Broken Trust with AI

[undertoad]

Hi

Quick question about breaking treaties/deals with the AI. I know about ROP-raping and the consequences, and the consequences of breaking a GPT deal. But something odd just happened in my current game.

I was exploring the Maya coastline with a Galley, and got the "what are your units doing in our territory?" business. I suggested a ROP deal. The answer I got was weird: "You broke this deal with the Koreans, we've heard about you, no way José!". Now the truth of the matter is:

a) I had just wiped out the Koreans
b) I NEVER had a ROP with them
c) I never even declared war with any of my units inside their territory.

What is going on here? Is what the Mayans are telling me just window-dressing, or does it mean I REALLY have, somehow, made ROPs (and maybe GPT deals?) impossible for myself from now on?

The only things I can imagine I might have done wrong in my dealing with Korea (although I'm pretty sure I didn't do these, it's possible to overlook a unit) are:

1. Maybe I declared war on them when one of my units was still in their territory? I always avoid doing this, maybe overlooked one, but I'm pretty sure I didnt. In the absence of a ROP, does it matter? The AI constantly declares war on me in response to a "Get Orf Moi Land!" squeak from me, and doesn't seem to suffer from it.

2. Does the situation earlier in the same turn matter? At the moment I declared war, I'm pretty sure (no, 99.999% sure) all my units were out of Korean territory; but at the beginning of that turn, some of them were (I moved them out deliberately before the DOW to avoid this kind of trouble). Does the "rep-breaking" DOW count any territory encroachment earlier in that same turn?

Sure, the fact that I was at peace with the Koreans and then DOW-ed on them and destroyed them would make the AI suspicious. But I don't see why it should break my ROP/GPT rep for the rest of the game. Maybe I'm reading too much into what the Mayans are saying? (Impossible to test whether I can do GPT business - the muy estupido AIs haven't built any Harbors!)

thanks!

 

[WHarris]

You must have had a trade deal going on with the Koreans.

 

[Spoonwood]

RoPs depend on the amount of territory you have compared to the AI you want the RoP with. Maybe you need to pay a fee for an RoP. We need a save to determine if you can sign an RoP in this game or not.

 

[Bucephalus]

Had you previously signed a peace deal with the Koreans, perhaps from a earlier war, then declared war within 20 turns?

 

[Optional]

I think you've read Microbe's article on trade rep, Undertoad, and that's not entirely correct.
You can declare war with units in that civs territory, that will not break your rep. Whether you had those units there at the beginning of the turn or later doesn't matter. What you cannot do is to ignore a boot order; that'll cost you your rep.
Your reputation is your ability to make per turn deals, whether it's a resource, right of passage, gold per turn or an alliance; it all gets covered by the same reputation.
What Bucephalus says can easily happen to a less experienced player, or perhaps you've traded some resource to Korea and some barbarian galley showed up on the trade route, or you've been in an alliance with Korea and signed peace with the mutual target too soon..

 

[undertoad]

Maybe Bucephalus and Optional have got it. But I'm pretty sure that the PT with Korea was age-old: lasted with no war from when I first met them to when I finally DOW-ed on them.

I deliberately didn't get into any GPT deals with Korea because I knew they were next on my s**t-list. But, if I understand you correctly, a simple Peace Treaty/Peace Treaty deal with no sweeteners on either side (or even if the sweeteners are immediate, like upfront gold or a tech or city) is also a 20-turn deal? I thought "unsweetened" Peace Treaties were just empty promises - that's how the AI seems to treat them!

It's terrible how the AI just does what the hell it likes, and when you do the same you get your rep trashed... (this is the reason I never thought of this). With CivAssist helping me, I have no excuse...

Optional, by "cannot ignore a boot order", do you mean I have to obey the AI's demand for me to remove my units from their territory, or trash my rep? (The AI ignores this demand all the time...) I may be misunderstanding your point, but do you have to remove all units by the end of that turn when given a "leave our territory" demand that you agree to? Or is it just DOW-ing in response to a "leave" order that trashes your rep?

Or maybe by "boot order" you mean the 2nd-level "get out of our territory" message, the one where either your units auto-move or you declare war?

I was trying to be clever and get them to DOW by agreeing to their 1st-level "get out" order but not acting on it, but it didn't work (I'm too powerful for them to DOW easily), so I just DOW-ed with no reference to any "units in territory" dispute on either side. Pretty sure this wasn't within 20 turns of a PT, though, the PT was age-old, and in spite of incursion disputes on both sides we'd never actually gone to war before.

I think I have the technicalities of this wrong anyway. Seems that the correct way to do this (or one correct way to avoid DOW-ing yourself and annoying other AIs) is to wait til their units are in my territory, then give them a 1st-level "get out" message that's either impossible to carry out (e.g. block them), or just annoys them enough to DOW. Is that right? I'm a little confused about this "get units out of territory" thing and how it affects rep: very clear about how an established ROP needs to be treated with extreme care, but unclear about how it works without a ROP.

I was hoping that this was a case of what Spoonwood says: the Mayans just don't feel like giving me a ROP at this time for various other reasons, or need to be bribed a bit, and it's not a case of "utterly broken rep". But it sounds like this isn't the case. I've attached the latest save, if anyone can shed light on what I did wrong it would be a great help.

Och well. If I've broken my rep in this game, so be it. I've got Horses, Iron and Saltpetre in my territory, a big ole' stack of gold, an even bigger stack of Knights/Persons with Muskets/Trebs, and Leonardo's.The other civs will just have to live without my nice Ivory, Incense and Dyes. If when the time comes there's no Coal/Rubber/Oil/Aluminium in my territory - I'll just have to "assimilate" it.

Still, would be nice to work out what I did wrong, if there's an easy way for anyone to figure it out from the save.

 

[Optional]

Boot order is 'Get out of my territory or declare!' There's even in brackets the line 'You will be held responsible for the conflict.' If you then declare, you've broken your rep. If you give in, your units will automatically get removed.

If you enter another civs territory with just one or two units, you first get a friendly request, something like 'What are those troops in my territory for?' You can ignore that, answer 'I'm just scouting', but that's all. No consequenses for reputation.
If you don't follow a request to leave, you sometimes get the 'Move or declare!' message in one of the following turns, sometimes nothing happens.
If you enter another civs territory with a sizeable stack, there will not be a friendly request first, but you'll get the 'Move or declare!' order immediately.
You'll learn soon enough to tell the request from the order.

Yes, it's more clever to let them declare on you, for the war happiness. You get happiness in your empire if another civ declares on you. Also I you have a 20 turn deal with a civ, and that civ declares on you, only their rep gets trashed, not yours.

I haven't looked at your save, sorry. I don't think it's possible to tell when a rep got trashed from a later save anyway.

EDIT: sorry, forgot something: default peace is not a 20 turn deal, but if you've been at war with a civ, the peace treaty that follows always has to be respected for 20 turns, even if it was just a 'white peace' with no further deals attached.
If you want to know whether you're still in a 20 turn peace treaty or in default peace, you can go enter diplomacy with that civ. Somewhere at the bottom of a white box are the tabs 'new' and 'active'. 'Active' shows the current deals. If it just says 'peace treaty', without a number behind it, that's default peace, but if there's a number behind it, it's a binding treaty that still has that many turns to go.

 

[Rodrig0]

Must have been a lost galley of your inside the koreans' territory when you declared war, or any other unit. That's the only way you will be help responsible and unable for any future ROP agreement. Still, not everything is lost. You can still make "per turn" deals, like, you send them your nice ivory and dyes and some gold (per turn, of course!) in exchange for some of their luxuries of resources. You can still trade lump sums of gold or techs for techs or gold of theirs. They just won't trade any lump in exchange for something "per turn".

 

[Bucephalus]

Do you archive games with Civassist? If so, you will be able to check back over the relevant 20 turns to see what happened.

 

[undertoad]

Thanks for your replies everyone!

Optional, that clears things up for me; if I understand you right:

[All this is without a ROP in place]
a) "please leave" orders (the 1st-level) have no effect at all on rep (though leaving your units there could annoy the AI?).
b) Doing a DOW in response to a "please leave" has no effect on rep.
c) But doing a DOW in response to a "boot order" (2nd-level), where as you say the AI clearly says "you will be held responsible", does trash your rep.

And (Rodrigo), having a unit in their territory, ROP or no ROP, at the time you DOW, does affect your rep? I thought having a unit in territory only did this if you had a ROP.

I'm hoping that my nervousness about the situation at the start of the turn in which you DOW is just a red herring - surely it's the situation (i.e. where your units are) at the time of the DOW that is important?

Maybe I did have a lost galley in their territory when I DOW'd. It definitely wasn't a 20-turn PT (CivAssist is very clear on this). Unfortunately I don't archive games with CivAssist - I've just switched this option ON for future reference.

Rodrigo, that's very interesting about GPT deals still being possible. From what you say, seems that the only thing I can't do is exchange an immediate benefit (gold upfront, tech, city) for a stream of GPT? I can still do [stuff] Per Turn vs. [stuff] Per Turn deals? I thought any offer of GPT/Resource per turn from me would be refused once my rep is broken?

Sorry to be asking so many questions - the workings of the trading screen are very obscure (or would be if it weren't for the excellent research done by people on this site) - it's often impossible to tell what's going on in a refusal to trade: embargo, broken rep, bad attitude, no money, or simply "we don't feel like it at the moment".

 

[Bartleby]

My understanding (which may be faded through time) is that unless you have an actual RoP (blue[green?] line on foreigh advisor screen), you can declare war without worrying about your RoP rep. It makes no difference whether you declare by marching in and attacking, attacking with a unit already in their territoty, declining a boot order, or via diplomacy.
I tested this with an old save once, and I think that's what I found.


edit to add:
As an afterthought, can you tell if you've shafted your RoP rep if you look at the foreign advisor during diplomacy; viz: if you put straight-up RoP on the table does he go "they'll never accept such a deal"?

 

[Optional]

And (Rodrigo), having a unit in their territory, ROP or no ROP, at the time you DOW, does affect your rep? I thought having a unit in territory only did this if you had a ROP.

Rodrigo is mistaken; you can attack with a unit already in that civs territory. Lord Emsworth tested this and posted about it. I'm afraid I can't find the thread anymore, otherwise I would have linked to it.

Rodrigo, that's very interesting about GPT deals still being possible. From what you say, seems that the only thing I can't do is exchange an immediate benefit (gold upfront, tech, city) for a stream of GPT? I can still do [stuff] Per Turn vs. [stuff] Per Turn deals? I thought any offer of GPT/Resource per turn from me would be refused once my rep is broken?

The last thing is correct. The AI will not accept your per turn offerings anymore, whatever it is. There are exceptions: An AI civ at war with Korea will still accept your per turn offerings, because they don't care what you've done to an enemy of theirs. And you can still offer per turn in an extortion deal; part of a peace deal after a war; an AI civ with your knife on their throat is willing to accept things that they normally wouldn't.

Sorry to be asking so many questions - the workings of the trading screen are very obscure (or would be if it weren't for the excellent research done by people on this site) - it's often impossible to tell what's going on in a refusal to trade: embargo, broken rep, bad attitude, no money, or simply "we don't feel like it at the moment".

There are clues, though. If you get the message 'They would never accept such a deal', there is something that makes the deal impossible. Your rep might be broken, or you're asking something that they haven't got. If you get 'They will be insulted by this', your offer is way too light. I'm not even sure what the actual civ is saying, I'm only looking at my advisor.

These mechanisms are indeed quite complex. Quite recently I still made a mistake with an RoP. I had one with India, and I had a boat in their territory. Then, in the interturn, India signed an MPP (Mutual Protection Pact) with my strong neighbour Babylon, and immediately declared on me and attacked my boat. This triggered the MPP, so all of a sudden I was at war with Babylon as well. Quite unfair, as I wasn't the aggressor, but the thing that triggered it was probably having a unit in India's territory in the interturn when the war started, so it counted as an act of war from my part.

 

[undertoad]

Thanks for your replies. It's good to know that my understanding of ROP and DOW was basically correct: having a unit in their territory only matters if you DOW with a ROP in place ("ROP-raping"). And gpt deals are completely off once rep is broken.

Interesting: I've just gone back to the game and played on a bit, and got the chance to ask the Mayans for a ROP again (they wouldn't talk to me for a while, and I didn't have an embassy). Now what they were saying before (which made me start this thread) is completely mystifying. Because

a) I asked for a ROP vs ROP deal. I got told "they would never accept such a deal" by my advisor, and got told firmly "no" by the Mayan leader - but without any comment about my previous behaviour.
b) I then put a ROP on my side of the table, and asked "what would you want for a ROP?" - and the Mayans came straight back and offered a ROP if I threw in Printing Press on my side!

So it looks as if my rep is not broken, and as Spoonwood was speculating, the Mayans were just annoyed about my rampaging, rather than referring to a broken rep.

Thanks for all the input - I don't think this has been for nothing, as it's clarified a lot of things I was unsure about.

One thing that seems to contradict what you're saying, Optional, is what my adviser said in this last contact with the Mayans. I always thought "never accept" was just a stronger form of "would be insulted", and doesn't actually mean anything more than that (e.g. that an embargo/broken rep makes something impossible). From this latest negotiation, it looks like this is true: because the adviser said "would never accept", but actually a ROP was fine for them once I chucked in a tech.

So it looks like "never accept" vs "would be insulted" is not a good guide to the reasons behind a refused trade.

I'm surprised that CivAssist doesn't have AI attitude (polite, annoyed, furious and so on) or broken/intact rep indicated anywhere. Judging by the thoroughness that makes CivAssist cover just about everything else, I'm guessing that this information must be impossible to extract from the save.

 

[Optional]

Yes, that is strange. I really thought 'never accept' would mean 'unnegotiatable'. If 'never accept' meant the same thing as 'insulted', then there's no need for the both of them, even if one is a bit stronger than the other. Did it really happen in the same turn, Undertoad, this Mayan move from 'never accept' to 'fine', with nothing else happening inbetween?
Your reputation issue is also baffling me, because if the Mayans referred to you not having been fair to Korea, you must have a reputation issue.
Are you really sure the Mayans didn't start a war with Korea inbetween?

I think I'll now have a look at that save of yours, because I like to know the game mechanics!
EDIT: Yes, the Mayans are moving from 'never accept' to 'okay' with nothing happening inbetween. Strange, I also looked at a few of my own game saves, but I'm getting 'insulted' when my offer is way too light, after that it's 'I doubt whether they'll accept this', and then 'we're getting close to a deal', if I'm improving my offer further. I never get 'never accept', when the deal is basically negotiatable. I can make a ridiculous offer, like asking 500 gold for an RoP, but 'insulted' is the worst response I get from the AI.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Even if your RoP reputation is shot it will still be possible to sign RoPs. It only going to cost you something more. I would guess maybe about additional 20-30 gpt. So, I suppose that there is really reputation problem.

 

[Spoonwood]

I agree with Emsworth. When I commented earlier I thought you thought too much to shuck up 80 or 120 gold (lump sum) for an RoP. Not sure what you needed to pay, but Printing Press usually sounds like overkill for a clean rep.

 

[undertoad]

Strange, I also looked at a few of my own game saves, but I'm getting 'insulted' when my offer is way too light, after that it's 'I doubt whether they'll accept this', and then 'we're getting close to a deal', if I'm improving my offer further. I never get 'never accept', when the deal is basically negotiatable. I can make a ridiculous offer, like asking 500 gold for an RoP, but 'insulted' is the worst response I get from the AI.

Maybe it's a version difference? I'm playing CivConquests.exe v.1.22 from the CivComplete CD.

Lord Emsworth, I'm confused again! I thought (from reading about here and game experience) that there were two things at work in the AI's mind:

a) "reputation", which is just a binary Yes or No. If you have it, you can sign ROPs and GPT deals. Once you lose it (by breaking a GPT deal, or ROP-raping), no amount of sweeteners can ever get you a GPT deal or a ROP again.
b) "other things". Maybe summed up in AI attitude, but maybe also including how much money they have, what their plans are, whether you're being very expansionist, whether they like your enemies etc. This is a more subtle thing, which I understood to be at work when the Mayans wouldn't do a ROP/ROP deal, but would if I chucked in a tech. (by the way, I agree with Spoonwood - a tech was too much to pay, so I declined that one).

Maybe there's some version differences?

 

[Spoonwood]

a) "reputation", which is just a binary Yes or No.

No. You can break your reputation once and make things bad, then break it again and make things worse. Sweetners can still sometimes get you a deal. AI attitude doesn't make deals harder. Increased aggressiveness does seem to increase worker cost... about 100 gold at least and 124 gold at most.

 

[Optional]

No, it won't be a version difference. I haven't got complete, but Civ III gold + separate Conquests disc, patched up to 1.22. Should still play the same.

I go with Lord Emsworth and Spoonwood; probably a broken rep doesn't make certain deals completely impossible. I don't really know that, because I never break my rep. I've also seen hinted once - by Bucephalus - that the effects of a broken rep are slowly fading away over time. Perhaps, with the Koreans being dead, this process is even speeding up, who knows. Speculation, speculation. Sorry, can't do better than that.

I do know know that the cost of an RoP also depends on your relative size compared to that of your partner. So if you're small, it's difficult to get an RoP with bigger partners, but if you're big, it should be a piece of cake to get it from the minnows. The Mayans were smaller than you, so for them to ask for a whole tech for an RoP is unusual. That, together with the initial 'never accept' from your advisor, probably still points to a broken rep.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Maybe it's a version difference? I'm playing CivConquests.exe v.1.22 from the CivComplete CD.

Lord Emsworth, I'm confused again! I thought (from reading about here and game experience) that there were two things at work in the AI's mind:

a) "reputation", which is just a binary Yes or No. If you have it, you can sign ROPs and GPT deals. Once you lose it (by breaking a GPT deal, or ROP-raping), no amount of sweeteners can ever get you a GPT deal or a ROP again.
b) "other things". Maybe summed up in AI attitude, but maybe also including how much money they have, what their plans are, whether you're being very expansionist, whether they like your enemies etc. This is a more subtle thing, which I understood to be at work when the Mayans wouldn't do a ROP/ROP deal, but would if I chucked in a tech. (by the way, I agree with Spoonwood - a tech was too much to pay, so I declined that one).

Maybe there's some version differences?

Hmm, I think that reputation is binary in a sense. And that you either have a clean rep or you don't. (There seem to be different types though.) But not having a clean RoP reputation does not mean you cannot sign RoP deals at all. Offered straight up the reply is "never" and if you increase the offer to include an additional 20-30 gpt it is possible all of a sudden again. And I have seem something similar happen with MA's. At some point the reply was "never" (caused clearly by a rep hit) but if you increased the offer enough (600+ gpt ) it became possible again.