Pact of cooperation / pact of secrecy

[Robert]

I haven't found anything about this in the civilopedia; what do a pact of cooperation and a pact of secrecy do? I know that the latter is against someone else, who doesn't know about that, but what does it do?

[Nikolai]

IIRC, it lowers the civs' relation towards the victim and is usually a stepping stone towards war when the AI propose it.

[Robert]

And a pact of cooperation most probably raises the attitude of the other civ towards you. And it gives a penalty I assume when you attack such a civ nonetheless, right?

[Nikolai]

If you don't uphold your word, all civs in the world will distrust you. Say you won't expand towards X, that you won't DoW civ X etc, and you do... No one will ever trust such a man.

[binTravkin]

As if promises and agreements ever meant anything IRL..

(well, maybe they do, but not on a scale CIV works)

[me_irate]

Thanks for the explanations. That makes sense.

My issue is with the agreement not to expand or buy land near them.

I built near a guy to grab some resources that were near by (gold, two cows, some cotton, something else). He immediately asks me not to expand near him anymore. I agreed, only city NEAR him that I wanted. I then buy some tiles just outside the border of my town toward him. He asks me not to buy anymore tiles near him, I agree since I bought the ones I wanted.

Later I send some settlers down the coast beyond a strip of desert that separated it from my cities. His borders were 5-7 squares from the city site, over a range of mountains. Not close at all. I build the city, he says I broke my agreement.

Later on, he builds a city in the gap between that city and my capital. There was only one empty strip of tiles between my border and his. Not wanting him to get the good river tiles I quickly buy those up. He says I broke the agreement. They were closer to me than him, and he just built next to my capital. I get why I got the hit, but its annoying.

[binTravkin]

Yes any such agreements should only be appropriated for territories at the time of signing the agreement.

[Jaybe]

From what I remember of the reviews & interviews, different civs have different personalities and territory possessiveness. It may have been just that civ ... or a combination of that and difficulty level. Hope you haven't a problem with your military.

[Pyrkaige]

The official word on these:

A Pact of Cooperation will get you better deals with that AI player provided that you reciprocate. It's an option meant to foster a positive relationship. Likewise, a Pact of Secrecy (where the AI asks you to work against another Civ) will also build a better relationship, provided you actually follow through, and do not cooporate with the target Civ.

[me_irate]

From what I remember of the reviews & interviews, different civs have different personalities and territory possessiveness. It may have been just that civ ... or a combination of that and difficulty level. Hope you haven't a problem with your military.

Prince, the other party was the river warlord guy, whatever his name was. Makes sense with his aggression level. But I agree with the above guy, the agreement should depend on present borders. Him building a city next to my town (after I had already told him not to) and then getting upset when I bought tiles next to the new town and getting a rep hit for it is a bit too much. I don't care that he got upset, but I don't think that should equal a rep hit with all players. Same with the city I founded 5 tiles away from his nearest town (which was also new and tiny, much further from his capital). I don't care if he is insane and gets upset about it. I just don't think I should get rep hits with other players for breaking an agreement when its based on his insane ideas and I have no idea what he considers his.

BTW, what was with the insults? It didn't seem smart since even at the time I had a larger/more advanced military and 2-3 times the number of cities. Perhaps it had to do with breaking the agreements? Even then, wasn't a smart idea since I could have crushed him at any time.

One thing of note, awhile later after I finished off another civ I was preparing to invade him, he asked me why I was building up on the border, and remembering this thread, didn't want to ruin my rep and admitted I was about to declare war. So he declared first and attacked my knights/longswordsmen with his warriors/archers. Wasn't very pretty on his end. I did lose a pikeman due to the ambush which annoyed me (only unit I ended up losing). Definitely a nice addition there. Anyone know how long that agreement lasts? If I really don't have plans to attack and tell him that I'm just passing through, then 50 turns later I change my mind, will I still get hit with the penalty?

[Dinner]

And a pact of cooperation most probably raises the attitude of the other civ towards you. And it gives a penalty I assume when you attack such a civ nonetheless, right?

Doesn't the pact of cooperation assist with research or is that only for the city states?

[Jaybe]

Thinking of the Research Agreement, Oerdin?

[Jaybe]

me_irate, remember that there is also a built-in hostility towards the civ who's way ahead in the game. That may (or may not) have had something to do with your situation.

[Dinner]

Thinking of the Research Agreement, Oerdin?

I must be.

[Fidel]

Too bad there is no printed manual, because I would like to show it down the troat of the person who actually compiled it. Civilopedia also, too bad it is digital. I mean, they are offering me treaties and I have no way of knowing what they are proposing, so I have to guess or come here to learn something elementary about the game.