the concept of repetation in the game?

[xiaoafei]

I just finished a civ3 game (original version).
In the early stage, I was in war with japan. When I signed those periodic peace treaties, I always tried to exchange cities. Because the AI thought the deal is fair (one or even two of my cities were exchanged for one of his cities), I always succeed in doing this. Just after the trade, I took the empty city back immediately, which broke the treaty I just signed. Thus although I was still in war, I had a new city, sometime even with new tech or some money from the trade. By repeatedly doing this, I took most japanese cities. the stronger I was, the easier this trade could be done.
I thought there should be a reputation penalty, but nothing happened. So, I'm wondering whether this is a bug or something.

 

[Longasc]

Sorry, could not follow you... could you explain it again?

 

[Dr Zlu]

Yes, there is a reputation system. And if you have broken peace treaties again and again like this, be assured your reputation has been very very badly hit. You'll realize this when you try to trade with other civs (not Japan, which should be mad at you anyway).

 

[kokoras]

Probably reputation counts only for the human player!
AI don't care at all!I have been attacked by the Arabs with who previusly i had a MA,and i had given to them as a gift 3-4 of their cities lost from our common enemy!
Plus,they couldn't stand a chance against me.

 

[warpstorm]

The AI has no concept of loyalty. If a team meets its price it will switch sides. If you have a MA make sure you kep it active. If they cancel it there it is a sign that they are considering attacking you. Giving gifts does not effect your reputation, but they will like you a little more for a short while. Gifts of land are not valued highly as they suspect that you have an ulterior motive.

They remember kindnesses for only a short amount of time but slights for the rest of the game.

 

[kokoras]

Gifts of money or map i can accept that can't change the reputation,but giving back cities sould mean something.But on the contrary it acts as you said they become more suspicious!
Doesn't make sence...or it does...

 

[xiaoafei]

What would happen? I couldn't find any difference. I could still trade with any other civ, including japan. Being a tech trader, I didn't have any financial problem, always be the most advanced and richest civ in the world. It looks to me that the AIs determine their diplomatic activity according to the strength comparision. For example, although Japan was furious with me, when I asked it to remove it's units from my place, it just gave in.
In civ2, such a bad reputation would lead to the result that no one want to trade with me. But that was even better than having a good reputation, since one can initiate wars as he likes even with democratic gov. And that's the reason why UN is great while Eiffel Tower is totally useless. I think the same thing may happen in civ3 .

 

[kokoras]

Strength is the only thing that counts for AI.When you can make the rules AI follows,if not it tryies to eliminate you.Trade depends on this one too.

 

[xiaoafei]

Maybe my word was too confusing. sorry.

As we all know, the only chance of trading for city is when we sign a peace treaty. So when I was fighting Japan, eventhough I didn't want to really sign a peace treaty, I would try to initiate a negotiation as soon as possible. This gave me the chances of trading for city.

Of couse, if the AI thought we were equal, it wouldn't give me any it's city for free. Thus I had to offer something to get the city I want. Instead of money or techs as I used to offer, this time I offer it my own cities (usually the small cities I just took from it in the battle). For example, I wanted to have Tokyo (population 6, 2nd city in Japan at that time). In exchange, I gave Japan my two small cities.
As soon as the trade was done, I had one empty Tokyo and Japan had two empty cities. All units in those cities before this trade would be moved outside to the tiles next to the cities. Then I let my units retake the two small empty cities immediately so that I break the peace treaty. In the meanwhile, I sent some units into Tokyo to defense it so that Japan could not retake it.
Thus, the only difference between before and after was: I had Tokyo for free, and maybe a worse reputation.

Through the same way, I can also get all the money and techs AI had. For example, one deal could be:
Japaneace treaty + one pop3city+200gold
I: peace treaty+two pop1cities
After I retook the two pop1cities and break the peace treaty, I got one pop3 city and 200 gold for free.

So, I got cities, I got gold, I got techs, and I got bad reputation, while AI lost cities, lost gold, lost techs but kept it's reputation. My question is: does reputation really matter? or, say, worth more than all these good things?

Sorry, could not follow you... could you explain it again?

 

[warpstorm]

It depends. Do you need the other players in the game? If not, go for it. Be aware that once your reputation is ruined, it's ruined for the rest of the game. You will find it very hard to get any diplomatic actions to work out. They won't do multi-turn trades with a known deal breaker, nor will they enter into alliances or pacts. It is also unlikely that you will win a UN victory. But if you are strong enough and self sufficient...

 

[microbe]

What will hit your rep is that you break any deal if you still owe an ongoing gpt payment or resources. For example, you get a tech by paying 30gpt, or exporting a lux, and then you declare war to cancel the payment. The game will recognize this and all other AIs will not accept your gpt payment anymore. Sometimes it's not even your fault - for example, if your trade route with the AI which you are paying resources is cut by anyone else, your rep is hit.

What you did is called "phony peace treaty". If you do not involve any per-turn payment on your part, breaking it has no penalty on your rep. This is a defect on the game itself, thus many people consider it an exploit. In my opinion you should try to win without relying on this kind of tactics.

 

[xiaoafei]

Thanks for the replys!

Maybe my belligerent style makes me think of these things.

You know, The only victory I allow in every game is always the conquest victory.

 

[warpstorm]

THe phony peace treaty is a major rep hit. You broke a 20 turn deal. It is unlikely any other civ will accept a multi-turn deal with you again.

By allowing only conquest, you are making the game easier (but longer). You are saying that you don't care what the AI's think so you can't lose diplomatically. I always leave th UN vicrtory on so that I can lose that way if I'm not careful.