Negotiating Peace Treaties

[rev063]

Question: what's the deal with negotiating peace treaties (in peacetime)? You can do this by going to the Active section of the Diplomacy screen, but this seems to be a little-used feature (at least, I haven't seen much discussion of it).

You'll see this if you offer a gpt deal for a peacy treaty to end war. At the end of the 20 turns the other civ will usually ask you to renew the treaty. I've always said yes -- but does saying "no" mean you'll instantly declare war, or just that you reserve the right to declare war from then on?

My guess is that an active peace treaty means that declaring war on the civ will hurt your reputation amongst other civs. But I can't quite work out how to get out of an active peace treaty -- I don't want to declare war now, but I might want to soon!

Has anyone been successful renegotiating peace treaties in peacetime? If you're a militarily strong civ, is it a good way to extort gold or tech from weaker civs? How is this different from merely demanding tribute? (My guess is that negotiating the treaty might get you better stuff, but you have a 20-turn window where you can't declare war without ruining your reputation. Demanding tribute doesn't have this 20-turn effect. Right?)

- rev

 

[rev063]

I couldn't find any information about negotiating peace treaties in the civilopedia either, so I'm very curious whether anyone has successfully used them. Stories?

- rev

 

[Willem]

Yes you can renegotiate, and if you say no, your military advisor will pop up asking you whether you want to go to war or not. If you say no, you will still have a treaty. It's an all or nothing situation, either war or peace.

 

[rev063]

One thing I did discover is that although deals involving peace treaties last until the next war declaration, you cannot renegotiate until you wait 20 turns. This applies to the AI, too, so if you demand 50gpt from a civ in exchange for peace, you're guaranteed at least 1000 gold unless war intervenes.

I still want to know: does declaring war on a civ with whom you've signed a peace treaty in the last 20 turns hurt your reputation with other civs?

- rev

 

[sealman]

rev: it probably does.

In fact one game I was eating dinner while playing and dripped some ketchup on the mouse pad. This of course angered the Germans

Seriously, If there are no conditions to the peace treaty, I belive that you can re-declare war whenever you want. After all, the screen does say

Until war is redclared

unlike the usual

This agreement expires in 20 turns

. Under this assumption, I would assume that breaking a peace treaty with no conditions would not harm your reputation. Of course I could be wrong.

 

[SirPleb]

I'd sure like to know too. I have not learned yet whether declaring war during a formal peace treaty hurts one's reputation.

So far I've been playing on the assumption that there are two kinds of peace, let's call them formal (when there are N turns remaining in the treaty as shown in the diplomatic screen) and informal (when it shows a peace treaty but no turn count associated with it.)

Things I've observed (so, speculation here, not known facts):

1) After war, negotiating a peace treaty which includes some payment by either party over time results in a formal peace treaty. If there are no over-time conditions to the negotiated peace then an informal treaty results. Renegotiating an existing peace treaty seems to always result in a new formal peace treaty.

2) A formal peace treaty becomes an informal one after 20 turns.

3) I've rarely seen a Civ go to war with me while we had a formal peace treaty. So it seems to me to be sometimes advantageous to include an over-time element in a peace treaty I negotiate. And sometimes a disadvantage. It depends on whether I want another war soon. Also, because the AIs seem to behave this way, I've avoided ever declaring war on another Civ while we have a formal peace treaty. Even if it does not damage reputation, it seems to me that it should so I play with that style.

4) If you have only an informal peace treaty then you can click on it to renegotiate peace. But there is a risk in doing this. Once you have started to renegotiate peace it seems that there are only two choices - agree to a new deal or go to war. If the other Civ doesn't want to make a new deal you can find yourself having to pay to keep a peace which was free before you opened negotiations. I generally renegotiate peace only if the width of my part of the histograph power chart is significantly wider than the other Civ's. Given that, it seems that they will almost always throw in something (tech, gold, and even cities if they are very weak) for the new peace agreement. If the opposite is true, i.e. they are stronger, it will probably be necessary to pay them for the new peace agreement.

 

[Zachriel]

It is not dishonorable to declare war to protect your people. It is only a dishonor to say one thing, then do another.

Cancel the peace treaty before you attack.


Bismark means to go to the active screen, and renegotiate the Peace Treaty. Perhaps you have been paying tribute, and want to really negotiate a better deal. If this negotiation breaks down, then declare war. When he won't turn over all his cities, or if you just want to, cancel the treaty! You can only cancel a treaty when it has expired after twenty turns. However, you hurt your reputation by breaking treaties.

So, a sneak attack hurts your reputation. Trespassing hurts your reputation. Razing really hurts your reputation.

 

[simwiz2]

"So, a sneak attack hurts your reputation"

How is a sneak attack any different that canceling a peace treaty in negotiations and attacking immediately? They both mean you will be declaring war and attacking on the same turn. The only difference i see is saving time by just attacking and choosing to declare war. Does saving a few minutes really hurt your reputation?

 

[Cyc]

simwiz2 - that's the difference between a world-class leader and a weaker low life leader.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by simwiz2
"So, a sneak attack hurts your reputation"

How is a sneak attack any different that canceling a peace treaty in negotiations and attacking immediately? They both mean you will be declaring war and attacking on the same turn. The only difference i see is saving time by just attacking and choosing to declare war. Does saving a few minutes really hurt your reputation?

maybe itS´a programming oversight???

I do get the feel that it is better to say :"That`s it, prepare for war!" and attack right away then just telling the unit to attck - even though it`s essentially the same....

Same for Alliences: the other Civs never show up after 20 turns and say they want to cancel, then sign peace with the enemy, but if I don`t cancel the agreement by way of the foreign advisor they are pissed!

 

[Aeson]

Has anyone been successful renegotiating peace treaties in peacetime?

I use renegotiating of peace treaties in almost every game except on Deity. What you can demand is based on power ratings, just look at the histograph. If you are the most powerful, then you can demand "worthless" cities from all but the top two most powerful AI that you've made contact with. These cities are size 1, with no expanded borders and no visable or hidden resources within 3 tiles of the city. The AI knows the resources are there, and won't part with those cities. This is a way of finding out where future resources will be.

2 or 3 cities can often be demanded from the weakest AI if they have that many "worthless" ones. Most of the AI will just part with one. I usually get ~20 gold from the 2 most powerful, I usually just wait until they have a worker and then demand it.

Just watch for when the weaker AI build a new city (preferably with a good food source), then renegotiate the treaty and demand the city. If they won't part with it, there is a resource there resources. I've check this out many many times with the multi.sav "feature" and they always have a resource within 3 tiles.

On a Huge 8AI map it's possible to get around 30 - 40 cities in this manner, more if the demanded cities are disbanded and the AI is allowed to build there again. The key is to keep your power rating high (number of cities, units, gold) and make early contact with all the other Civs.

 

[Selous]

Originally posted by Zachriel
It is not dishonorable to declare war to protect your people. It is only a dishonor to say one thing, then do another.

Cancel the peace treaty before you attack.


Bismark means to go to the active screen, and renegotiate the Peace Treaty. Perhaps you have been paying tribute, and want to really negotiate a better deal. If this negotiation breaks down, then declare war. When he won't turn over all his cities, or if you just want to, cancel the treaty! You can only cancel a treaty when it has expired after twenty turns. However, you hurt your reputation by breaking treaties.

So, a sneak attack hurts your reputation. Trespassing hurts your reputation. Razing really hurts your reputation.

is a interesting theory ... but ... i have never had the AI declare war to me before an attack in the diplomatic screen, so does that mean the AI is taking a reputation hit every time they attack? (but then reputation doesnt matter for the AI) and what about when u honour MPP? u never go into the diplomacy screen for that also .... this is an important issue ... but i never seem to take a reputation hit after declaring war and i rairly do it in the diplomatic screen
and are u sure that u take a reputation hit if u tresspass without a treaty? i also never seem to do, and i dont mind the AI going for a walkabout

 

[smallstepforman]

If you plan to take over the entire world, then who gives a flying f@#$ (excuse my French) about reputation. I dont start wars unless I plan to exterminate a Civ, and that usually means I've beefed up my defences just in case the worm has 1-3 MPP. All other civs join my crusade, and they come cheap when you have a technological lead.

A clean reputation is only good when you are a worm terrified of other AI civs - they wont treat you as fingernail dirt if you have a clean rep. That wont stop them from attacking you anyway.

Does the US have a spotless reputation? No, I thought not.

 

[CivMonger]

Way back when, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, we waited 65 million years, then, Civilization came out. DA DA DA!!! The first one had war, and peace, the second one had war, cease fire, peace, and alliance, now the third in the series has war, peace, alliances, right of passage, mutual protection pacts, trade embargos, maybe some that I forgot, but NO cease fire?! I kinda liked the uneasy peace that was to be had after the war, cause then I could get paranoid, build a big army, and then go, why not, and blast them to itty bitty bits. I want cease fir back. Maybe next patch. Just my 3 cents.

 

[CivMonger]

Way back when, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, we waited 65 million years, then, Civilization came out. DA DA DA!!! The first one had war, and peace, the second one had war, cease fire, peace, and alliance, now the third in the series has war, peace, alliances, right of passage, mutual protection pacts, trade embargos, maybe some that I forgot, but NO cease fire?! I kinda liked the uneasy peace that was to be had after the war, cause then I could get paranoid, build a big army, and then go, why not, and blast them to itty bitty bits. I want cease fir back. Maybe next patch. Just my 3 cents.