Closed borders == More wars?

[microbe]

Just wondering if the AI would declare war on you if it needs to trespass your border.

Also, it would eliminate (part of) one important variants: defiant. Since you cannot demand other AIs to leave anymore.

 

[Joseph Stalin]

hmmm maybe they now use other ways to get to there goal. (boats)

i think if you have a weak military that there is a good possibilety that the AI will declear war against to get his/her goal.

but if you are strong they wil find another way

 

[CustodianV131]

Yeah also wondering about this feature. When you close you borders to a country you also can't trade with them and such... guess you and they won't be to happy with each other already when you take this measure.

I guess the AI will see closing borders as a hostile move, which will deteriorate the relation. If so closed borders might indeed lead to conflict.

 

[Joseph Stalin]

i thought you could trade with closed borders or am i wrong

 

[Sirian]

Just wondering if the AI would declare war on you if it needs to trespass your border.

Also, it would eliminate (part of) one important variants: defiant. Since you cannot demand other AIs to leave anymore.

If it means a pemanent end to the Deity RoP(TM) behavior, I'm for it. (We can come up with new variants.)


- Sirian

 

[ThePrankMonkey]

i thought it simply meant they just cant come in your lands like they do now in civ III and wander around or cut through to build a city far away that wont build more than two improvements the rest of the game.

i dont think it prevents trade, in the real world you can trade without letting another country's military stomp around all over your country.

 

[ThERat]

well, it certainly will remove the feature to get out of deals demanding the AI to leave your territory.
I am glad RoP rape is removed since this is a huge exploit. But again, the infos are all too vague to know what's really going on.

 

[Legionary37]

I don't think it will neccessarily mean more wars. Instead of attacking your units as often, they'll just cross your borders as often.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

This is a quote from the Gamespot Preview on this matter-hope it clarifies things:

In Civ IV, borders can be closed, which means that foreign units cannot enter your territory unless a state of war exists between your two factions. Closed borders will also be an excellent way to keep foreign missionaries out of your territory. However, you will eventually need to open your territory with friendly nations in order to trade and generate wealth.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Legionary37]

Yes, just like real life, as you get more advanced, trade and contact with other nations becomes much more important. Look at today. Which nations are the wealthiest and most powerful, the most closed nations? Or the most open, trading nations?

 

[Craterus22]

However, you will eventually need to open your territory with friendly nations in order to trade and generate wealth.

Yeah just the other day, the british paratroopers landed in my backyard to ensure that trade relations were maintained...

 

[Alphidius]

Closed borders option is good...
I rather the AI declaring war than rampaging their units across my lands towards my capital then declaring war, if you know what I mean...

 

[Urederra]

Yeah just the other day, the british paratroopers landed in my backyard to ensure that trade relations were maintained...

Any pretty female english paratrooper landed in your backyard? I have to watch the skies then...

 

[ThERat]

However, you will eventually need to open your territory with friendly nations in order to trade and generate wealth.

do you people understand what is the implication? If I am not wrong, in order to trade and generate wealth you have to accept units trampling all over you including missionaries.
So, why would one use closed borders unless you care heck about trade and money. Does not sound too different from before.

In fact this is worse, in Civ3 you could trade, but still ask AI to leave your territory.
Now, either closed borders = no trade or
open borders = trade = units free to enter

 

[nullspace]

I wouldn't assume that open borders is the same as a ROP. There's got to be a treaty that allows trade and brief trespasses, but not whole armies traipsing through your territory. In that case, closed borders is a useful state of antogonism between civs that isn't all-out war.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think the key issues are these:

1) Hopefully trade will be more important in Civ4-and the civs more interdependant-such that Closed Borders can't be used as an easy fall-back position to keep out units.

2) They make a point of the fact that civs will not be able to send units constantly over your borders unless you are in a state of war. This claim was made in the absence of Open/Closed Borders, and so suggests the possible need for a further level of diplomacy in order to send units through another nations territory-above and beyond open borders.

3) Hopefully, if a nation with whom you have an open border agreement does send units through your territory, then hopefully the option will still exist to demand that they remove said units from your territory or else sign a Right of Passage agreement.

I think my overall point is that this is another one of those features which I definitely want to learn more about before I make up my mind if its truly good or bad. On its own, though, I definitely feel that the ability to literally close your borders is a good addition-its how it gels with all the other factors that I am uncertain of.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Justy]

I think that a simple strategy utilizing this rule would be to close your borders to continental adversaries. For trade, pursue open trade with other continents and island nations.

 

[Joseph Stalin]

you dont have to close borders with all country's in the game only the ones that treathen your country

if they are peace full you open the borders to them and try to keep them peacefull towards you.

but a country that really doesn't like you but is not ready to wage war against you should be closed of and trading with them isn't nesesary anyway

 

[microbe]

From the new preview at Yahoo! it seems the borders are not always closed. Instead, you COULD close it with the side effect that you couldn't trade with others. Kind like China (the Qing Dynasty) in late 19 century.

If so, it's a good option. At the very least, we could still do defiant by just not using it.

 

[Texan General]

This thread gives me a sick feeling. This may have revealed a glaring problem with civ4. I would really dislike it if closing my borders meant no trade and trade meant allowing people to walk all over my territory.