Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

a rep hit for the wrong reason

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    a rep hit for the wrong reason

    this some seriously stupid crap.

    In my current game I'm playing the Mongols on emperor, and generally, I haven't been doing bad. But I started to wonder why other nations were wary about trading luxuries with me. Everything else didn't seem to be a problem.

    Once upon a time, I was trading with Spain (some time ago in terms of the game), and my nearest neighbors, the big bad Zulus, decided it was time to ask me for a little tribute. Well, I told the to go f*** themselves and proceeded to take several of their cities and raze several more.

    All the while, I'm not thinking I've done anything wrong. After all, they declared war on me . But apparently, they were my only way of trading with Spain and as the lines of trade were severed during the war, I was slapped with a bad reputation for something I had no part in.

    This is a flaw in the game. The 20 turn trade deal shouldn't be hardcoded anyway, but since it is, reputation hits should be reconfigured around the notion of whether or not I had any control in the matter.

    Come on, firaxis! I wasting literally hours of time here trying to play a straight game, not step on any toes I don't mean to step on, and you've got it programmed to hate me for things I can't help. Stupid!
    "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." -- Abraham Lincoln

    "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever, in flesh and blood, walked upon this earth." -- Albert Einstein, in regards to Mohandis Gandhi
    Tags: None
  • #2
    yes, this is a big problem.

    That said, I certainly use this trick to my advantage agaisnt the AI....

    i would hope that somehow this aspect can be rectified and improved, that the AI would be acknowldege the reasons for breaking a treaty and act accordingly.

    Comment

    • #3
      If you would have paid the Zulu, you wouldn't have had a rep hit.

      You are now paying the price, for not paying the price

      The reason, I guess they did it this was (firaxis) is to counter the possible exploits. But yes, sometimes, it IS
      Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
      Then why call him God? - Epicurus

      Comment

      • #4
        Originally posted by alva848
        If you would have paid the Zulu, you wouldn't have had a rep hit.

        You are now paying the price, for not paying the price

        The reason, I guess they did it this was (firaxis) is to counter the possible exploits. But yes, sometimes, it IS
        good point, that would be a cheap way of getting out of a deal. still, if one AI declares war on you and its not your fault, the ex trade partner should take that into consideration

        Comment

        • #5
          alva, that was EXACTLY my reaction... I've never really commented on this aspect before, and I know it really POs some people (including Arrian), BUT... it's all part of the in-game geo-politics. Either accept that, and include the impact in your decision-making, or pay the price. And yes, sometimes you will get screwed, for reasons beyond your control... too bad.
          The greatest delight for man is to inflict defeat on his enemies, to drive them before him, to see those dear to them with their faces bathed in tears, to bestride their horses, to crush in his arms their daughters and wives.

          Duas uncias in puncta mortalis est.

          Comment

          • #6
            Think of it this way:

            If you set up the deal again after the war, and then a second war breaks out, they lose the luxury again. So it is really an insurance policy against losing the trade route again.

            It is pretty clumsy way of doing reputation I admit...

            Comment

            • #7
              I thought razing cities was not looked upon with favor at any time?

              Comment

              • #8
                I totally agree that the favour thing in civ3 needs some work. I've had the same problem of having my deals broken by others and getting the blame. Now, I wouldn't mind it in MP, because humans can understand that and you can explain it. But the AI doesn't really care itself. In fact I can't remeber game I finished in which there was an AI left with a good reputation. They had all either screwed me over or accidently screwed someone else over by means ruby_master has mentioned. In the end everyone distrusts everyone, even their allies, and never forget the atrosity of 4000 years ago. A bit of a shame, really.



                I take it there is noe way to fix this in a patch or it would have been done long before. I don't remember the SMAC reputation being so ficle.

                Comment

                Previous template Next
                Working...
                X