Vassal-Should I bug this?

[DrewBledsoe]

Scenario:- Charlemagne dow on me. Gets slaughtered (another crazy agg ai dow horse archers and maces vs rifles, but that isn't the point here). Five turns later, he's ready for peace, and I'm glad, as the second he attacked, Caeser's stack of 80+ units started moving up to attack me yet again.

So I accept peace, and instead of cash, I accept a small border city which is part mine culturally anyway, and move a few rifles down to garrison it, and they will arrive in 2 turns. All OK so far.

Now the "bug".

The very next turn, as soon as I hit enter, I get the message "peace treaty 10 turns to Charlemagne cancelled". WTH? he can't do that. Of course what has happened, is that he's vassalised to Caesar, who has then attacked me. And of course Charlemagne just walks into the unprotected city, "captures" it, and fortifies lots of units there. I mean, come on, that's like him giving me 1500 gold (which he had and would have given for peace), and turning around and taking it back with no option on my part.

So even though not an actual "bug", he managed to sign a peace treaty for 0 turns then reattack me. Do we need to modify vassalisation, so that someone who is in a "can't attack-peace treaty", also cannot become someone else's vassal until the deal has expired?

What's anyone think.?

 

[Jamesds]

Huh, seems like the one time that the 10 turns treaty need not be abided by...

Seems a bit unfair to me, although I fail to see a way to fix it at the moment

EDIT: You could always try and post it in the bugs forum, at least let Firaxis know and they can decide what to do

 

[DrewBledsoe]

Huh, seems like the one time that the 10 turns treaty need not be abided by...

Seems a bit unfair to me, although I fail to see a way to fix it at the moment

EDIT: You could always try and post it in the bugs forum, at least let Firaxis know and they can decide what to do

Yeah, I wanted a few more opinions before I did that.

 

[DomA]

This sounds like a great "machiavellian" trick (though it's probably an AI fluke) - Charlemagne was opportunistic, heard or sensed about Caesar's impending attack on you and found a way not to abide by his word by joining him. Caesar's "protection" as master allows him to reject his word to you.

That must be annoying, but OTOH this is more realistic than magically enforced treaties - and accepting a city as bride for peace is a lot more responsabilities and risk than accepting currency, so that too was realistic.

IMO, all treaties/promises/deals should be betrayable - for a heavy diplomatic price relative to how strong your civ is compared to each of the others.

 

[DrewBledsoe]

This sounds like a great "machiavellian" trick (though it's probably an AI fluke) - Charlemagne was opportunistic, heard or sensed about Caesar's impending attack on you and found a way not to abide by his word by joining him. Caesar's "protection" as master allows him to reject his word to you.

That must be annoying, but OTOH this is more realistic than magically enforced treaties - and accepting a city as bride for peace is a lot more responsabilities and risk than accepting currency, so that too was realistic.

IMO, all treaties/promises/deals should be betrayable - for a heavy diplomatic price relative to how strong your civ is compared to each of the others.

I don't disagree with you in principle, in fact I quite like the idea. However, that isn't the point here. The game does has rules, and this occurance seems to circumvent them.

Edit: In the actual game, this was about as machiavellian as cutting your arm off becuase you had an ache in your thumnail. Not long after the 2nd war, Charlemagne had lost his 4 largest cities to me, and was my vassal

 

[Yarnosh]

Caeser's stack of 80+ units started moving up to attack me yet again.

80+ unit stack???? Was that a typo or something? I have never in my life seen anything like that in a game of civ (all versions). Most games I barely have that many total units, much less all in one stack ready to attack. I've certainly never seen anything like that from the AI. But then I haven't played the highest difficulty level...

 

[DrewBledsoe]

80+ unit stack???? Was that a typo or something? I have never in my life seen anything like that in a game of civ (all versions). Most games I barely have that many total units, much less all in one stack ready to attack. I've certainly never seen anything like that from the AI. But then I haven't played the highest difficulty level...

Yep 80+ (mostly knights, maces and praetorians), but they obliterated themselves on the 20 rifles and 22 cavalry I had in a hill fort .....play agg ais/rand personalities emperor or so, and you'll see these stacks too (whether you like it or not)....

 

[winddbourne]

80 units seems excessive, how do you support such a huge stack and defending units? Also if your throwing out that much unit production what is it doing to your cities? Your not building wonders or improvements during all those military training excercises. I can see why you wound up so far ahead in the tech race. Maybe THIS should be reported as a bug? lol

 

[Arlborn]

80 units seems excessive, how do you support such a huge stack and defending units? Also if your throwing out that much unit production what is it doing to your cities? Your not building wonders or improvements during all those military training excercises. I can see why you wound up so far ahead in the tech race. Maybe THIS should be reported as a bug? lol

Why? If you use it wisely you can pretty much wipe out 1-2 or even 3 civs without building more

In one game I had recently, I was testing aggressive AI. I did beeline to iron working, then rushed praetorians.
You know how I kept up with tech? All cities I did put to build only research and full commerce. Then I survived taking money or from the 100% gold(not much though, was expanding too fast), or from cities I got from the AI. Possible, one time I got around 40 praetorians I guess.