Refresher needed - How maintain reputation?

[Arrian]

I've always wanted a listing of the various civ's reputations, ala CivII.

I think there is one thing you left out of your excellent post, Catt:

Razing cities hurts that civ's attitude toward you in a BIG way. I noticed this not to long ago. I often raze cities (usually ancient era auto-raze), but once or twice I've fought wars w/o any razing, just city capture and then peace. After those wars, the enemy will after drop back to "annoyed" and can be worked up to a better attitude. Civs whose cities you have razed, on the other hand, seem to hate you forever.

I also believe that abandoning captured cities counts just like razing. I remember (several months and patches ago) a chinese city that flipped to me, that I wished to move 2 tiles over. It was a size 2, so I figured "no problemo, buy a settler" which I did, disbanding the city. The Chinese dropped from "polite" to "furious" that turn.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Theseus
I wonder if there actually is "put the AI civ out of its misery" code?

I think there is, but that's just the impression that I get from several bizarre sneak attacks late in the game (ala the "Sword of Damocles" game where Alex committed suicide for no apparent reason, Theseus).

That's scientific proof, though.

-Arrian

[vmxa1]

Maybe I did not read this close enough, but I thought the advisors shows you their attitude. When I look at my advisor, it said things like they admire our culture and then it has more. If you wait it will tell you the more and one thing it may say is the Greeks are annoyed or whatever with us.

[JohnM2433]

I thought that if a city doesn't have enough population to build a settler or worker, it just waits until it does to complete it?

You can see a civ's attitude, and your Foreign Advisor will warn you if they have a bad rep if you are in negotiations with them. There is no simple list of these things, though (as with so many things ).

[vondrack]

Originally posted by JohnM2433
I thought that if a city doesn't have enough population to build a settler or worker, it just waits until it does to complete it?

Not really - you have the possibility to finish building your settler/worker without waiting for the city to grow big enough, disbanding it in the process. But you do have a point - the game will sometimes automatically delay the production in order not to disband the city. I am not 100% sure, but I believe this happens if the city is growing. If not, you get a prompt, whether to finish or postpone production.

Anyone to comment on this? I am not sure about when one gets the prompt and when the game simply delays the production without letting the player know...

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Catt


Did you have (2) troops in Egyptian territory when you declared war, That will really cause problems - and your peace while in turn 19 of a military alliance was actually a betrayal of Rome (your ally) not Egypt.


Catt

Probably had troops inside boundaries. Egypt "get out". Nah, I don't like your attitude, declare war.

Guess I will have to declare and then move inside boundaries. Thanks for the advice.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Arrian
I think there is one thing you left out of your excellent post, Catt . . . .

I also believe that abandoning captured cities counts just like razing.

You're right - I didn't try to capture all of the triggers on "attitude adjustments" (anybody ever a Hank Williams Jr. fan?) nor on reputation -- I'm sure there are other "bad acts" as well.

And you're also right on razing - I believe the same thing - I have noticed (all in gameplay, not testing) that razing does have an effect on others' attitudes towards me. I tend to avoid razing when possible for a variety of reasons, but when I go on a raze fest, the world opinion turns against me just about every time.

I also hope (and think!) you're right about abandoning cities -- if you don't take a "razing" hit because of it, it's quite the exploit. I don't have enough experience with it to say for sure, but I lean towards your view that it acts like a razing in terms of world opinion.

Originally posted by vmxa1
Maybe I did not read this close enough, but I thought the advisors shows you their attitude.

The advisor does show AI attitudes, but doesn't show your reputation (other then saying "They'd never accept such a deal" at the trading table which could be due to reputation or to inability to complete the deal for other reasons).

Originally posted by vondrack
Anyone to comment on this? I am not sure about when one gets the prompt and when the game simply delays the production without letting the player know...

IIRC (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), you're prompted to switch production if the city is generating a surplus of food, and will therefore eventually be capabale of producing a settler or worker. If the city is only producing enough food to feed the 2 (or 1) current residents, you are prompted to "Abandon the City" or not.

[trickey]

*waves at everyone*

Hey, one of the wierdest, (and unfairest) reputation brekers is this.

If you have a on going trade with a civ (weather its luxeries or gpt) and they get destroyed by another civ, YOUR reputation will be tarnished. The game treats it like you broke the deal...ect..ect.. you kniw the rest.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by Catt
IIRC (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), you're prompted to switch production if the city is generating a surplus of food, and will therefore eventually be capabale of producing a settler or worker. If the city is only producing enough food to feed the 2 (or 1) current residents, you are prompted to "Abandon the City" or not.

This is exactly what I believe (and what I clumsily tried to describe as "if the city is growing") - I remember that several times, when disbanding the city was my intention, I had to rearrange worked tiles in order to stop generating surplus food and get that prompt...

[Bangedup]

Originally posted by trickey
*waves at everyone*

Hey, one of the wierdest, (and unfairest) reputation brekers is this.

If you have a on going trade with a civ (weather its luxeries or gpt) and they get destroyed by another civ, YOUR reputation will be tarnished. The game treats it like you broke the deal...ect..ect.. you kniw the rest.

I have had this happen with a twist. I had an alliance for incense deal and I took the last city of our mutual enemy before the end of the alliance and my ally went from gracious to annoyed. Also I could no longer make a per turn trade agreement after this.

As for things to improve your reputation I believe that only time can do this. However, if it is attitude you wish to repair I can help you out there. I should note though that I generally do not worry about attitude until I get United Nations (hopefully). Then I become mister nice guy--wouldn't hurt a fly--with an average military--and gifts for everyone!
In the later game when my cities grow beyond 20 I will sometimes build a settler and deploy him somewhere on the map. In particular I do this after a war when there is more open space and resources. I then call up an annoyed or even furious civ and offer it as a gift. I have noticed that if the city has a strategic resource the recipient civ may immediately go up a level in attitude toward me. I usually plant these cities far away from the intended civ so they will never be productive. I also put them next to their traditional enemies and will put several cities close together so they are crowded.
When I played at the lower difficulty settings I used to sell captured cities in lieu of razing them. They would never agree to that at Diety level. I just started playing this game again since the patch and have not played a lower difficulty so I don't know if this is still possible.
A twist on this is to put the "free gift" city in a dead space in the center of your territory. The benefits of this is you can make them cross your territory to get to it and demand they leave. This will make them mad at you and may eventually start a war and since they are on your territory their reputation is damaged. OR you can just wait a while and your culture will absorb the city. This way you get a free military unit and can sell or give the city to the same or a different civ!
I will call up civs and give them my world map. I do this once the world is completely visible and while it offers nothing new to either of us they seem to like it.
If I can't find a buyer for a luxury I may sometimes give it to an angry civ.
Joining an alliance is a good way to improve another civs attitude toward you if only temporarily. I just gave up on a game where everytime a war ended everyone was furious at me even though I broke no alliance or even had no alliance. I gave up because the AI's kept nuking each other and 80% of my territory was desert due to ecological damage.
While in a war if you which to seriously damage others attitude toward you use nukes.
BTW there is a "suicide code" for the AI. This is implemented when an AI is the first to nuke another civ. MAD is guaranteed.

[Lintamacil]

I read somewhere in this forum that your reputation will get worse if you declare war and attack "in the same turn". If this is true, then moving fast units in after declaring war and attack will damage your reputation.

However, there seems to be a conclusion here that declaring war and moving in won't affect reputation. So can anyone confirm which is correct? I normally declare war and wait one turn before conducting business. If declare war and move in is okay, I won't have to waste one of my precious turn.

[Wormwood]

Originally posted by Lintamacil
I read somewhere in this forum that your reputation will get worse if you declare war and attack "in the same turn". If this is true, then moving fast units in after declaring war and attack will damage your reputation.

However, there seems to be a conclusion here that declaring war and moving in won't affect reputation. So can anyone confirm which is correct? I normally declare war and wait one turn before conducting business. If declare war and move in is okay, I won't have to waste one of my precious turn.

I think it only hurts your rep. if you declare war while you have units in their country. Have your units based outside, then declare it. It wouldn't make sense to give them the option of first strik on your units by waiting a turn.

[vondrack]

your enemy is my enemy, therefore I like you

I have just discovered something I can't recall seeing mentioned in any reputation/attitude thread here @ Poly.

I have started a new game yesterday night and soon found myself being blackmailed by Liz. Gimme 23 gold, she said. As I was unable to even see where she lived, so distant England was to my empire, I thought it would do no harm if I just show her the door. She promptly declared war on me. A turn or two later, Bismarck knocks the door, apparently inspired by what Liz did... This time, I agreed to his demands, as he was pretty close and I did not feel strong enough (still REXing).

OK, I was waging this "war" with Liz, actually bringing it to her country. I happily pillaged here and there, making good use of my fast horsemen, outmanoeuvring the slow English swordsman. Not forgetting to maintain friendly relations with everybody I do not currently fight with, I made a round-trip to meet all the other leaders... and guess what! Bismarck just LOVED me! Well, mean 23 gold and see... it can do miracles, I said to myself.

Several turns later, I noticed one of the English towns was gone, even though I did not touch it... One more turn and I realized that Bismarck was also busy crushing poor Liz... It was at that time that I started suspecting that his graciousness had something to do with the fact we were fighting a common enemy. I checked on the turn when I finally decided to take all of the English techs and head home. Prior to signing the peace with Liz, Bismarck was Gracious. Immediately after signing the peace (on the very same turn), he went Cautious.

I did not have an alliance or trade embargo signed with Bismarck, we just fought the same enemy and that was it. Therefore, I conclude that the AI does understand the concept of a common enemy, even if there is no formal tie and you are only "de facto allies" - it will like you more (i.e. will improve its attitude towards you).

If you want a save, just ask, I do have it.

[SpencerH]

I just finished a game where I ruined my reputation by declaring war on France while I had troops in their territory (circa 1AD). We were both playing cross border violations to annoy each other (at least I got annoyed). I couldnt fix my rep at all, and it turned out to be virtually a continuous world war for the entire game. I finally forced peace with everyone by around 1980. I'll be more careful in the future.

[vmxa1]

It makes sense when you realize Bismarck is a sorely guy anyway. So you moved up a bit in his eyes by going after Engalnd. After that ended, it was back to your prior relationship.
You could even move down a notch considering that he could be upset that you got stronger than you had been.