Replies to denouncements

Sporally

Sporally

Prince
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
462
Location
Denmark, EU.
I believe I see the point in most replies in the diplo screen. However, I never really figured out what the replies to the denouncemenets do - if anything significant at all.

When being denounced I get two replies. Either I could say something like "Very well" or I could say "You will pay for this". Can someone please explain to me what difference it makes? They hate me anyways, so would they hate me even more for saying "You will pay for this". In that case, why ever choosing that one over the other? Do you scare them away or does it send out a message to his friends not to do the same? - And in that case, why just say "Very well" (or whatever it's called).
 
I don't think that reply ever does anything

Because it also comes when they are taunting you.. <shrug> maybe it's just a way to roleplay or something.
 
I would guess so too. Strange... first time since the throne room in Civ1 I've seen a feature that does absolutely nothing :)

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
 
Oh. That reminds me. My friend usually denounces before DoW. What are your take on that matter?

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
 
All civs that like you more than the people you're denouncing are likely to denounce them too, civs that have denounced them will like you more, civs that like them more than you will like you less and display a hilariously cheesy dialogue box.
 
Mr. Grieves said:
All civs that like you more than the people you're denouncing are likely to denounce them too, civs that have denounced them will like you more, civs that like them more than you will like you less and display a hilariously cheesy dialogue box.
Click to expand...

Does that mean that "denounce before DoW" is not always a good idea?
 
TheKingOfBigOz said:
<shrug> maybe it's just a way to roleplay or something.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I always took it for. Although, to be honest; it would be nice if the replies meant something. Maybe add a few more, too.
 
i do want some other options to reply to denouncements. maybe 'are you SURE you want to do this?' (a threatening response - if you have the force to back it up). and perhaps 'you and whose army?' or just a yawn. if someone denounces you simply because other people have i would also like options such as 'i see you have been taken in by (original denouncer)'s lies, and it saddens me.' which could cause them to reassess relations based on character (some wont retract the denunciation no matter whether justified or not - or see retraction as sign of weakness) and disregarding another civs denouncing you in the calculation.
maybe there should be a middle stage; if you have been denounced by another civ, rather than go straight to denounce based on that as a trigger, they should go to guarded relations with a message 'so-and-so denounced you but we do not see why. in order to protect ourselves we are reconsidering all out relationships'. then they act on your behaviour over the next few turns. they could do this by checking a blank relationship table (same as the one they store with the past relationships, but as if they just met you when you were denounced). if after a set number of turns there is nothing negative in your relations with them and the world (depending on their character traits) they disregard the denounce and remove it from their relationship memory...and maybe add a 'you denounced a friend for no reason' penalty to the civ who originally denounced you!
 
Sporally said:
Oh. That reminds me. My friend usually denounces before DoW. What are your take on that matter?

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's worth doing if you have any popularity left on the world stage. Then people can join in your denouncement, which gives you a nice healthy diplomacy boost to offset your warmongering ways.
 
So that means you shouldn't do it the same turn you DoW the AI, but rather a few turns before so your friends have time to denounce aswell?

What if you attack, say Gandhi, who would never go to war? Do your friends follow you based on their personality or is the chance bigger of the dislike them on beforehand - say because og warmonger..?

@ andreafin
More options only if there would be a clear distinction between them. But I like the ideas mentioned in general.

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
 
Sporally said:
Oh. That reminds me. My friend usually denounces before DoW. What are your take on that matter?

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Denouncing , and , waiting one turn , i found : does wonders for , chain denouncing ,and , slightly helps with the hating from : other civs. I have recently learned , however , that : every DOW of any type ,and every city conquest , adds to the separate warmonger score that : dissipates (if at all) at a rate per turn too slow to actually be perceived even in marathon games (like , 300 turns for it to even budge a bit), and , the score blanket adds to civ hate no matter what , so , nothing besides : never declaring war , and , never taking a city for any reason , will : have a chance of curtailing eternal hate.
 
LoneRebel said:
Does that mean that "denounce before DoW" is not always a good idea?
Click to expand...

Its because denounce last for awhile but war may not. If your war is over but your denunciation hasn't expire, The new friends he made even after the war will hate u.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
 
It might be nice if there was an option like "If you denounce us, there will be war." Then the civ would have to decide whether to proceed with the denouncement or retract it. If it proceeds, war is automatically declared. That would have some actual teeth to it, unlike the ineffectual "You'll pay for this in time" response.
 
Every time I see Ramkhamhaeng's whiny face I keep hearing the annoying crying of Baby Mario.
 
the 'are you sure?' response leaves open the chance for them to reconsider denouncing, or retract it; if they still denounce, then you use either very well, for no action, or you will pay for this would become also a DOW.
if we had room for subtlety there could be more versions of doing nothing; 'very well' would be the 'i cant/wont do anything in response'; and perhaps 'we will remember this' meaning you cant do anything NOW but wait until later when u have trained more combat units; and a response more for other civs to consider, which would be along the lines of 'yap away little dog at your betters' (youre basically saying to other leaders that they denounced you and thats all they dare do because they cant match your power, and they arent worth your time to crush them. big dogs dont bark. perhaps there should be also a response which involves you denouncing them right back 'and we denounce your lies/betrayal. this meeting is done.'
 
Vitruvius said:
Its because denounce last for awhile but war may not. If your war is over but your denunciation hasn't expire, The new friends he made even after the war will hate u.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Noted!

Grogs said:
It might be nice if there was an option like "If you denounce us, there will be war." Then the civ would have to decide whether to proceed with the denouncement or retract it. If it proceeds, war is automatically declared. That would have some actual teeth to it, unlike the ineffectual "You'll pay for this in time" response.
Click to expand...
This is a good idea. I would really like the option. Too bad this probably never will be patched up.

Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mastrude
I'd like to play Civ V...
Replies
0
Views
353
mastrude
mastrude
M
Triple win
Replies
0
Views
248
martindo
M
foreverlost
Need help to advance to beating the AI Civs
Replies
4
Views
527
foreverlost
foreverlost
mastrude
Civ V Calculator Nerds
Replies
0
Views
344
mastrude
mastrude
R
Few questions about vox populi and more
Replies
1
Views
308
Yerltvachovicic
Yerltvachovicic
Top Bottom