1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Why does the AI say I broke treaties when I didn't?

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by eighty, Jun 19, 2002.

  1. eighty

    eighty Boycott Milk

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Eightyland
    An annoying problem I have encountered is that the AI will tell me that they won't enter alliances or right of passage or whatever because I have broken a treaty with, say, the Germans. This seems to happen after I get the Germans to agree to a military alliance against another civ. Then, later on, the Germans make peace with the civ we had an alliance against. I think the other civs interpret this as me violating a treaty somehow. Has anyone else had this problem? The only other potential thing I can think of is that I may have had a trade route with the Germans and that route got disrupted because of war and so I couldn't fulfill my promise to provide whatever lux or resource it was for the full 20 turns. But I have no idea. It is frustrating not to have a screen that shows exactly what my commitments are and the duration of those commitments. The foreign adviser screen is just about useless in my opinion, because it doesn't tell me how I could have violated any treaty arrangements. This is a big problem because my rep is ruined and the AI hates me and it takes awhile to rebuild trust. sigh.....
     
  2. TheNiceOne

    TheNiceOne Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,372
    Location:
    Norway
    You get the blame if a trade route is disrupted for any reason, so that is probably the cause.

    Also note that other civs won't trust you if you declare war while inside enemy territory, even when not having a ROP. For your reputation, it's best to declare war, then walk into enemy territory, not walk in and declare war when asked to leave.

    There is a screen which shows all your commitments with another civ (one at a time). If you open up the trade screen with another civ and clicks on "Active", you'll see all agreements you have with that civ, as well as when they expire. It's here you must stop a MPP even after 20 turns if the other civ don't stop it.

    This should be available from the trade advisor screen though - but I think something like this will be added to the next patch (or was it the XP?).
     
  3. Zouave

    Zouave Crusader

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,603
    "Why does the AI say I broke treaties when I didn't?"

    BECAUSE IT CHEATS!!

    We've gone over this many times. I have often been blamed for stuff I never did, and then the dumb AI hates me for thousands of years, which is ridiculous. I cut a tech deal and then as a bonus throw in SIX FREE resources, luxury and strategic. The idiotic AI then insults me, cancels the deal, and refers to my "perfidy" against some Civ that attacked ME!! :crazyeye:

    Why does it do this? I have realized it is just another form of AI cheat designed to screw the human.

    Example: I control most of the northern half of a hemisphere. Rome, half my size, is way at the bottom of the southern half with three civs in between. For no reason it declares war on me, and then, a dozen turns later, some lame attack force gets stopped in front of my fortresses. A little later it asks for peace. Fine. Whatever. Go away. I then try to make some trade deals and other civs hate ME. It's just ridiculous.

    If I make a separate peace when allied with a civ my reputation is destroyed forever. I haven't noticed any AI civ having a problem with making a separate peace and leaving their human ally hanging.
     
  4. eighty

    eighty Boycott Milk

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Eightyland
    Hey thanks! :)
    I don't know why I never noticed that. Too much crack I suppose. Also when I got my game last year, the manual came with a whole bunch of pages missing and I haven't got around to sending it in for a replacement yet, so I miss a lot of stuff.
    (Or it could be the crack; you never know.)

    A related question: Do civs that don't know you yet hate you when they meet you if your prior trade agreements have been disrupted through no fault of your own?
     
  5. Zouave

    Zouave Crusader

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,603
    "Do civs that don't know you yet hate you when they meet you if your prior trade agreements have been disrupted through no fault of your own?".

    Yes. Even if what happened was NOT your fault; even if the civ you supposedly did it to was exterminated a thousand years earlier; and even if you are meeting this new civ on a new continent two millennia after the alleged incident effecting your rep.

    As I said, it is illogical - unless you see it as yet another shameless AI cheat. Either way it stinks.
     
  6. Zeromus

    Zeromus Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    28
    Location:
    Where Angels Lose Their Way
    This used to be an unsolved mystery/pain in the arse. The solution is simple though. It's just as TheNiceOne said. Don't declare war while any of your units are in enemy territory and make sure all agreements like RoP are peacefully ended beforehand. With that, you shouldn't hear about you breaking any deals or betraying anyone. Want a friend to join the party? Go ahead, just don't sign a military alliance if you are going to make peace before the alliance. As for the ai making peace before the alliance is over, they should suffer a rep hit, but there is no way for us to see it (ie, we can't see if the Iroquois are "polite" or "annoyed" with the americans,etc.) so it's hard to tell sometimes. You know the saying, you never now how much it hurts until it happens to you.
     
  7. eighty

    eighty Boycott Milk

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Eightyland
    Okay, so has anyone found a way around trade routes becoming accidentally lost, therefore rendering your trade agreements useless? I mean is it better to just not trade luxuries??? I have played some games where it was absolutely vital that I traded for luxuries because all I had were furs (mmm dead beaver skins). I mean the same thing for resources applies too. I hate having extra resources and luxuries that I can trade, but no one will trade them because a prior trade route was cut off in the middle of an agreement. Even using them as a gift can backfire because the gift of the luxury lasts 20 turns and the route can be lost during that time.

    Oh, and BTW I personally think at this point AI cheating is really the only way to make a game challenging. Reason being is that human players will constantly find exploits and tactics that the designers and AI have no solution for. I don't think I would enjoy Civ 3 if all my games were at the chieftan level. I like finding ways around the AI cheats, though. It is part of one person gaming.

    Just my humble opinion, and really I am more concerned with the trade route issue than the AI cheating deal.
     
  8. Quentin

    Quentin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    737
    Location:
    Singapore
    Yes the way reputation is ruined by lost of trade route is, at the very least, irritating. Once I had all the furs in the world and no one would trade anything for it because I supposedly broke a deal with the romans. Everyone on my continent was at war with Rome and if it was anyone's fault that the deal was broken, it was not me. I was already kind enough to not declare war on the Romans.
    I like to think that most of the game's concepts are logical but just don't work right eg. the damage to reputation for something that was not your fault.
     
  9. eighty

    eighty Boycott Milk

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Eightyland
    Yes I think this detracts from the potential richness of the game's diplomatic side. It is disappointing to encounter such difficulty with diplomacy because it makes war all that much more simple and attractive for achieving victory. I think Firaxis should adjust this in the next patch if they want people to enjoy the time they spent programming diplomatic options.

    (or mebbe they could use a hit off the ole' crack pipe)
     
  10. Zeromus

    Zeromus Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    28
    Location:
    Where Angels Lose Their Way
    The only counter-measure I have right now against having deals broken due to a disrupted trade route is to avoid trading to nations involved in war. The only reason I can see so far for the ai to lose their trade route to me is when another ai civ destroys it (tearing up roads, destroying cities with harbors,etc.). So if I hear about a war between two nations, then I end any trade deals asap. You lose a person to buy stuff from you, but it's better in a long run that maintain an honorable reputation(yeah, I know, half the time it isn't even your fault. That sucks.:mad: ) to continue trade with everyone.

    A disadvantage to this method:

    Wars on this game tend to quickly involve more than two civs. Using this measure will stop your trade to almost or all civs whenever war starts. To help fix this problem a little, I continue trading to nations fighting a completely overseas war(they have no enemies on the same continent). Usually, ai civs fighting overseas against each other will not severly damage their internal infrastructure enough to cut trade.

    Those are my thoughts.
     

Share This Page