Quick Answers (formerly Newbie Questions)

[Strider]

Originally posted by Padma
For some of us, the citizen management is an integral part of the *FUN*.

Fun?! That's Fun? *mumbles something about old people*

I hardly ever use the govonors.... I like to manage all my cities by myself.... Alot better.

 

[MadScot]

One nice thing about governors - they react instantly.

So if I know I'm running into likely civil disorder problems - impending war weariness and/or loss of luxuries - I will pre-emptively engage the governors, as the loss of a turns production is often a greater penalty than the relative inefficiency of the governors.

 

[Strong2theEnd]

I know that if you destroy a civ while you have an active alliance with someone else you get a rep hit. What if you have an MPP? Will your ally still get mad at you for destroying someone you are both at war with? Also, what if you make peace with the common enemy?

 

[Grille]

Definitively not, you don't get a rep hit because of MPP.

Btw, I am almost sure that you don't get a rep hit either when you've signed a *plain* MA. (It appears that you could still sign MAs, that is.)

 

[Turner]

You get a rep hit if you make peace before the 20 turns is up. The same should go for the AI.

The AI gets mad at you under any circumstances in which you take out a civ it knows of. I think it's jealousy. . .

Keep in mind the key words: that it knows of. So if you're the first to make contact with Rome and you take them out before they meet anyone else, then the AI doesn't 'know' about it. More accurately, it does, it just ignores that information.

 

[Grille]

I also used to think that any MA "bracket" agreement would count as broken if the target civ gets wiped out - changed my mind some time ago though.

Here's a recent thread, just regarding this very question.

:shrug:
Well, actually there's a draw about this issue: some think it's treaty breaking, some not. This topic seems to still be kind of a "rumour" thing. (Maybe we need a poll...? )
:shrug:

Note that there may be an attitude drop when the target civ gets wiped out (from the missing MA bonus).

 

[morkaphi]

It's under my impression that you don't get a rep hit with an MPP. An MPP is a promise to get into a war against a common foe, but not really a commitment to fight for 20 turns (like an MA).

So, if you are dragged into a war b/c of an MPP, IMHO you can sue for peace anytime without getting a rep hit. However, according to Bamspeedy's attitude article, your ally certainly would get mad at you because you're not doing enough damage to your common enemy.

With an MA, you wipe out the enemy or sue for peace before 20 turns, you get a rep hit b/c you fail to fight for 20 turns as promised.

My own experiences suggest that an MA is always easy to sign (of course, with the right price), regardless of my rep. However, if I trashed my rep, AI sometimes is reluctant to sign an MPP with me.

EDIT: Just read the thread provided by Grille. Learn new things everyday.

Originally posted by Catt
FWIW, I did a very rudimentary test which implied that destroying a civ doesn't affect your reputation if you had MAs against the civ, but having an ongoing trade deal of any sort with a civ that is destroyed will negatively affect your reputation. In other words, if the Koreans are my trading partner and they are destroyed, I'll take a rep hit (even though I did nothing to contribute to the premature end of the Korean deal); but if I have a MA deal with the Chinese against the Koreans and the Koreans are destroyed, I won't take a rep hit even if I agreed to pay gpt or some other 20-turn commitment to China in connection with the MA and the MA ends early due to the Korean's destruction.

 

[Grille]

Well, there have been suggestions that reputation may have different "shades" (shrug), just like the attitude towards you. But then, a "broken" MA would give only a very minor rep hit: Ending a MA once in a while by wiping out the target doesn't obviously affect your dealing/trading abilities in general (the attitude drop might have more impact: e.g. buying techs for gpt or lump sum from a formerly ally would be more expensive due to them getting furious after such a war - especially if you've razed some cities during the war).

And if there's different "stages" of reputation: maybe "breaking" MAs on a pretty much regular base in the described way would affect trading at some point, but I guess then you're very close to domination or conquest victory (hope it's not an ai civ...) anyways - no rep needed anymore.


So don't stop the fight at the gates of the enemy's last city (with a plain MA, that is).

 

[stupidradical]

when you are trying to upgrade units by winning battles, does it matter if the unit you are fighting is weaker/stronger and on land which gives more defensive bonus? eg: will a an archer winning a fight with a pikeman who is standing on some mountains have a bigger chance of being upgraded than an archer fghting a warrior standing on a grassland?

sorry if this belongs in the "post your utterly inane beyond newbie questions here thread".

 

[Aggie]

The chance of a promotion doesn't get higher when you beat stronger units. Same goes for chances of getting a leader.

And don't worry: I sometimes have things in the game that I still don't know and are very basic. This is in fact a good question

 

[Destroy]

Hi to you guys,

Few questions,

1- how can you make the AI fight agaisnt each other?

2- How to stop either a embargo or a right of passage...?

 

[MadScot]

1. If you are at war with an AI, you can often get another AI to sign a "Military Alliance against the X" (MA) which causes them to declare war on thet civ. I have never been able to sign an MA when I was not at war with the civ I wanted to AI to start fighting. Of course, AI civs being at war doesn't necessarily mean there's much actual fighting going to happen. Sometimes your allies are pretty useless.

Once Nationalism is discovered you can also sign a Mutual Protection Pact (MPP) and then goad anothjer AI into attacking you, which will cause your pact-mate to declare war too.

Both these have risks - if you back out of an MA before the 20 turns are up, it damages your standing in the eyes of the AIs. And an MPP commits you to any war the other party starts, too.

2. If you mean "stop one you signed up for" you can go to "active" deals on the diplomacy age, click on anything without a (x) with a number in it (showing it has run the full 20 turns) and renegotiate it, including cancelling it by just removing the deal.

If you mean stop an embargo against you, all you can do is try to be nice to the AI, make deals, and hope they break it. It's not a dealo with you, so you can't directly affect it.

Same with AI-AI RoP deals. Basically it's none of your diplomatic business what AIs deal to each other.

 

[Smellincoffee]

A few questions:

1.) What's the different between using the Embassy to steal tech/investigate cities and using your planted spy? The only thing I can think of is that when I was poking in the editor, I noticed you could set the vetrancy of diplomats AND spies for certain governments. So if you had Vetern diplomats and Concript spies, would this imply that embassy steals are more reliable than Spy steals?

2.) Can an enemy nation at war with you use the defensive bonus gained by your fortresses- in other words, fortresses in your territory?

3.) Why is it so bloody difficult to plant spies into some Civs and easy for others? I couldn't get a spy into Rome to save my life (he declared war on me after fourteen failed attempts), but I got spies into India and Zululand on the very first try. What's up with that?

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Smellincoffee
A few questions:

1.) What's the different between using the Embassy to steal tech/investigate cities and using your planted spy? The only thing I can think of is that when I was poking in the editor, I noticed you could set the vetrancy of diplomats AND spies for certain governments. So if you had Vetern diplomats and Concript spies, would this imply that embassy steals are more reliable than Spy steals?

2.) Can an enemy nation at war with you use the defensive bonus gained by your fortresses- in other words, fortresses in your territory?

3.) Why is it so bloody difficult to plant spies into some Civs and easy for others? I couldn't get a spy into Rome to save my life (he declared war on me after fourteen failed attempts), but I got spies into India and Zululand on the very first try. What's up with that?

1) Vetern/Elite/Conscript just determines the cost of everything (I believe)

2) No... an enemy can not get the defensive bonus of a fortress in your terrority

3) Can't tell you... I know I've been told before, but I've forgotten.

 

[MadScot]

I was pretty sure #2 was "yes" - they are just a terrain feature, with no nationality. But I've never built that many.....

 

[Aggie]

Originally posted by Smellincoffee
3.) Why is it so bloody difficult to plant spies into some Civs and easy for others? I couldn't get a spy into Rome to save my life (he declared war on me after fourteen failed attempts), but I got spies into India and Zululand on the very first try. What's up with that?

Rome may be communist, while India and Zulu aren't. Also the factor 'luck' comes into play.

 

[Ankka]

Whats the exact difference between Conquests and PTW? Is PTW required for conquests, and does Conquests include the multiplayer options of PTW?

Might sound stupid, but I'm not really keen in browsing the forums for info if I can just ask...

Edit: spelling...

 

[Krayzeenbk]

PTW is not required for Conquests, I believe.

Conquests and PTW are different expansions for CivIII.
Conquests should include multiplayer.

 

[Ankka]

So conquests is a sort of better PTW? I mean, with more stuff, but also everything PTW has?

I'm trying to decide whether to buy PTW or wait till conquests comes here to Finland, which should happen a couple of months later than it pops out in the States.

 

[Krayzeenbk]

I hear Conquests will include all PTW content (I'm not sure if that means features too, but should be everything).