Open Borders Question

[Dis]

I like to do it since I find early religions, and like to spread it to them (esp if they have no religion) via open borders. I often get lucky, and it spreads without using missionaries. And they convert to my religion.

My last game I was playing an earth map with 18 civs (though I had to stop as the turns were taking too long). Every single civ in the world was Hindu except one. I played as the germans and founded hinduism. I quickly went for writing and made open border agreements with all 17 civs.

All my religion spread via open borders except with the Mali. I used missionaries for them.

[Nacht]

Open borders don't influence religion spread.

[yimboli]

It does affect missionaries being allowed, right? Does the computer use missionaries?

[ZEE]

Originally posted by yimboli
It does affect missionaries being allowed, right? Does the computer use missionaries?

yes the computer uses missionaries

[Ming]

I'm with MrWhereItsAt... I pretty much will give anybody Open Boarders, knowing that somebody will ask me to cancel a deal with such and such... I will ignore the demands of people I plan on going to battle with, and agree to demands by the AI's that I think I can keep as friends. You can either piss them off by rejecting their original demand for open borders, or by cancelling it later. At least with the latter, you get something for it... better relations with somebody else

[couerdelion]

I did not realise there was a diplomatic penalty for cancelling an Open Border agreement. I know that you will get a penalty if you response to a demand of this nature – in fact it’s worse because the civ will not only give you a “-1 you broke your deals with us” but will also refuse to talk with you for approximately 1000 years.

[Ming]

If it's one of my potential enemies... they probably won't be around for 1000 years

[dregor]

I always assumed that having open borders agreements with 2 different civs that hated each other would give you the "You traded with our enemy" penalty.

[jaishaw]

i usually sign open borders with everyone asap. i started my most recent (and most successful thus far) game with a different approach though:

I found that i was at the middle of the main continent (pretty much america shaped - me starting around mexico, if you like). i got 3 or 4 cities together in a line, east to west, and refused to open borders with anyone. this gave me a hell of a lot of land to develop into as quickly as i wanted. i am now in control of more than half of the total land.

sometimes it pays to be secretive!

[yimboli]

Originally posted by dregor
I always assumed that having open borders agreements with 2 different civs that hated each other would give you the "You traded with our enemy" penalty.

I'd like a definite answer on this. Does open borders do it or do you have to overtly agree to, say, trade resources for a certain number of turns, or trade techs for techs or money?

[Dis]

I'm fairly certain open borders do not give you that penalty. Trading something like iron or furs to them will give it to you.

[Nugog]

Depends on the situation for me - if I can block in a civ by not allowing open borders I will do so.

Also if there is a natural "rligion block" forming I will consider closing borders with the "un-believers".

However from a trade point of view, especially if I need the cash - then open borders for everyone. This also helps gain valuable for the ineffitable "liberation forces" I will have visiting someones elses land at some point..........

[Jaybe]

I have always assumed that Open Borders IS an aspect of trading with a civ. After all, when you agree to cancel agreements with a civ, Open Borders is also cancelled.

[emperor]

Open Borders is usually worth it in single player, unless you're looking to temporarily deny some land for settling from the AI. You have to weigh up Open Borders much more carefully in the multiplayer environment.

[BobTheBackpack]

They can map your territory and sell the map to their friends