Everyone hates me because I won't DoW on them?

[G-Max]

Okay, here's my dilemma.

I'm Rome, and a sated power right now. I've conquered Spain, France, England, Greece, Byzantium, Carthage, Egypt, and Babylon, and I've built cities in Palestine, Anatolia, and what I'm guessing is Slovenia. Because I'm the big dog, EVERYONE else who's still alive keeps asking me to join whatever war they just started. But I'm too busy building improvements and Wonders to expend any resources on more wars, so I decline. Always. I'm playing nice and not hurting anybody anymore. I'm even giving away technologies when asked nicely.

Now everybody hates me because I won't kill them. Seriously. You see, when you decline to join someone else's war, that player gets a bit angry at you, but you don't score any points with the player that you declined to attack! Isn't this a bit... um... unfair and ********?

I propose that we petition Firaxis to fix this in the next patch.

 

[CajNatalie]

Why would the victim civilization know you declined to agree to join in a war against them?
It's not like a leader going up to you and asking for you to stab your friend in the back is going to be magically broadcast in your friend's throne room, unless you accept, then things get obvious.

 

[G-Max]

Why would the victim civilization know you declined to agree to join in a war against them?

I'd tell them, of course.

 

[CajNatalie]

Why should they believe you?

Also, going out of your way to tell your friend 'oh hey, one of my buddies who's at war with you thought it'd be cool to backstab you', then it's gonna make them feel reaaal great.
So even if there was 100% proof for what you said, the bad feelings you're gonna give your friend are going to make sure they can't feel good enough to like you any more than they do.

 

[G-Max]

Why would hearing that I refused to DoW on them make them feel worse? Why would their mood have any effect on their attitude toward me? You're not making any sense.

 

[karadoc]

I don't think you should get any brownie points for declining to stab your friends in the back. That's just a neutral action.

 

[Derakon]

In any event, the game goes out of its way to try to keep you from staying a neutral party. About the only way to stay friendly with everyone is to get everyone to have the same state religion; otherwise, invariably two AIs will get pissed at each other over religious differences, and then they'll drag the rest of the world in with them. Figure out which side has the stronger position and side with them, then don't worry about the other side hating your guts.

 

[Ataxerxes]

In any event, the game goes out of its way to try to keep you from staying a neutral party. About the only way to stay friendly with everyone is to get everyone to have the same state religion; otherwise, invariably two AIs will get pissed at each other over religious differences, and then they'll drag the rest of the world in with them. Figure out which side has the stronger position and side with them, then don't worry about the other side hating your guts.

This^^^. You can't play nice and have everybody like you. Religious issues, etc. make it necessary to choose sides in the game. Besides, considering the position you're in (sounds like Earth18), a little more conquering might be in order.

If you really want to not have to fight, join in the wars on the side of your neighbors and then don't send any units to fight. I've had phony wars go on for a long time and you get a lot of brownie points by pretending to beat the same dead horse. Often there will be a pariah nation everyone hates. That's the one to join in the war against.

 

[revengeofmakno]

If there are a lot of wars and you never join then you are on the road to being in a situation no one will be convinced that you are their real friend. Religion might keep you out of trouble for a while but once people start going to free religion, isolation is almost inevitable. Staying completely out of all the fights seldom leads to an optimal situation. Picking the right ones often does.

 

[G-Max]

I don't think you should get any brownie points for declining to stab your friends in the back. That's just a neutral action.

If it's neutral, then why do the petitioning civs hate me for doing nothing?

In any event, the game goes out of its way to try to keep you from staying a neutral party.

This^^^. You can't play nice and have everybody like you. Religious issues, etc. make it necessary to choose sides in the game.

If there are a lot of wars and you never join then you are on the road to being in a situation no one will be convinced that you are their real friend.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM!!!

Besides, considering the position you're in (sounds like Earth18)

Actually, it's my Earth27 map... which means even MORE wars.

 

[karadoc]

If it's neutral, then why do the petitioning civs hate me for doing nothing?

Isn't it clear? A civ asks you to help them, and you refuse — the fact that you are not willing to help them suggests that you are not their friend, so you get negative points.

Let me put it like this: Civ A asks you to declare war on civ B, and you refuse. You have actively rejected a request for help from civ A, so you lose points with civ A. But from civ B's point of view, you haven't done anything. You haven't helped or hindered civ B by not declaring war on them; you've done nothing. So there is no change in points for civ B.

It would be nice if the AI would recognize it when you helped them in other ways such as closing borders with civ A to prevent them from reaching civ B, or something like that, but that kind of stuff can be very subtle. Maybe it's best that the AI doesn't attempt to understand subtle gestures lest it risk opening itself to abuse.

 

[G-Max]

Let me put it like this: Civ A asks you to declare war on civ B, and you refuse. You have actively rejected a request for help from civ A, so you lose points with civ A. But from civ B's point of view, you haven't done anything. You haven't helped or hindered civ B by not declaring war on them; you've done nothing.

From Civ B's point of view, I had to make a choice, and I chose the course of action that was in their best interests, indicating that I am their friend.

 

[CajNatalie]

No, it does not indicate that you are their friend unless you decide to declare war on the civ asking you to backstab your friend.

You're just idly standing by and letting your friend get attacked.
You may not be joining in against them (negative), but you sure ain't helping (which would be positive), so you get neutral from your friend.

 

[G-Max]

Well, if I'm just standing idly by and allowing the aggressor civ to attack the other one, then the aggressor civ shouldn't hate me.

You're all using doublethink, applying one line of reasoning to the attacker and a different line of reasoning to the victim, and it's getting annoying.

Let me explain how this works. Either I'm doing nothing, which should incur no positive or negative attitudes from anyone, or I'm actively rejecting one of the belligerents, which indicates favoritism.

 

[none]

Fake wars are a good way to boost relationships with some AIs. Even if you don't send any unit to fight. Being neutral is frowned upon by everyone because they will ask you in turn to join and you will decline everytime thus getting negative modifiers from every belligerent AI. The logic is that you're either with them or against them.

You must have a Holy City. Convert them and kill the rest, faith helps with relationships. If you already have Free Religion you don't have to worry about the negative hit for not following the same religion (and it will get better when the AIs will get Free Religion). Don't neglect the importance of trading resources (it gives gold and also gets you a positive modifier for supplying them with resources -especially since you must already have the you've traded with our worst enemy modifier).

Or scratch that, just kill them all. But since winning a Domination or Conquest victory doesn't seem to be the point then pick a few fights especially with the large guys if their military is getting too big (China and Mongolia come to mind) or help them against the little guys but make sure they don't get bigger than you.

If you maintain an army large enough to defend your large empire and enough catapults to deal with SoDs you don't have to worry about other leaders liking you (especially the ones overseas who can't really manage an invasion from another continent). Later on just build nukes and make sure you nuke them before they get a chance to do it first.

 

[G-Max]

Somebody didn't understand the point of this thread... I was ranting about the illogic of it all, not asking for recommendations on how to deal with the situation.

 

[ElMikkino]

The civ that declared war is mad at you cause you didn't help them. They won't view it as "they didn't help us, but they are letting us do this". The negative in this situation is so much worse than the little positive to that civ that they really won't remember the positive, its just psychology.

And for the civ being declared on if you tell them what happened, then I bet IRL they'd say "Um...thanks?" cause you do not really wanna tell someone you were this close ot declaring war on them, and it would be considered a neutral action.

 

[karadoc]

I personally do not thank people just for not doing bad things to me. On the other hand if I asked someone to do something bad as a favour, I'd be thankful to them if they did it.

 

[Farm Boy]

Let me explain how this works. Either I'm doing nothing, which should incur no positive or negative attitudes from anyone, or I'm actively rejecting one of the belligerents, which indicates favoritism.

These are the points on which we disagree. If somebody is attacking your family and you ask your neighbor for help and they walk away, you are probably going to hold it at least a little bit against them.

 

[Derakon]

Frankly, if you're going to rant about how the game is unrealistic, you could find plenty better opportunities than this. Just accept that the game wants you to pick sides, and pick one already!