Bad Reputation

[Worthingtons]

In my current game i found myself helplessely behind in Technology, so I decided to some trading with the French , Military Tradition,Magnatism,Nationalism and Steam power for about 700gpt and furs. I then, of course, declared war

Problem is, I want to win the game by Democracy , Is there anyway I can mend the reputation hit over time, or is what i did too bigger crime?

Ps , it's my first main crime apart from a mild sneak attack once

Cheers
Matt

[Fosse]

I don't know how badly this will hurt the chances of other Civs voting for you, but you can count on France being against you forever.

What this will do is make it very difficult for you to arrange gpt and luxury trades to other civs... having those trades in place raises their opinions of you. Since you won't be trading very much, your opponants will and will thus be more liked by the world in general.

You can still win a diplomatic game... but it sounds like you made it a lot harder on yourself.

[badams52]

Winning a diplomatic (I assume that's what you meant) victory is largely based on the AIs attitude and reputation towards you. For a detailed analysis you can look at this thread AI Attitude Revealed on civ fanatics.

But for a quick sum: you have caused this to be counted against you (being + is bad)

+4 if you break a trade route (like pillaging your own road) that cancels a treaty. In addition to the -5 you lost since you are no longer trading resources, it will feel like +9. Other civs will add +1.

Fosse is right that none of the AIs will accept gpt deals from you anymore, but you should still be able to get gpt deals and trade your luxuries away which will improve the attitude of the other civs toward you. According to current knowledge, giving a gift to France in excess of 500 will improve their attitude -10 for a length of 50 turns.Which will offset the +4 penalty you incurred. You could also just give them 100 g before you vote to improve their attitude by -10

[Theseus]

Rothy, you are a bad person. Tsk tsk.

When you said "win by Democracy" did you you mean by a UN vote? Doable, but very tough.

[BigDork]

Hi everybody...

Can't you just be cheesy and give all the AI civs everything you have the turn before the vote? Yeah it's cheap but it'll get you the votes.

BigD

[BigDork]

Hi everybody...

BtW, I've never won by diplomatic victory so I may not know what I'm talking about.

BigD

[badams52]

Originally posted by Theseus
Rothy, you are a bad person. Tsk tsk.

When you said "win by Democracy" did you you mean by a UN vote? Doable, but very tough.

I don't know about that. As long as you war when someone else declares war on you, keep your trade up, give gifts, sign ROPs, and build the UN, I don't think it's that tough.

But if you're declaring wars, razing cities, breaking trade agreements, then it's tough.

I used to be able to win diplomatically, but that was before I leaned the power of the darkside.

[Sava]

Only wussies win by diplomacy

[nbarclay]

Wussies and people who have enough confidence in their ability that they don't feel like they have to win by conquest or domination in order to prove themselves.

[Worthingtons]

Hi , Thanks for the info there, the Civ fanatics thread was great altho it was a bit information overload the first read

It seems it's split Reputation/Attitude, Attitude is easy enough to alter with most civ's you havent directly betrayed, but reputation is absolute and I'd never be able to get a gpt deal again


I look to win by diplomacy because I have a VERY slow computer that would take me all year to win by combat. I will not enable domination , becuase if i win by that i woudnt feel i'd really 'won' ..

[Catt]

I'd add my habitual $0.02 that reputation and attitude are distinct concepts with distinct rewards / penalties.

Originally posted by nbarclay
Wussies and people who have enough confidence in their ability that they don't feel like they have to win by conquest or domination in order to prove themselves.

Again, I agree Diplo victories are welcome victories when the game is won, but the player has some sort of aversion to just "quitting" a game (as I do ).

[theNiceOne]

I agree Catt (as usual ). A game I finished yesterday was on emperor, a large archipelago map with 24 civs (3 had been eliminated). I had 1 1/2 of the two biggest continents and reached the modern age while the second best civ was still fighting with riflemen. I could've played 10+ hours more of overrunning everyone with my tanks/artillery - soon to be mordern armor, but I much prefer to start a new game. I don't want to quit a game, so the solution was to go directly for fission, keep a leader and hurry the UN for the fastest possible win.

[MPatton]

How is this for bad reputation.
Maintain one real enemy.
trade with everyone else with your luxury items.
Then when you conquer your enemy off their land and force you to look for the rest attack the next closest country. Also raze every major city of your enemy. By using reputation the others are pleased to have happy citizens and are less likely to make war pacts against you and you make so more income and slow the other civs down. I did not have to lok hard for the two remaining Russian cities but everyone else is far far away.

[Ephesos]

All I have to say is this. Why the heck would you offer 700 gpt?!?!? It's just going to come back and hit you later, why bother?

Oh yes, and I for one also think Diplomatic victories are more rewarding than domination and conquest victories. Unfortunately, I never get them .

[badams52]

Originally posted by MPatton
Also raze every major city of your enemy.

All this is going to do is add +1 to the attitude of every other civ for each raze of a city.