"Our troops approach your cities..."

[Madroc]

When you are at war with the AI, you have three choices in the Diplo screen: Threatening ('...I urge you to discuss peace while there is still time'); Neutral (the normal 'Propose a deal'); and Humble ('We seem to have overextended ourselves...')
What is the difference between the three apporaches? I don't think the AI has ever repsonded to the Threat, even when I've destroyed two cities and captured a third. When they rebuff that, however, I'm always able to extort what I want with the Neutral approach.
Is there any advantage (rep, attitude, better deals, etc.) to using different messages? I play PTW and just moved up to Monarch.

 

[Cu Chulainn]

I've found they are more likely to give peace (with concessions on your part, of course) when you take the humble approach. A second question: How bad are the affects of taking a peace treaty before a military alliance has expired?

 

[citizen001]

I find that you usually only get something out of threatening them when you're kicking they're ass really badly (to the point where they give you gpt deals for peace or worse). Otherwise they'll just be defiant and say blah blah i'm too good for you blah blah.

 

[thunder]

If u beat them down to the point where they only have a few cities left. The threat works ('I urge you to discuss peace while there is still time') and they will offer practically all they have, even cities, but that only works if you haven't screwed them before.
One more thing, I let them break alliance treaties first that way they have to pay a lot more next time for MPP and ROP. Once you pass 'monarch' they hate you no matter if you break treaties or they do.

 

[Madroc]

If u beat them down to the point where they only have a few cities left. The threat works ('I urge you to discuss peace while there is still time') and they will offer practically all they have, even cities, but that only works if you haven't screwed them before.

Is there an advantage to using the Threat in that situation, as opposed to a regular negotiation? I've found that if I take the Neutral approach (sometimes after a Threat was rebuffed), I can still demand gold, cities, and tech, depending on what the civ has. Granted, the cities in question are usually those annoying coastal cities the AI likes to plop down on the other end of my landmass... they're not core, Wonder cities or anything.

 

[morchuflex]

So far, I never could bring the AI to grovel for peace, even after destroying 3/4 of their empires. They just keep saying they can't be intimidated...
But yes, you can take the normal way and still negotiate peace with an advantage if you kicked them really badly.

 

[zerksees]

I rarely use the "threaten" approach. I typically know what I want from the AI when I start peace negotiations. As a newbie it might be handy because you are not sure yet what the AI will give for peace. As a veteran it is entertaining to see what the AI will offer.

 

[The Adjudicator]

I always end up using the neutral method to test the limits of what the AI will offer. Someday, maybe I'll test this out to see if they will settle on different deals depending on your intitial attitude. I doubt it makes a difference, but there must be some reason for the different options?

 

[colontos]

I have used the threat effectively at times, like with 10 cavalry outside of a city defended by 2 pikemen. They will come back with very good offers of gpt, techs, and sometimes cities. One thing I've noticed...if you use the threat once, when they are not scared yet (so they say "we're not scared of YOU! or whatever), then they will never ever respond to it, even if they are down to one city defended by one spearman and his little brother. So if you want to use it, it's important to wait until the AI is really scared poop-less.

 

[Smellincoffee]

To use a "our troops are outside your cities: surrender or perish" threat, it's usually handy to have troops outside their cities.

 

[mikehunt]

they'll pay you off for peace in civ3?
I've yet to see it
in previous Civs they used to give me gold and tech to stop kicking their ass all the time

 

[Admiral8Q]

To use a "our troops are outside your cities: surrender or perish" threat, it's usually handy to have troops outside their cities.

I was going to say that!

I've had alot of successful "our troops are outside your cities: surrender or perish", and yes, you need troops outside their cities.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Well, I only have Vanilla but I tend to use the threat, which usually gets rejected, then (and depending on the situation, if I'm winning or losing) I just leave the negotiations, and depending on the size of the enemy I capture about 7 of their cities and raze about 12, and when we get back to the peace table I make extortionate demands and threaten to wipe them off the planet again. And I repeat if necessary.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

After this they seem to be more willing to stop this war.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

After this they seem to be more willing to stop this war. Sometimes, if I admire how the enemy fought or see any potential for this enemy, I MAY give them something for peace, sometimes I give 1 or 2 of their cities back.

 

[dexters]

Well, I only have Vanilla but I tend to use the threat, which usually gets rejected,

Time to upgrade. Seriously, Conquests is worth it. If you can't find it in stores, Amazon still has them in stock.

Anyways, regarding the peace offering, the AI has two inflection points when its at war.

The first inflection point is when they are hurting badly (usually multi-front war, lost lots of units and key border cities) you can approach them from a superior negotiating positon and ask for good terms for peace. They may not always offer you their best deals, try throwing in items and techs and they may agree.

The second inflection point is the point of no return. Once you pass that, they hate you so much they will only agree to peace and nothing else, even if they are down to their last city. Although sometimes, a losing AI is bankrupt and simply has nothing left to give.

Also, with regards to asking for cities, the AI will only give away towns, usually size 3 or smaller and far from their capital. They will however never give up cities with a luxury or a strategic resource in its radius.

 

[Alpha Draconis1]

They will however never give up cities with a luxury or a strategic resource in its radius.

I disagree. The Babylonians gave Ellipi (sp?) to me when they were losing, even though it was their only supply of Fur. That was on Regent.

 

[dexters]

I disagree. The Babylonians gave Ellipi (sp?) to me when they were losing, even though it was their only supply of Fur. That was on Regent.

Post a save? I've tried to get cities from them with resources, even when they have more than one source and they always disagree.

Either your game was one of the earlier unpatched version of Civ 3 before they nerfed city trading in a patch [Civ 3 pre patch allowed you to trade cities with AI like techs and they'd agree, this was subsequently removed and you could only demand cities from them from peace treaties] or something strange is going on.

 

[Alpha Draconis1]

Either your game was one of the earlier unpatched version of Civ 3 before they nerfed city trading in a patch [Civ 3 pre patch allowed you to trade cities with AI like techs and they'd agree, this was subsequently removed and you could only demand cities from them from peace treaties] or something strange is going on.

Actually, that's what I meant. The Babylonians gave up their Fur base for peace and some GPT after I beat them to only five cities.

That was last night and my save is way past that point. The Babylonians are already dead, even in the earliest of my saves.