacks France and I attack Germany to help France what happens? France calls me a 'war monger' and won't trade with me!

If you negotiate a trade beforehand with France and offer that you DOW on Germany, they will probably give you some gold or if you do it for free, you should get a "we traded recently" positive diplomatic hit.

This is useful for when you want to DOW a civ but don't want a negative hit with a certain civ. You will need to remain at war for at least 15 turns though.

 

[Kriogen]

Well, what you call "good" can be seen as something else by AI

Examples:

In my current game I just liberated a city for Brasil.

Result? They won't even give me open borders.
...

Maybe Brasil didn't wanted that city, plus Pedro knows you liberated that junk city just to lower your big warmonger score. So, not that you helped Brasil, but made yourself look better in the eyes of others.

...
Or if I'm England and Germany attacks France and I attack Germany to help France what happens? France calls me a 'war monger' and won't trade with me!
...

Did they (France) ask you for help? Or did you just wanted germans cities the easy way (coz they are busy with france). I mean its a standard tactic. Bribe germany/france to attack each other, and while they are busy with each other, attack and grab a couple of cities and maybe a capitol.


Plus if they where really in a war, fighting, you should get "we fought a common enemy" diplo points.

 

[InCi]

Diplomancy in Civ V (or any Civ for that matter) is a bit odd. To say the least.
At least the expansions fixed some issues with it, it was even worse in Vanilla.

 

[redwings1340]

Well, think of it this way.

For the first one, imagine if I beat you up and steal your bike. The next day, I give you cupcakes. Chances are, you would still not like me or trust me even after I gave you cupcakes. Presumably Brazil doesn't like you for many reasons outside of you liberating their city.

For the second one, there probably was a diplomatic benefit from going to war with germany, but after you took German cities, you're suddenly a big empire that's a threat to world peace. You also got standard warmonger penalties if you took german cities, especially if Germany made peace with France to try to deal with you.

 

[Volcanon]

Well I think doing good should have both diplomatic rewards as well as repercussions. But yeah agreed that France should, instead of calling you a warmonger, pop a leader screen asking whether you joined the war to fight on their side (i.e. "I noticed we have a common enemy- what's in it for you?"). Here's to more waiting for details!

NB I always thought it'd be fun to have a "realm divide" (Shogun 2: TW) mechanic in Civ which basically turns everyone against you once you are dominant.

Previous civ games (especially 3) were like that. It wasn't really all that fun. It sucks to be ahead and try to play peaceful and end up getting dogpiled. Even if you win it's boring. I recall the entire world versus me and I ended up putting infantry around my entire land border (low attack, high defence, equivalent to great war infantry in civ 5).

Teched up to some sort of tank and blew them away, but in the mean time I had no trade to speak of and had to keep reinforcing my ranks.

Also Alpha Centauri. When you're ahead, you're in perma-war with half the world and even your allies will backstab for no apparent reason. And the AI will agree to a ceasefire and then attack you the next, or even the same turn.

 

[Trackmaster]

It depends. Liberating cities is probably more useful early on, late game its only strategic.

Early on, it's a way of taking out your foes cities, and hoping your war mongering rating in the process. It's also early enough that you can start building a good relationship with another empire, and keep another empire in the game that you can benefit from since they're so much weaker than you if they're losing cities. If you recall them to life, you get their their WC votes too.

Later on, it doesn't matter as much. Everyone's butthurt at you anyway, freeing cities will just be one nice thing for them, but it won't outweigh all the other stuff they have to be angry with you about. And if you're a domination Civ, your warmonger rating is so far gone anyway.

I say strategically, because there are cases where you want to take out a city, but don't want to control, and don't have time to raze it. Or it being there helps you, like opening up trade routes for you.

 

[Volcanon]

Liberating also keeps cities from your opponents and the city is still useless for a long time.

A good way to get rid of useless cities when it would take 20 turns of unhappiness to burn the city down is to gift it to a weak civ, who will either burn it down for you or simply keep it. Even better if you restored that civ to life to begin with.