When Civ's Demand!

[temurleng]

Here's an issue I haven't seen people bring up before: how often do you give in to other civ's demands? They often demand a lot, but I'm only worried about when they: 1) demand you go to war against another civ; 2) demand tribute.
I once decided I would build only 5 cities, then not anymore until around 1800. I played the traditional starting positions on earth and soon it was just the Zulus and Vikings in Eur/Afr/Asia battling it out for the Middle East/North Africa. The zulus asked me (the Indians) to declare war on the Vikings for an alliance. I did, but the Vikings did nothing- they were too busy with the Zulus and periodic invasions by the Americans.
Well, starting around 1900, things got real dicey- the Vikes had colonized all of Europe/Africa/Asia except Sub-Saharan Africa (Zulus), South Asia (me) and South East Asia (me). Australia was owned by second-gen Russians who were belligerent and almost on par with me tech-wise. I had started to colonize South America but hadnt devoted enough resources. Then, the Zulus asked me to declare war on the Vikes again. I did, but wasn't worried, since the Vikes kept offering peace treaties after I declared war. Then they didn't- they swamped the (weak) defenses of my most valuable city (w/ most of my wonders) with armor and howitzers, while I fought back with Cavalry, Riflemen (on the attack!) and newly-formed partisans. I took back the city in one turn and the Vikes offered a ceasefire.
Here's where the question comes into play: they wouldnt sign treaties and would only accept a ceasfire if I gave them a ton of gold- it was like half my treasury. At first, I had to sell improvements just to make the payment every decade. For over 100 years, Viking bombers flew over my cities , armadas patrolled the Bay of Bengal and tanks and marines fortified themselves in my territory.
I managed to get out of that problem- destroyed the Russians, massive army/armada swept into Africa, after declaring war on Zulus. Then I allied with them against the Vikings. Bizarre! I know one fellow Civ2 player who automatically says "no" to all demands and was shocked I even made one payment. I say that the payments bought me time to get techs (like fighters! and !) and colonize. But just as importantly, I wonder if I could have avoided all that by refusing the Zulus requests that I go to war with the Vikes. They were so far, and apparently being marginalized by the Vikes.
Well! (looks at long story...) That brings me back to the beginning: When other civs demand you declare war on a third party or give tribute, do you comply? If so, how often and what considerations do you make?

 

[Yuri2356]

I never give in to any puny AI demands. If they want a piece of me they'll have to take it and die trying . I only sign alliances if I'm already at way with the person they want to ally against.

 

[DSN]

Well if you have a city with severla enemy AI units around it which could capture it and the AI demands some sort of tribute I usually give it if:
a) I can
b) It won't give the AI too much of an edge (though remember that if the ai is demanding a tech, it'll get that tech anyway if it conquers the city.
c) I'm not allied to the ai, allies can only cancel alliance, not declare war
d) The ai is twice as big as me.

Otherwise, if they are friendly or not very powerful they'll only say you've offended them and leave you alone.

 

[The Person]

I never declare war when asked to. In all other cases it depends upon the situation.

 

[ferenginar]

I never give in to AI demands, however if they offer money to declare war against a third party, I take the money then do nothing.

 

[ElephantU]

If you play for Conquest, agreeing to AI demands make little sense except in the very early part of the game when you are weak and first meet someone. The AI "relationships" are much like talking to the North Korean dictator: give a little and he'll demand more, act belligerent and he'll back off. The primary reason for putting up with AI demands should be to buy time to race ahead with tech improvements. This is stretched to the extreme in One City and Early Landing games, but there you are racing so fast with tech discoveries that you can give them away every other turn to keep the AIs Enthusiastic so they never demand anything anyway. And in the meantime you are getting ready to launch your spaceship while they are just starting to build Factories and Calvary. But if you don't have a good chance of making major tech progress after being a pacifist, you can also try getting some other AI civs to join you in an alliance against the biggest threat. Milk them like the Brits did in the 1800s and 1900s in their different alliances against Napoleon, Kaiser Wilhelm and Hitler. This is especially useful if you interest a civ on the opposite side of the biggest threat from you, causing a two-front war.

A final point about AI belligerence: the AI is much more reasonable if you play the Classic version (2.42) rather than the "improved" versions that followed (MultiPlayer, Test of Time, Fantastic Worlds). The programmers seem to have "tweaked" the AI to be much more volatile in later versions. Even someone you act kindly towards for thousands of years is likely to backstab you at the stupidest moment, despite being insignificant in size and having no reasonable chance of making a difference. At least in Classic the AIs know when "resistance is futile"...

 

[Terrapin]

I play MGE and, as pachy says, the AIs are extremely belligerent. I only give in to any demands at the earliest stages of the game when I have mostly settlers and cities defended by (at most) one warrior. Even then, I only give in if the threat is immediate, such as when an elephant is parked on my doorstep. In MGE there just is no point in trying to buy off the AIs. They will come back just in a couple of turns just as ready to fight.

I try to avoid getting stuck in ceasefire because it is the worst of both worlds. You cannot ask AI units to leave your city squares and you cannot kill them. Again, because of the diplomacy in MGE, I have never had an AI ally long enough to make a difference. In fact, the use I make of diplomacy is that once per AI civ, I gift them up to Worshipful and then trade maps. By the next turn, they are usually icy or worse. I guess I do use peace treaties to ask the AIs to leave my territory. The AI civ is nearby, they usually move more units into my city squares at the same time and by the time I demand that they leave 2-3 times, they declare war...

The real drawback of having no chance for diplomacy is in trade. It is simply impossible to keep any AI in cease/peace/ally for longer than one round of trade deliveries. In effect, I can only trade when I have enough units to protect my ships and vans. Unescorted trade units almost immediately tempt the AI to cancel any treaty and attack.

 

[temurleng]

@DSN- Even if I'm tons more powerful then the demanding civ, I'm careful. I've got a few games where I'm facing off against globe-spanning alliances- and the weakest, smallest, least significant is the MOST belligerent. The big civs are actually quite pleasant. (cordial to enthusiastic)

@The Person- How does it depend? What happens if they want you to go to war with someone who's territory you've been eyeing for a while? Plus, I'd imagine declaring war by allying with one of the combatants would be a great way to conquer in a democracy. (like US in WW2)

@ferenginar- Does declaring war and taking your new ally's money but not really doing anything damage your reputation? What happens if your "enemy" offers a treaty? And if you sign, what do you do if your ally asks you to declare war again?

@Terrapin- Tell me about it! Ceasefire Thuchts! How do you stomach defending only with a militia- or worse, nothing at all? The AI always seems to have horsies or explorers roaming around.

 

[Specialist290]

Responding to the question directed towards ferenginar:

1. I think your reputation is only damaged if you "sneak attack" in peacetime/during a cease-fire, or cancel an alliance. Of course (I think I should copyright these next four words), I could be wrong...

2. You can accept or reject without any consequences. Same as in any other case. Again IIRC, your rep will be safe.

3. Same as 2. In fact, if your "ally" is really desperate, you can refuse and hope it gives money, take it if it does, then contact the other civ and make peace. Repeat next time your ally talks. Rather devious, and I've never actually tried it, but it should theoretically be possible.

 

[Prof. Garfield]

Breaking any treaty results in a damaged rep, but being "incited" doesn't damage it as much as breaking it "just because".

 

[ferenginar]

@temurleng

No idea what effect it has on reputation, I'm not really concerned about it. I would be happy to declare war again if I was paid to do so. It's about getting money. It also provides a good excuse to start a war without upsetting the senate.

 

[Terrapin]

@Temurleng-- I go w/ minimal defense early in the game... If I make contact with another civ, I will start building better (not so much more) defenders. So my post refers to 'getting caught with my pants down" where I have little defense and the enemy shows up. Naturally, this tactic has lost me many a city over the years. Surprisingly, it is usually the barbarians who get me, since the first couple of civs you meet typically offer peace... for a price.

In my current game I appear to have a (huge) continent all to myself, so I am in early Republic and once again have very few troops. In the latter stages of Monarchy, I build extra defenders to deal with crowd control, but they are not necessary until each is done making its requisite 2-3 settlers and I dispand them in Republic because they drain my shields...

 

[Marlos]

Okay, so I read termuleng's opening question, and I think that I have a simple answer. NO! As far as I'm concerned, the AI can take a hike!

But then, I keep reading. It seems that there's more to this question that I thought. As a rule, I never intend to give the AI anything. Somehow, the progression seems to be: (1) war is declared (2) I invade, attacking as many units as possible, and take a city, (3), at first contact, the AI demands an audience, (4) then the AI demands a tech or money. WAIT A MINUTE! I just captured THEIR city! So, just why would I GIVE them something?

Most times, I don't even meet with the AI unless my troops are very overextended, as in a multi-front war. Then I may offer a cease fire so that I may heal/rebuild. When there are multiple wars going on (and let's face it, with MPE, you're always at war) a brief respite can be welcome.

Generally, though, the AI doesn't get anything from me. If someone wants to give me some change to help beat up on somebody else, great! I will undoubtedly have to beat them up sooner or later anyway. I've given up trying to keep the AI in MPE happy -- they are just arrogant and demanding.

In the final analysis, I guess that I am like ferenginar on this one.

 

[Old n Slow]

Lots of good thought in the thread.

If I recall correctly, "agreeing to declare war" causes a reputation hit if you've made contact with the civ in question, especially if you were at peace. I think that if the contact has yet to occur, you might get away with something.

Reputation does have some small subtle effects (such as trading maps), and getting gifts when allied, but for many players, it may be easily ignored.

As far as my acceeding to ai demands, it depends. Very early contact has often been between "effective equals", so no big deal. Later I might see (via Marco) an ai with a demand, which I'll grant if it is tech since I'm trading for techs and maps at that stage. I might give the money if the tech I'm looking for is worth it. Once or twice, I'll give in to the demand if the tactical situation is that bad. Usually, though I'm willing to duke it out.

 

[temurleng]

@Old n Slow- For me, reputation is HUGE: If they're enthusiastic (or better!), they won't surprise attack, giving me the chance to initiate wars with whomever I want, whenever I want. Better yet, I can pit roughly-equal AI civs against each other- they exhaust themselves, wasting all their resources on war while I zoom up the tech tree.
In one of my current games, I bribed a civ to attack its ally, allied with the first against the second and then asked my ally to help. So, instead of one-on-one, it was three-on-one. It was in this game I found out agreeing to declare war doesn't damage reputation- or at least enough to knock me down from spotless.

Diplomacy is the ULTIMATE force-multiplier. Diplomacy works best with a great repuation.

 

[The Mass Leader]

I usually play the games just like I would do in real life. I always have an everyday ally, and I always go to war when he asks me to. But I never pay tribute, unless I am defenseless against the enemy.