Open Borders Problem

[Marshall Thomas]

I like the open borders rules when it comes to trade, but I have noticed some major problems with open borders and was wondering if anyone could suggest a solution. The main problem is that during war an enemy that is pretty far away can attack through a country(or several countries) into your country from almost any front. Most un-realistic of all, is when one of the countries the enemy is attacking through is on good diplomatic terms with you. If Spain wanted to attack Russia, and her armies marched through France, Germany, and Poland- Russia would have quite an understandable issue with France, Germany, and Poland for allowing this or at least for not informing Russia of a major attack. Is their any way to correct this problem? Can it be modded? I play on a huge Terra map with 18 civs and I must admit that this bizarre military access is the most un-realistic aspect of war.

 

[lost_civantares]

It would be muvh harder to be at war if this was the case in the game, and historicly you have countries allowing other countries to pass through if it was needed (happened often in the middle ages).

Although looking at what is happening now is important, it is the past that also that should have a bearing on what should happen in civ4.

 

[aaronflavor]

You can always ask (or bribe) your friend to stop trading with your enemy, which will close borders. They will do this (for a reasonable price) as long as they aren't particularly good friends with your enemy.

 

[AngryPants]

I'd like to see a new open borders option, where one country can move through the other country, but not the other way around.

 

[ShaLouZa]

You can always ask (or bribe) your friend to stop trading with your enemy, which will close borders. They will do this (for a reasonable price) as long as they aren't particularly good friends with your enemy.

Careful with that one : I've used it once to stop enemy troops landing on my continent in my neighbour's country. I asked him to cancel his trade agreement with my enemy, he accepted and all the enemy troops have been rejected... right into my territory. That neighbour was Montezuma so I've bribed him to declare war on my enemy and all the troops went pillaging his land instead of mine, but you might not have such a complient neighbour.

The troops go on the closest territory they have access to (open borders or war), so be careful or that might bite you in the back.

 

[imagod284]

Careful with that one : I've used it once to stop enemy troops landing on my continent in my neighbour's country. I asked him to cancel his trade agreement with my enemy, he accepted and all the enemy troops have been rejected... right into my territory.

LOL, oops!

 

[ShaLouZa]

Yup. It was a huge pile or artillery and tanks and my mechs were still bleeding from the precedent assault one turn before.

 

[HawkeyeGS]

In my last game my friend and my enemy (they were pretty un-friendly but not at war) had close cultural borders and I used my friends territory to bombard several senemy cities and the enemy could do nothing (short of declaring war on my friend) to stop me. I was then ables to capture 5 border cities in 1 turn. He was done after that.

 

[White Elk]

Yes I'd like the option to request that my neighbors disallow an enemy of mine from using their borders to launch attacks on me. Forget realism. It just makes sense in Civ4 gameplay. With this games improved diplomacy, the AI civs act more like allies ought to act. But allowing an enemy to use their lands to attack an ally is counter to this.

This option shouldn't close the borders to trade. Only to military units. And I'd think it should only be an option for civs with Pleased, or Friendly relations.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Can this problem be fixed by modding?

 

[darkhand]

Careful with that one : I've used it once to stop enemy troops landing on my continent in my neighbour's country. I asked him to cancel his trade agreement with my enemy, he accepted and all the enemy troops have been rejected... right into my territory. That neighbour was Montezuma so I've bribed him to declare war on my enemy and all the troops went pillaging his land instead of mine, but you might not have such a complient neighbour.

The troops go on the closest territory they have access to (open borders or war), so be careful or that might bite you in the back.

Could this be used by savvy allies in an internet game to effectively half the distance through one's territory?

 

[Thalassicus]

Most un-realistic of all, is when one of the countries the enemy is attacking through is on good diplomatic terms with you. If Spain wanted to attack Russia, and her armies marched through France, Germany, and Poland- Russia would have quite an understandable issue with France, Germany, and Poland for allowing this or at least for not informing Russia of a major attack.

It would make perfect sense to me, and work in the game, if it gave a diplomatic penalty.

"-1 You allowed our worst enemy to pass through your land!"

Something along those lines would be nice.

Maybe two treaties: open borders (non-military) and right of passage (military). Then you have "Traded with our worst enemies" and "Allowed armies to pass". It's like the difference between trade agreements and flyover rights.

 

[Frostyboy]

The games should have divided the Open borders between trade and units. I often turn off Open borders to lock my neighbours out from the good areas I haven't settled yet.