Open Borders gripes!

[Arkalius]

There is a bug in the game where agreements can get fubared... One time I had the agreements section in my game say I was giving open borders for Fish or some such, (and not getting open borders in return), and other wierd things like that. Perhaps you've ended up in a situation like that. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it beyond loading a savegame from before the trade agreements got screwed up.

I noticed that the easiest way to screw them up is to go into the diplomacy screen and go to "what deals do we currently have?" and select a deal as if you're going to cancel it, then press the no button on the confirmation. At this point the conversation options change to those that involve proposing deals but the problem is that you're on the active deals screen. Then if you press one of the dialog options, it will quickly screw up all your deals and mismatch them. At one point I was giving open borders three times to someone for various things that weren't open borders... it was all screwed up.

[MattPilot]

Originally posted by Arkalius
There is a bug in the game where agreements can get fubared... One time I had the agreements section in my game say I was giving open borders for Fish or some such, (and not getting open borders in return), and other wierd things like that. Perhaps you've ended up in a situation like that. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it beyond loading a savegame from before the trade agreements got screwed up.

Perhaps that may be it? It would explain why in my tests with the war declaration & then peace signing it worked again.

[Cordelayne]

Arkalius, Thanks for your interesting post. I suspect that is the root of the problem, a big mess with the code that handles diplomatic negotiations. That area of the game seems screwed-up to me, so I have mainly avoided it so far. But I think I did experiment with some negotiations with the Germans in my game, and while I don't remember, I'll bet I did what you suggested.

Hope springs eternal. Sid Meier is the all-time greatest game designer and Firaxis is a class company. I suspect this game will improve a lot after several patches.

SirRalph, I really ought to just let you have the last laugh. But it's hard not to ask you whether you understand what "fanboy" means, because you sure fit the bill.

[Nacht]

You're making a fool of yourself Cordelayne

[Cordelayne]

Nacht, how is that? I thought I was being rather reasonable.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Cordelayne
SirRalph, I really ought to just let you have the last laugh. But it's hard not to ask you whether you understand what "fanboy" means, because you sure fit the bill.

You're repeating yourself. You can not even insult with style, how sad is that? But if that is all you can bring up, we can certainly consider this debate over.

[mmm_ok]

There is a bug in the game where agreements can get fubared...

I agree. I've seen it personally in one of my games.

It doesn't happen that often though and it's only vaguely annoying and no doubt it'll get fixed in a patch

[Soren Johnson]

Originally posted by Cordelayne
I'm not getting the Apolyton upload feature, but here's an attempt to use the Forum's "attach file" feature.


Hallelujah. That works. Please forgive my ineptness with the uploading.

Again, as you can see from the save, the Germans have a frigate in my territory next to Coventry, although we're not at war and we have no open borders agreement. You can prove that we have no open borders agreement by trying to move any ship except a caravel into German territory, among other ways.

As I said in the thread above, earlier in this game the Germans had at least two galleons in my territory loaded with longbowmen and a settler, but I don't see them now. I think they went away after I seized the last oil resource in my territory.

I speculate that this may be some kind of corruption in an early save game file--the game acts as if it thinks the Germans have an open borders agreement from me (even though they keep asking for it and keep getting turned down), but not the other way around. Curious.

thanks Cordaleyne!

[soulfire777]

In all my games, galleons could not enter another civ's territory unless open borders had been established. Caravels can proceed through borders at will however.

[Fidel]

cordelayne, soren is your fanboy LOL

[Tall Stranger]

Cordelayne,

I think you're way off base here. SR is quite right to express skepticism about your overly-broad claim. You just can't make sweeping statements like "This is completely broken" and expect people NOT to question you very closely about your claim.

The funniest part about this whole "fanboy" accusation is that, of all people, SR is probably the least likely to be called a fanboy. He was frequently quite critical of certain elements of Civ 3 (resource scarcity being but one). And while I often disagreed with him, he has always been an honest and fair person.

Let's just try to keep our focus on the game, not insults.

[padillah]

I may be being naive but I have to wonder: Cordelayne, did you know 'fanboy' was an insult when you initially used it?

FWIW 'fanboy' is a rather rude insult insinuating that the person will never contradict the game nor say anything even remotly disparraging about it. They will do this even in the face of unadulterated idiocy and blatant bugs. It is widely regarded as being quite insulting, akin to insinuating that the person under assault cannot think for themsleves.

I cannot believe this is what you meant regarding Sir Ralph.

Tom P.

[]LoL[Harm]

I'm an outsider here, I don't have much presence on these boards. But if I posted that I was experiencing a problem and one of the first responses I get from someone is:

"Or yet better a savegame, to back up a claim which is obviously false."

I'd think that guy was an ass. Calling what I am experiencing as "obviously false" is pretentious. And contrary to what others have said, it does indicate that I am fabricating something...which would indicate I am a liar.

I'm not even close to 50 years old, and I can't program in any languages. But I do have manners and respect for people that I do not know. Sir Ralph should have led off with his information provided on the second page, first:

"You have found a bug, even though it looks rather like either a graphical glitch or a completely messed up game database (where the AI obviously has no idea where that galleon really is). Both have little to do with the Open Borders treaty. I would recommend you to post this incident in the topped bug report thread, including the savegame."

Instead of the "obviously false" post, which would automatically put someone on the defensive.

[Aileron]

I mentioned in another thread where I was at war with another civ, then at peace, then open borders, then they moved deep into my territory, attacked and razed a city, but were *not* booted out to the edge of my territory. I think I lost/overwrote that savegame, but I'll try to find it tonight. Sounds like it might be a similar bug as this one; agreements getting screwed up.

Maybe they thought they were still at war with me the whole time? Or maybe the "peace" expired, but they didn't acknowledge the open borders agreement that occured in the meantime? Anyway, I'll try to find the save...

[Harovan]

Originally posted by ]LoL[Harm
I'd think that guy was an ass. Calling what I am experiencing as "obviously false" is pretentious. And contrary to what others have said, it does indicate that I am fabricating something...which would indicate I am a liar.

I'm not even close to 50 years old, and I can't program in any languages. But I do have manners and respect for people that I do not know.

Do you even realize, that these 2 statements contradict each other? You have neither manners nor respect for people you do not know, if you call them names over an expression of doubt.

What concerns your conclusion in the first paragraph, so it is false. It does not mean, that he is fabricating something. And drawing wrong conclusions is of course completely different from lying, as was stated in this thread as well.

To draw from one single (and as it is obvious, very buggy) sample sweeping conclusions for a broader entity (the Open Border feature, which works for others) is an inductive fallacy, if memory serves right, a "hasty generalization". I saw a dog with two tails. Hence it's wrong to say, that dogs have only one tail. Right?

And the second statement, about the color of the lines in the foreign relations screen, is also false. Still. And obviously. And that is exactly the purpose of my first post.

Since I have my doubts in your cited "manners", I am not interested in further discussions with you. Goodbye.