Reputation

[medieval elephant]

How am I supposed to get a good reputation in VH/VH? I heard that you should make alliances with everyone you meet, and never start wars, or break alliances and such, but my allies keep attacking each other. My reputation was mixed before, but Milan attacked HRE and I chose HRE and my rep changed to dubious.

[Artetius]

This information is gathered through both personal research and other sources. Every tip helps me in campaigns to hold secure Alliances for 40-100 turns. I end up attacking my own Allies sooner or later as they are no longer needed.

1. Avoid accepting and/or setting up too many trade relations. Do not setup trade agreements with factions you can't possibly trade with as this destroys your relationship with them. When you attack someone you have a trade relationship with, you are breaking an agreement. Hence bad reputation.
2. Do not setup multiple alliances. This will end up mucking up your reputation as your allies will sooner or later war each other and you will have to break an alliance.
3. If you follow step 1 from the start, you should know that having a trade agreement to a faction's enemy hurts your relationship with them. Furthermore, having trade agreements with your Ally's Enemies does the same with your Ally.
4. With the trade information down, I would suggest having a super ally. This is an ally which you have from early on in the game and keep for most of the game. Their is a common belief that the AI requires presents to stay in good relationships with you... yet again if you watch your trade agreements and assist in fighting a mutual enemy, your relationships will be fine.
5. Don't step on Neutral or Ally Turf unless you have Military Access Rights. This ruins your relations and in doing so can hurt your Reputation through affiliate effects. Same goes for setting up fortifications, watch towers or stationing troops by the border.
6. Stop that Pesky Spying and Assassinating. Having a spy caught & the general activity of Assassinating characters lowers Reputation.

[PanzerHue]

(...) Same goes for setting up fortifications, watch towers or stationing troops by the border.

Hi,
I was wondering if watchtowers on borders actually worsen reputation?

Kind regards...

[axnsan]

Did your really have to start a new thread?

[Callawyn]

This information is gathered through both personal research and other sources. Every tip helps me in campaigns to hold secure Alliances for 40-100 turns. I end up attacking my own Allies sooner or later as they are no longer needed.

1. Avoid accepting and/or setting up too many trade relations. Do not setup trade agreements with factions you can't possibly trade with as this destroys your relationship with them. When you attack someone you have a trade relationship with, you are breaking an agreement. Hence bad reputation.
2. Do not setup multiple alliances. This will end up mucking up your reputation as your allies will sooner or later war each other and you will have to break an alliance.
3. If you follow step 1 from the start, you should know that having a trade agreement to a faction's enemy hurts your relationship with them. Furthermore, having trade agreements with your Ally's Enemies does the same with your Ally.
4. With the trade information down, I would suggest having a super ally. This is an ally which you have from early on in the game and keep for most of the game. Their is a common belief that the AI requires presents to stay in good relationships with you... yet again if you watch your trade agreements and assist in fighting a mutual enemy, your relationships will be fine.
5. Don't step on Neutral or Ally Turf unless you have Military Access Rights. This ruins your relations and in doing so can hurt your Reputation through affiliate effects. Same goes for setting up fortifications, watch towers or stationing troops by the border.
6. Stop that Pesky Spying and Assassinating. Having a spy caught & the general activity of Assassinating characters lowers Reputation.

1. The first part of what you're saying here is nonsense. You do not lose relations with AI factions because you have a trade agreement with them but 'can't possibly trade with them'. The game makes no such check. In any case, you can get a benefit from a trade agreement with any faction, no matter how far away, because your merchants will make more income from the resources they're on in that factions territory. Now, you do lose reputation for all broken agreements, but you actually have to go to war with a faction for the Trade agreement to be broken and you only take the rep hit if you started the war (which, when you think about it, is actually pretty rare) and the hit you take is less than for breaking an alliance or for the DoW itself. So, if you want to make trade agreements with every faction in the game, as most of us do, it will NOT hurt your relations with anyone and the reputation loss over the course of an entire game for breaking trade agreements really is negligible.

2. This is true. The problem here is that if you Ally with every faction in the game, once they start going to war with each other you are forced to break your alliance with either the aggressor or the defender of each war. This can totally hose your global reputation by about turn 50. Note the difference here between Trade Agreements with everyone and Alliances with everyone: when 2 allies go to war with each other, you are charged a rep hit due to being forced to break one of the alliances, but you can maintain your Trade agreement with both. I try to set up a patchwork of alliances, allying with AI factions that are not likely to go to war with each other, and I rarely ally with more than about 3-5 factions at any given time.

3. Also nonsense. I don't know how these myths get started, but its amazing how they are perpetuated.

4. This is great advice, sans the trade agreement bits. Actually, you can maintain 3+ super allies so long as they are well separated geographically. The key is picking allies that can help you or secure a border but have almost no chance of declaring war on each other and forcing you to choose which alliance to break.

5. Correct about not stepping on AI faction turf without Military Access, this will definitely hurt your relations with that faction (the exception being troops on crusade, you can move crusading armies through AI faction territory with no penalty). The stuff about watchtowers and fortifications near your borders is nonsense. You can build anything you want in your territory, anywhere you want, with no ill effects. As far as stationing troops near your borders, I've never seen that hurt relations. Having weak garrisons in border provinces, however, is an invitation to be invaded.

6. This is entirely true. You can engage in a moderate amount of this type of activity and still be able to counter it with other things that boost your reputation. But, if you go hog wild with assassinations expect to see your reputation tank. Once you're strong enough this isn't much of an issue, but while you're struggling early on having a good reputation reduces chances of unwanted wars that you can't handle.

[Viking Prince]

Originally Posted by Artetius

1. Avoid accepting and/or setting up too many trade relations. Do not setup trade agreements with factions you can't possibly trade with as this destroys your relationship with them. When you attack someone you have a trade relationship with, you are breaking an agreement. Hence bad reputation.
2. Do not setup multiple alliances. This will end up mucking up your reputation as your allies will sooner or later war each other and you will have to break an alliance.
3. If you follow step 1 from the start, you should know that having a trade agreement to a faction's enemy hurts your relationship with them. Furthermore, having trade agreements with your Ally's Enemies does the same with your Ally.

1. The first part of what you're saying here is nonsense. You do not lose relations with AI factions because you have a trade agreement with them but 'can't possibly trade with them'. The game makes no such check. In any case, you can get a benefit from a trade agreement with any faction, no matter how far away, because your merchants will make more income from the resources they're on in that factions territory. Now, you do lose reputation for all broken agreements, but you actually have to go to war with a faction for the Trade agreement to be broken and you only take the rep hit if you started the war (which, when you think about it, is actually pretty rare) and the hit you take is less than for breaking an alliance or for the DoW itself. So, if you want to make trade agreements with every faction in the game, as most of us do, it will NOT hurt your relations with anyone and the reputation loss over the course of an entire game for breaking trade agreements really is negligible.

2. This is true. The problem here is that if you Ally with every faction in the game, once they start going to war with each other you are forced to break your alliance with either the aggressor or the defender of each war. This can totally hose your global reputation by about turn 50. Note the difference here between Trade Agreements with everyone and Alliances with everyone: when 2 allies go to war with each other, you are charged a rep hit due to being forced to break one of the alliances, but you can maintain your Trade agreement with both. I try to set up a patchwork of alliances, allying with AI factions that are not likely to go to war with each other, and I rarely ally with more than about 3-5 factions at any given time.

3. Also nonsense. I don't know how these myths get started, but its amazing how they are perpetuated.

4. This is great advice, sans the trade agreement bits. Actually, you can maintain 3+ super allies so long as they are well separated geographically. The key is picking allies that can help you or secure a border but have almost no chance of declaring war on each other and forcing you to choose which alliance to break.

I shortened the quotes to the first three to discuss my observations on trade.

I will defer to the expertise of others regarding what is in the code and will only state what I observe. When I make trade agreements with far off factions or even nearby faction with whom no trade occurs, I find when playing on vh/vh that the relations begin to deteriate after trade agreements and with no trade. It may very will be that relations went up with the agreement and then back down due to not profit from the agreeement. How high the rise and how low the fall, I do not know.

I can agree that trade agreements improve merchant trade. What I described does not include such trade nor the settlement trade. I will establish trade agreements when my merchants are in position to benefit and not earlier..

For my play, such details do not really matter. I tend to try to make the simulation through role play a bit closer to what the nobles would do. With that in mind, I do not make trade agreements unless they will directly benefit my faction.

I would be interested in an explanation for what I have observed though.

[porfiris]

I am sure that I didn't do something bad in order to lose rep and I loaded the correct save. I play vanilla version.
The only thing that goes in my mind is what I wrote, I destroyed every building in a beseiged city, mine from the start of the game, that was going to fall to enemy's hands for sure. I thought that this action was considered a cruel thing to do to the population of that city, leaving ruins to gain money, taking away from them the means of life even by the coming new ruler. Just a thought. :hmmm:
Anyway I plan to start a new game only for doing that on purpose asap and see what happens

[DJ_JasonX]

Re: trade rights - my understanding was the same as Callawyn's -
I'd never heard of or observed a rep hit for "not being able to trade" when you have trade relations. The only place I've seen this claimed is here and in the great (mis)informative thread.

There is, however, a normalisation on H and VH campaign that adjusts your relations with every faction down every turn - so if you don't do anything to butter up a faction, your relations WILL drift downwards on tose difficulty settings. Is it possible that this is what VikingPrince was observing?

[Double A]

Why? It's not like dubious is that bad. It's basically -1 rep, with mixed at 0. If you spend the entire game getting your rep high, someone's probably going to knock your front door down. Or back door. Either way, you'll get screwed. So take my advice and just start killing everyone instead.

[Artetius]

Why? It's not like dubious is that bad. It's basically -1 rep, with mixed at 0. If you spend the entire game getting your rep high, someone's probably going to knock your front door down. Or back door. Either way, you'll get screwed. So take my advice and just start killing everyone instead.

People like you murder role playing!

You could take Double A's advice and just dominate. I often do this when my power is the pinnacle of supremacy and I have the ability to rampage across Europe and expand my dominance throughout the realm with little to no opposition.

When I am not having a blood feud for dominance, I am role playing. I try to keep my empire under 20 provinces and just sit around assisting my allies. Which is where my tips come in.

I will say it again just to get it clear.. Don't open up trade relationships you can't keep or so many trade relationships that you can't attack anyone because you will break the relation and hurt your reputation.

[Haakon]

People like you murder role playing!

I thought tw was a strategy game and not a RPG? Why RP if it means your faction will be inferior? But more importantly, why not RP as a real medieval ruler....who were brutal and mean? (most were)

[Viking Prince]

I thought tw was a strategy game and not a RPG? Why RP if it means your faction will be inferior? But more importantly, why not RP as a real medieval ruler....who were brutal and mean? (most were)

That is the good thing about the game. You can play any style that suits you. If you want to be brutal and mean -- fine. If you want to b a part of the Knights of the round table -- fine. Do what you enjoy.

bte -- the times were brutal and mean by modern standards, but how many regions faced wholesale extermination upon conquest? Hmmm?

Just by occupying in the game, you see that citizens die. I would call that brutal. This is why some of us role play the game. Or you can blits the map and be done in 30 turns. Again, what ever is fun for you to do.

[Haakon]

That is the good thing about the game. You can play any style that suits you. If you want to be brutal and mean -- fine. If you want to b a part of the Knights of the round table -- fine. Do what you enjoy.

bte -- the times were brutal and mean by modern standards, but how many regions faced wholesale extermination upon conquest? Hmmm?

Just by occupying in the game, you see that citizens die. I would call that brutal. This is why some of us role play the game. Or you can blits the map and be done in 30 turns. Again, what ever is fun for you to do.

ALURT ALURT INCOMING NITPICKLING POST!!

The roundtable is fiction, even the most noblest of lords were ruthless killers as that was the charter of those days.

[Double A]

OK, I gotta add that to my pet peeves in my sig.

[Artetius]

OK, I gotta add that to my pet peeves in my sig.

I don't see how that can qualify as a Pet Peeve. If you are just playing the game to kill a large collection of computer generated pixels over and over again for the span of three years and not role play, why bother?

[Viking Prince]

OK, I gotta add that to my pet peeves in my sig.

A temptng challange. Hmmmm?

**stalking Double A**

**seeking to rate on the pet peeves list**

btw --- Happy New Year from Colorado USA. Good posts to you in the new one!

[Double A]

A temptng challange. Hmmmm?

**stalking Double A**

**seeking to rate on the pet peeves list**

btw --- Happy New Year from Colorado USA. Good posts to you in the new one!

Viking, you... *no comment*

[medieval elephant]

lol, anyway, I'm trying out the more peaceful approach cos its my first time playing VH/VH. I'll start dominating and killing everyone when I'm a bit more powerful.

[taw]

Releasing prisoners is the simplest reputation pump. Attack a stack, release leftovers, attack them again, release until nobody's left. You get reputation points for releasing, and extra points for releasing big units and releasing characters.

If you think it would be a major pain to release, demand ransom don't execute. AI rarely has money for ransom, so it has the same effect except it doesn't cause reputation drop.

Having multiple allies in different parts of the map is another good way to score reputation. It's not as hard as it sound, as AI seems much more willing to ally when your reputation is already high.

[alovell83]

Releasing prisoners is the simplest reputation pump. Attack a stack, release leftovers, attack them again, release until nobody's left. You get reputation points for releasing, and extra points for releasing big units and releasing characters.

If you think it would be a major pain to release, demand ransom don't execute. AI rarely has money for ransom, so it has the same effect except it doesn't cause reputation drop.

Having multiple allies in different parts of the map is another good way to score reputation. It's not as hard as it sound, as AI seems much more willing to ally when your reputation is already high.

Better is to go to war with your allies, honor your alliance and back your allies up in their wars. You are better off executing their enemies than to remain on the sidelines, but yes, obviously releasing or ransoming their enemies will be even better.