Protecting Weaker Civs

[slatemen]

It's been while since I've posted anything since I gave up Civ3 about 10 months ago. I have recently come back to playing.

Anyway... I don't know why but I can't stand to see other Civs destroyed, especially ones that don't deserve it. In my current (Large map, Monarch I think) game, there was France with about 11 cities positioned next to the mammoth empire of the Vikings (maybe 30 cities). I watched for hundreds of years as the Vikings grew stronger and the French fell further behind. It was only a matter of time...

I think it only took about 5 turns For the Vikings to overrun France. But just before the victory was complete I (the Iroquois) "gave" the French a small city on another continent. I had set up the city after Germany razed half of England. It was near enough to my main nation to be useful for possible future invasions, but it offered no resources and corruption was pretty bad there.

So I gave the city to the French, signed a RoP deal and loaded all surround squares with my troops. The Vikings won't dare attack me. France lives on (Even though all of its citizens are Iroquois)

Meanwhile, I have a very long string of troops dividing the Aztec's nation from the Americans, who are vastly more powerful. With land-war between the two impossible, they are engaged in a not-so-damaging naval war. Only Aztec satellite cities away from the main nation have fallen.

Worse still, I am now amassing a force to invade the Vikings. I don't actually care about taking their land, but I want to exact revenge for what they did to France, who I will give most of my captured cities to. (The Vikings are a bit too powerful anyway).

The point here is, in every game I play I find myself trying to defend all of the weaker CIVs (who seem to have no interest in defending themselves). I don't know why I do it. They are never thankful and usually make no effort to re-build their nations following my liberation. Nevertheless, I can't help it.

Does anyone else do the same?

 

[Gogf]

Once in a while I will. Usually I'm not strong enough, and when I am, I normally just consider them a smaller threat.

 

[Pentium]

I conquer them. Some more cities and they come relatively cheap. You need a small army.

 

[Bucephalus]

I do it occasionally if I'm going for a diplomatic victory, and I need their votes.

 

[Zakharov]

France lives on (Even though all of its citizens are Iroquois)

When you gift a city via diplomacy all of the citizens switch nationality, so in this case all of your Iroquois citizens will become French.

 

[Pounder]

I have be known to support a weaker Civ that is fighting a War on my behalf. I will give them favorable trades to help them out.

 

[DexterJ]

If I am leading or one of the top few civs I will give free techs and/or resources to weaker nations which I have good relations with as it makes me feel good. It also provides more competition for my more powerfull rivals so they can't easily swallow them up.
In one quality game of civ2 I played towards the end of the game there was myself and a rival occupying a large continent each and one smaller civ on a small continent. I had excellent relations with the smaller civ but my rival was at war with them. I kept the weaker going by giving them £££££'s each turn and large quanities of tanks. this meant that the war dragged out for decades and in the long run weakened the larger civ which I then took out. So in the long run my generosity tends to be a bit self serving.

 

[slatemen]

Dexter,
I think my motivation is the same as yours. I kind of see it like a Cold War. In my case, the Vikings and Americans are on the verge of becoming too powerful so I need to get them bogged down in a long war -- except I don't want to fight the war myself. Instead I'll just support their enemies.

I also think the game is far more interesting with lots of Civs rather than just four or five at the end of the industrial era.

 

[DexterJ]

yes I liked to imagine it as a cold war situation. i hope civ4 diplomacy and espionage is enhanced to allow more devious back hand activity (sponsering civil wars and unrest in rival civs, a return of the option to supply military hardware to civs, the ability to undermine governments hostile to yours and replace them with ones favourable to you, secret treaty options between civs allowing you to get one player to attack another for you or plot to divide up the nation you both declare war on etc).

 

[Heffalump]

I often pursue a strategy of trying to keep any one civ from getting TOOO powerful and I do what I can to keep anyone from rolling up to much of an empire.

This becomes quite hard after Nationalism when the stronger civs gradually dogpile the weaker ones into oblivion. Seems part of the games mechanics.

I also sometimes pursue a strategy of protecting weak neighbors when they are all that's separating me from another powerful, more menacing civ.

This is where some of the weaknesses of Civ3's diplo model come into play. In these situations I find myself wishing there were some method of having vassal states, or at least of supplying your neighbor with arms. But I do like the fact that I can supply helpful resources, like rubber for infantry, or tech, and I do this regularly. Indeed, I try to be strategic about my resource trades. This may only delay matters, but at least it bogs down the big guy a little longer while I do other things.

 

[klopolov]

I usually give free techs to the backwards civs that share the continent with powerful AIs, keeps the balance of power and prevents the powerful AI from conquering them and getting more land and resources.

 

[bagger]

I like to keep the weaker Civs around to trade with. Many times they will give you some sweet deals on luxury goods, resources, and techs. Having multiple trade agreements with a few little civs brings in a lot more gold than having to conquer them.

I also like to bribe them into going into an alliance with me when I go to war. Give them a couple of techs that is a few hundred years out of date and they're enough of a distraction to the Civ I am warring with that I can accomplish my objective.

However, if they start to give me grief and they have some resources I need, then all bets are off.

 

[Prince David]

I call 'em my "pet civs." I keep them alive because it does me no harm and "aggrivates" the other civ (well, not really, but I do imagine them gnashing their teeth and pulling their hair). Kind of like a civ zoo, keeping endangered civs from going extinct. Unfortunetly the AI does not seem to be particularly good at coming back from a down position, and they never really seem to make use of my generousity.

On a completely manipulative level, pet civs are good for manouvering into a "just" war: ROP and MPP, and wait for your rival to get tempted by those last few little cities . . .Of course, this can occasionally go off, such as your pet going insane and attacking your arch rival.

 

[CrazyScientist]

I was recently playing a game where I had a "pet civ" situation that went sour. I was the Greeks, and had conquered almost my whole large continent (huge map, 16 civs, continents, 80% water), except for the Iroquois in the north, and a tiny corner in the south where the English lived with their 4 cities. Elizabeth had helped me in my very first major war against the Portuguese, who had been between us, and so feeling a bit guilty for boxing her in, I had been periodically dropping in to help her out with a free tech or some gold.
Then, just as I was thinking about attacking the Iroquois, the limey bastards storm across my border with archers and swordsmen! My cavalry made short work of them once they made the trek south (3 turns even for cavalry with roads all the way) and my musketeers kept them from doing anything more than making a slight nuisance of themselves, but I was nonetheless appalled by this ludicrous behavior. My reputation was fairly good, since though I had conquered 2 or 3 civs, I was never the initial aggressor. Elizabeth had always been either polite or gracious to me, and then she violates our RoP for this pointless suicidal attack. Very strange. If they could find a way to do it without making it easy to exploit, they should really try to implement some sort of system of gratitude and long-term friendship between civs in Civ 4. It's silly that even a vastly weaker AI that you lavish with gifts will still decide to go to war with you for no reason. For the record, the AI aggression level was set to normal.

 

[colontos]

in some games, i roleplay a sort of world police kind of thing, so i punish aggression and maintain the status quo among the AIs. it's fun, but there is not too much gratitude. gifting an old city back will usually improve a civ's attitude one or two levels, but thats it. also the AI declaring war for no reason thing is stupid. i really dont understand that.

 

[geardy]

I know, it’s this kind of thing that has caused me to put the game away for awhile. Their would be situations where I would be minding my own business just trying to eek out a living and two or three nations would declare war on me. Their wasn’t much to do, I had no chance to win, so rather then see my nation destroyed I stopped the game and quit playing it, as if that was going to help. After a couple of weeks I would come back with some kind of plan that never works, and get myself wiped out. My nation survived for two weeks without my help and now when I show up, their wiped out in minutes. I get the idea that I shouldn’t give up my day job.

 

[budweiser]

If a civ is weak and far away from me, I will usually give them good deals and sell them techs cheap if I think it will help them stand up to a nearby power better. I use them as a delaying action for me against stronger civs.

If a civ is weak and near my borders, I "protect" their people by annexing their lands and brinning their population points into my greater empire. Afeter all, I can manage their lands better than the ai. There is almost always a good reason to do so; it keeps the real enemies from getting the land, you may secure resources for later, luxuries, worker farms, and of course good old leader farming during the campaign.

 

[Trotskij]

I attack them...they are the only one I can beat

 

[JaseEmtP]

I have tried to protect them and then they just turn around and attack me or will ally with someone else to wage war against me. I have found the best thing to do is just mow them down, unless you are locked in alliance.

 

[douche_bag]

I have tried to protect them and then they just turn around and attack me or will ally with someone else to wage war against me. I have found the best thing to do is just mow them down, unless you are locked in alliance.

Exactly, whenever I see a civ weaker than me I destroy them.It's no fun if they're not competiton.The citizens of the nation still live, but their government and leader are overthrown. . . . muhahahah. . . . .