A Question About Peace Treaties

[GamezRule]

I asked this in my "Moving to Emperor" thread, but since everybody seems to have abandoned it:

"I see conflicting information about peace treaty reps. If you sign a peace treaty, and break it before the 20 turns are up, do you take a rep hit or not. I see both yes and no depending where I look. If I signed peace straight up without anything else, would that hurt my rep? What if I paid them? What if they paid me? Both of these questions are asked in terms of instant things like gold or techs. And do the same rules apply if there is gpt in the deal? Resources can't be traded at the peace screen."

One thing to add on to that, is the rep hit to you're RoP rep, or trading rep, or is there even a difference like the War Academy thread said?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Breaking a peace treaty before the 20 turns are over will trash your reputation. Trading reputation, if I am not mistaken.

You might however be surprised to find that a civ can't see any of your rep-hits as long as you are at war with them. Means, during peace negotiations you can always deal as if you were rep-hit free.

 

[vmxa]

"GamezRule
"I see conflicting information about peace treaty reps. If you sign a peace treaty, and break it before the 20 turns are up, do you take a rep hit or not."

Yes

"If I signed peace straight up without anything else, would that hurt my rep?"
no

"What if I paid them? What if they paid me? Both of these questions are asked in terms of instant things like gold or techs. And do the same rules apply if there is gpt in the deal?"

If you mean you give them xxx gold for tech A, then there is no deal. I mean it is a transaction, not a deal. It cannot be broken as it is instantly completed. It is the same in either direction.

That is not the case in a gpt as that is a deal. That deal has a time of expiration. If you do not met your end, you take a rep hit.

"One thing to add on to that, is the rep hit to you're RoP rep, or trading rep, or is there even a difference like the War Academy thread said?"

Do not know what the statement is you refer to in the acad. RoP, MPP and trade are all impacted by your reputation. The only other thing is attitude. That has no direct bearing on deals per se. They will make deals with you while they are at attitude furious.

 

[GamezRule]

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/trading_reputation.php

Vmxa, all those sentences were intended to be if those situations were actually on the peace treaty, and if that would cause a rep hit if said treaty was broken before the 20. Also, you both say that breaking peace incurs a rep hit, the article doesn't. Was it different in Vanilla/PTW?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I just checked. If you break a straight-up peace treaty this does indeed not impede on your ability to use gpt to buy cash or techs in and of itself. It does however impede on your ability to sign Military Alliances where your gpt and an AI's upfront are involved.

 

[Spoonwood]

LordEmsworth,

It looks like things changed in Conquests then.

Et alia,

In the comments there Vol wrote

There is an essential piece of information missing in this article, that I found out the hard way. This may only apply to PTW and not Conquests, but it has to be mentioned to warn anyone else who reads this guide.

My friend and I were playing an SG where reputation was essential, as no self research was allowed, and there was a limit on gold in the treasury (You can read our turnlog here, http://unhelpful.info/test/).

However, when I got the game back in 750 AD, our reputation was broken! We re-examined everything, and we had strictly followed the guidelines set out in Microbe's article. Yet our reputation was broken.

After much investigation, we determined the cause:
- Once you have warred with a civilization, peace is dealt with as a "deal" from then on, in the Active Trades, the Peace Treaty (16) will always have turns left on it
- Even if this Peace Treaty deal is straight-up, and includes nothing else, if war is declared while there is still a number left in the Active trades box, your reputation will be broken!

Another important item left out:
- Your reputation is restored with civilizations that can no longer contact the civilization you offended
- If you get someone to declare war against the civilization that you offended, the new warring civ will now honor gpt trades with you
- This should also apply when you eliminate the civ you offended, so there is hope to restoring reputation.

The guide is otherwise great, but its unfortunate that this omission screwed up our game. [/Vol]

I do recall this happening also in Conquests, though I can't confirm I only had peace in the deal, so I may have misread what happened.

It *is* clear that if you break your end where *you* agree to export resources, luxuries, or gpt, then you will suffer a reputation hit. It also *is* clear that if you don't export resources, luxuries, or gpt, or peace, but they import say gpt to you and you declare on them, you won't get a reputation hit. Even if only military alliances get harmed by breaking a peace treaty earlier, that does seem significant.

 

[Donny Brook]

"If I signed peace straight up without anything else, would that hurt my rep?"
no

If the deal is Peace Treaty (20) for Peace Treaty (20) and you break it, I'm sure you take a rep hit. However, I'd defer to vmxa on all things civ. I just don't think he understood you.

 

[vmxa]

Breaking a peace deal will hurt your rep. That question asked if signing it would. He may have meant to say signing and breaking, though the prior question asked that and I said yes to breaking. I will admit it was a bit confusing to see them back to back. A little more verbage would have been useful.

If you see my first response it had both question listed, so my understanding of the questions was plain, but could have been in error.

 

[splunge the 2nd]

VMXA, I thought there were 3 types of reputation: 1) attitude which bears on how eager the AI will war on you and whether they'll vote for you in the UN, 2)trade rep which bears on whether the AI will trust you to keep a per turn deal and 3) ROP which is whether they'll trust you in their borders. Are ROP and Trade reps linked?

 

[Smellincoffee]

Are ROP and Trade reps linked?

No, I've accidentally destroyed my ROP cred but been able to trade freely with the AI, as well as maintained right of passage with civs who refused to accept long-term deals with me because they were accidentally destroyed by trade routes being disrupted or so on.

They would be linked if you offered the AI luxuries in exchange for getting ROP, I suppose, and then the deal was broken before the terms were up. That might happen if you are a small country asking for right of passage from a larger nation.

 

[vmxa]

AFAIK you just have attitude and Rep. You rep controls the type of trades that can be made. IOW if they will make a gpt deal. They will always trade for one shot things like tech for cash or tech.

I do not really know about RoP and rep as I do not make many of them and I try to never break my rep. I would expect that if you have a bad trade rep, you also cannot make RoP deals. I do not see them tracking that seperately.

What would be the need for that as anyone that broke a deal of any kind cannot be trusted. However, I have not tested that, so it could be wrong. It just does not matter to me as I am going to try to not break deal and not make a lot ofRoP/MPP deals.

So the rare time I do make an RoP, my rep should be spotless.

 

[Elephantium]

AFAIK ROP reputation and trade reputation are tracked separately.

See the War Academy article at http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/trading_reputation.php

There's a section on ROP.

 

[vmxa]

I will try to test this as it makes no sense to add the extra code to do that. The fact that you can get an RoP and have a bad rep may not be related at all. IOW your rep may have nothing to do with RoP or MPP.

I can see them having a single flag that says you broke an RoP or MPP and that controls getting any more or not. No tie in with your trading rep. Not sure, if that can be tested though. It may just be a case of symantics.

Like I said those details are of no importance IMO. You keep your deal or you don't. That is all I need to know.