War mongering penalty for not accepting peace?

feldmarshall said:

They occupied it, but did not annex it or make it their permanent territory. Hence my suggestion above, to distinguish "occupying" (which means the territory will be returned at the end of the war and no penalty if the war is "just") vs permanently "annexing" (which should be penalized). For example, if the US made West Germany its 51th state, they should get warmonger penalty for that even if Germany DoWed first.

Click to expand...

So, you're saying Napoleon surely would have, should have, received a warmonger penalty. Ok you got me. Have a nice day.

nokmirt said:

So, you're saying Napoleon surely would have, should have, received a warmonger penalty. Ok you got me. Have a nice day.

Click to expand...

What do you mean? Didn't he? He did end up with almost every other power hating and eventually DoWing him, right?

Some other examples:

• WW II: Hitler got warmonger penalty for annexing/puppeting France, and would have gotten further negative sentiment if he conquered Britain, despite technically it was France who DoWed them
• WW II: The Soviet Union got a bad reputation for annexing and puppeting much of Eastern Europe after WW II, despite them only taking them for Germany which DoWed it.
• Franco-Prussian War: France DoWed Prussia. Prussia ended up capturing Napoleon III and occupying Paris. However, after the war Prussia only annexed Alsace-Lorraine and gave Paris or any other French territory it occupied back. As for Alsace-Lorraine, the annexation was not justified by "France attacked us first", but rather by the fact that the region was populated by German-speaking people.This was controversial, even among Germans.

feldmarshall said:

What do you mean? Didn't he? He did end up with almost every other power hating and eventually DoWing him, right?

Click to expand...

Just like what I said man. Ah this warmonger crap is something new and it does not work. Bring back the old civ where I can conquer the world if I want. Yes my friend without penalties!

Maybe there could be a mod to turn this off and make the game more like, good old Civ game.

I might point feldmarshall to some Paradox game

poom3619 said:

Warmonger hating is a feature to avoid human player to easily steamroll the map. I heard a counter-argument against Just War a.k.a. Casus Belli that human player will somehow exploit this and would reduce this anti-player blobing system into nothing.

Click to expand...

I think these points are both correct.

NightflyUK said:

Now this went on for around 50 turns and by the time I was done (around early Renaissance) everyone had now seen the "potential threat of my warmongering" and was hated/denounced by everyone, embargoed at the UN and eventually had every other Civ at war with me simultaneously.

Click to expand...

Probably if you had killed Monty before the Renaissance era relations would have eased up considerably. But really, you did nothing else to earn hatred? You never denounced others? Every civ DoWed you out of the blue? Early embargo is really tough though.

Even those that I had a declaration of friendship with became hostile almost immediately so it felt that because I was at war for so long and refusing peace the hate seemed to pile up a lot quicker.

Click to expand...

Taking a city when the mouse-over says it will cause major warmonger hate -- means you will get a lot of warmonger hate -- even from your current friends. You should be able to wait some of that out. Long wars and refusing peace do not effect the hate.

I've seen the formulas for working out warmonger hate and that there's supposedly a decrease for early war but this seemed excessive with Civs like Denmark and America fearing me after only taking 3 cities.

Click to expand...

It is not taking 3 cities that causes war monger hate, it is taking the next-to-last and last cities that get you into trouble. Monty was out of the game, so why did you kill him? Try to temper warmonger hate by following up by liberating cities. It makes a huge difference.

I'm trying to work early conquest into my game to try and avoid becoming a turtle power but if this is what I'm getting in the long run it hardly seem worth it.

Click to expand...

Absolutely this is strong strategy that is desirable to work into your play. You just have to be a little bit more clever with it. Either kills civs before the renaissance era or have a path to redeem yourself. I very much struggle with early conquest myself, and who needs game-long denouncements from a civ crippled early? One thing I try to do is to save a conquered CS (or other civ) as the last city of a civ I really want out of the game. Liberating that city seems like it cancels out the warmonger hate.

poom3619 said:

Maybe there could be a mod to turn this off and make the game more like, good old Civ game.

Click to expand...

There probably are some, if you want to know which one(s), I'd recommend asking the question over in Creation & Customization.

beetle said:

It is not taking 3 cities that causes war monger hate, it is taking the next-to-last and last cities that get you into trouble. Monty was out of the game, so why did you kill him? Try to temper warmonger hate by following up by liberating cities. It makes a huge difference.

Click to expand...

More precisely the formula for taking a city is C * E/N (C a constant, E is a modifier for era that starts at 0.5 for ancient and peaks out at 1.0, and N number of cities they had right before you conquered it)
Liberating a city reduces your war monger hate by something like C.

So taking the last 3 cities in the modern era or later gives you C * 1 / 3 + C * 1 / 2 + C * 1 /1 = 11 C / 6, slightly less taking the last city of two different civs in the modern era.

What works well sometimes -- particularly if the enemy only has one city left -- is to refuse peace and just keep using their city for target practice to level-up your ranged units. Meanwhile you buy the allegiance of a CS right next to the enemy city, and the CS will capture it for you (and will always burn it down if they can.)

You never want to capture someone's last city; you want to sucker someone else into capturing it. If you actually wanted the city, you can declare war against its captor and steal it from them. (I've learned this one the hard way)

I've gotten dogpiled like once during gods n kings and that was it and I came out on top even stronger after a single naval battle because they tried to win control of a chokepoint where my citadel tore their wooden ships up.

I've never seen this example of blobbing on human player happen before. Probably because when I go on world conquering spree I have a tendency to take out the strongest AI first so there is usually never a coalition against me just victims waiting to be picked off one by one.