Machiavelli Institute : The right use of ROP

[Togas]

Originally posted by kring
The first thing I did was make a RoP with the civ; it still attacked.

The RoP itself never, by itself, stopped the attack. It even accelerated the attack in some cases.

The AI has done(RoP abuse) this to other AI civs in a number of my games.

This has been my experience as well. In my last game I used the preemptive RoP tactic to dissuade an agressive enemy from attacking me after he dropped several knights into my territory. He agreed. The turn after that he declared war.

I have also seen the AI do this to other AI opponents. In fact I'll often bribe them to do this to their "allies."

Unless we need the RoP to get to territory we could not otherwise reach, it's not worth it.

--Togas

[Epistax]

How about this. We use ROP agreements with those that are not near us, such as the Romans, Babylonians etc. We can use it as a general purpose trade item good for money and making the civ happier with us.

I have no fear of the english, romans, babs, iroqs, and those other people near the babs.

[Robber Baron]

Will we be able to use RoPs to promote, or at least support, scenarios in which distant civs would make war on civs we want to weaken -- if, say, the Greeks wanted for some reason to make war on the Persians? If that kind of opportunity opens itself, we definitely want to take advantage.

[Shiber]

I agree. I myself suggested a similar plan earlier, but it is different in one aspect.
My proposal was to offer this to all the civs in Abananaba Minor but not to our neighbors. Each of them is dangerous to us.
Take the English for example. They may seem harmless now but they are technologically advanced and they're expansionists stuck between three powerful civilizations. They may decide it's a good idea to attack sooner or later. I'm not saying that they would, but there's a considerable chance, whereas with the Abananaba Minors it's a safe bet that they won't abuse the agreement.
So what I'm saying is: we have nothing to lose from signing a RoP with the Abananaba Minor civs, only to gain, and therefore we should sign these treaties with them next turn.

[DAVOUT]

This is to summarize what has been discussed till now on the right use of ROP agreements.

Feel free to indicate any error (material or interpretation), I ll edit it as required.


Preliminary synthesis

- Everybody agrees on sneak attack during a ROP agreement : Strictly forbidden.

The cost of ROP agreements
- Binds us during 20 turns (Gepap, Davout) ; Spiffor says, in his positive style, that we gain freedom to attack at the end of the 20 turns !
- A ROP agreement does NOT prevent an AI to attack (tested by Kring and Togas).

The value of ROP agreements
- Increase the chances of conflict between the AI civ (Epistax, Kloreep, Spiffor).
- Improve intelligence on enemy civ (Espitax, Robber Baron).
- Raise trade conditions we obtain from our partner and deteriorate those granted by our partner to our enemies (Spiffor).


Preliminary conclusion

Right now there is no need to sign ROP agreements (Gepap, JD2007, Sheik, Spiffor, MrPresident, Davout, Skywalker). Nevertheless, considering the above, this is far from precluding an appropriate use of ROP agreements in the future.
ROP agreements with Abananaba Minor civs are to be considered (Shiber).



Everything of importance has certainly not yet been noted, so all comments, either by those presently taking part or by new ones, will still be appreciated.

[Shiber]

I say we should sign agreements with the Abananaba Minor civs for the reasons mentioned in my post above. You can add that.

[Kuciwalker]

First, I would like to point out to many of you in this thread that it's Abananaba, not Anabanana. Anyway, I agree that we should not sign any RoP's yet.

[DAVOUT]

Shiber,
Edited.

Skywalker,
Edited.

[jdd2007]

a RoP could very possibly be good in the near-future. which civ(s) would be the best, do you think?

Greece immediately comes to mind...

*Glory to Country through Strength and Honor!*

[DAVOUT]

It all depends of what the AI will do. I see two hot areas : the Abananaba strait, and the Munich-Ubergorsk area. Which civ will do what ? I cant tell, but we must be prepared to have unpleasant surprises, and it is therefore important not to grant ROP agreements prematurely.

[DAVOUT]

In the light of recent events (war declared on us by Persia after signing a ROP with us), I suggest the following policy :

when a RoP is granted, we should send immediately at least one unit wandering throughout the adverse country for intelligence gathering and implicit threat of pillaging in case the treaty is broken, and if possible several offensive units able to take a city.

This is the logical consequence of the AI behaviour ; it adds to the cost of the RoP but greatly increases our security.

[Shiber]

A great idea!
This can assure us that the AIs don't betray on us, and if they do - POW! They lose a city.
BANG! ZOOM!! RIGHT IN THE KISSER!!!

Sorry, got carried away.

[Robber Baron]

I agree, DAVOUT.
I wonder if this deters the AI civs from violating an RoP. In any event, it would be satisfying to be able to punish them quickly for doing so.

[DAVOUT]

A perfect scenario of war could begin with a ROP. During 20 turns our units enter the ennemy land and go to strategic locations : roads connecting the capital, ressources, highly productive mines. Then at the end of the 20 turns the main army start taking cities when the units in place destroy the economy and the communication.