Amarr Emperor
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2013
- Messages
- 64
You should never have kids, sir.
Perhaps this can shead some lights on all the anti-warmonger feelings out there
- Thread starter Amarr Emperor
- Start date
You should never have kids, sir.
Polisurgist
King
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 630
This is a much more concise way of stating that you have no idea how the warmonger penalty works than your original post, so...progress?
Amarr Emperor
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2013
- Messages
- 64
facepalm. not being a warmonger does not mean no knowledge of warmonger mechanics. Bet I know more than you do
Securion
Civ Veteran
tldr
I wage war if I need to. Like I build Museums if I need to, or trade for resources, or whatever in the game.
I wage war if I need to. Like I build Museums if I need to, or trade for resources, or whatever in the game.
Polisurgist
King
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 630
joshua43214
King
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 985
This is actually a really big deal, and some of you folks should pay better attention to it.
Shaka, Attila, the Ottomans,and Assyria very often only make a 2 city empire and set out to expand by conquering. You simply can't keep up with their unit spam to the point where you can make peace on high difficulty.
The only way to get peace in this situation is to take one of their cities - preferably their cap.
The new "improved" penalty that some of you seem to think is so nice, destroys your game when you fight back and capture a city when they only have 2 cities to begin with. I actually fought an ongoing war with the Ottomans for over 200 turns because I could not make a huge enough army and still focus on science.
Like I said in my previous post - get your dirty little moralistic paws off my game, we can police ourselves just fine
Amarr Emperor
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2013
- Messages
- 64
Venice declares war on you, kills everything you own, you fight back, take capital? Y/N
Polisurgist
King
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 630
Y: take a severe warmonger penalty, mitigated among your declared friends and those also at war with Venice.
N: you've razed all his improvements, plundered his trade routes and destroyed all his units. Venice, who relies on his economy, will need to offer you a substantial portion of his now greatly diminshed resources for a ten-turn respite. You take no warmonger penalty for any of this.
Amarr Emperor
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2013
- Messages
- 64
Egypt 1 city wonder whores over 20 wonders. Take capital? Y/N
Arachnofiend
Perturbed Pugilist
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,950
Take the city, people generally hate you for it but with all of the goodies you just got you probably don't need them anymore.
Just FYI, I recently had a Shoshone game with some very successful early warmongering. I had DoF's and trade deals with multiple civs up until I had wiped out a third leader, which I would consider entirely reasonable if not somewhat generous on their part since it should have been obvious I was going to kill everyone by the time I wiped out the second. The multi-dow didn't come until I had wiped out a fourth, and by this point my economy was in perfect condition due to such lucrative conquering and I didn't need the other major civs to survive.
The trick is Commerce.
N: You bribe one of his bigger neighbors to declare war. You join and soften Egypt up for the AI attacker, but you let him take the city. He will pay the severe diplo price for it. You then denounce him with the other AI. You DoW the new owner and launch your attack on Memphis. It isn't his only city and this isn't an early era, the map is full of cities. You get the Egyptian capital and 20 Wonders with only a minor warmonger penalty.
I've done something fairly similar in a recent game, got Darius to take William's last two cities with a little help to destroy the tiles and defenses of the last one for him, and Darius got the severe warmonger penalty for wiping out William while I got nothing. I joined the concert of denouncements against Darius, later bribed a few AI to declare war on him and joined them and took back William's former city, now one of many Persian cities, for a minor diplo hit. I was finally the master of my continent, owning all 6 of William's cities, and still well-liked by most. Only Austria got pissed at me, but she didn't like me anyway.
This is what I do as well... except that I make sure the person I bribed took some useless cities I can liberate to mitigate the penalty.
If not, you can always get it in a trade/peace deal.
As Sun Tzu once said: "kill with a borrowed dagger".
if so, you really have nothing to fear from just two cities; how can you not keep up with only two cities? (and remind me the last time Shaka only made two on deity... I'm pretty sure he's the biggest city spammer out there) If they have two, then pillage all their tiles and gain one through a peace deal instead... and then bribe another civ to DoW them and wipe them out, denounce that civ and gain friends, then liberate that city, then use the resurrected leader as a patsy for the rest of the game, drawing fire from whoever you want hated by the rest of the world, then liberating them over and over.
Yep, seems the OP wants to have his cake and eat it too...
joshua43214
King
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 985
If they have two, then pillage all their tiles and gain one through a peace deal instead... and then bribe another civ to DoW them and wipe them out, denounce that civ and gain friends, then liberate that city, then use the resurrected leader as a patsy for the rest of the game, drawing fire from whoever you want hated by the rest of the world, then liberating them over and over.
Sure, any moron with 4 cities can "keep up."
Why are you going along with this whole thing? He DoW's, you kill him - simple. Why do you think its a good idea to get into some huge diplomatic mess to deal with him? Seriously, the OP is dead on right about this being a "moral" issue for some players.
I get DoW'd, I want a city in recompense for having to deal with it. Alternately, I had a bad week, and I want to destroy the world, not deal with a bunch of badly scripted warmonger penalty.
Then you're doing it wrong. In my current game, I eliminated an empire and can still conduct diplomacy. Here's how:
After my initial early wars, I waited for my warmonger penalty to die down a bit ("early concerns" completely gone from Incas/England/Morocco/Persia) I DoWed Siam and took their only remaining city - Sukhothai - at EXTREME warmonger penalty in Classical Era. Was immediately denounced by England and Persia (who I denounced right back since Darius had DoWed more than anyone else in the current game, the "I hate warmongers" hypocrite!, and Elizabeth is just a %&#%). All but Inca listed a penalty about my "potential threat" as a warmonger... Inca still only had "early concerns".
Inca had been attacked by both England and Persia, so I hoped denouncing those two would help get Inca on my side... I also decided to GIVE him a surplus luxury I had (got 3 Salt from Sukhothai, so I just gave him one for 60 turns). He remained Neutral instead of Guarded like the other three.
Morocco denounced me about half a dozen turns later, but I chose not to denounce in response - despite the fact he was annoying the bejeebus out of me with his missionary spam on my CS allies. Instead, I bribed Persia (at a cost since he was Guarded, but I had a strong enough empire to bear that cost for 60 turns) to attack Morocco.
Persia went rabid and ravaged Morocco down to 1 city (from 5). England denounced Persia as did the Inca. Then the Inca approached me to join a war against Persia. I requested 10 turns (partly because I was busy shuffling missionaries to undo Morocco's damage while Persia gave me a reprieve and secondly because I was curious if Persia would elimate him).
The Inca jumped the gun and started a war with Persia after about 5-6 turns and immediately lost a city. Darius made peace with Morocco before taking their last city and then my time to join came. I did. First thing I did was liberate two Incan cities (one Inca lost a few wars ago the other the one they just lost) both Minor liberation bonuses. Over the next two turns Inca proposed DoF then Open Borders and were Friendly with no negative modifiers.
My next action was to liberate one of Morocco's cities (at MAJOR liberation bonus). Now I'm in DoF with Open Borders with Morocco... and the warmongering penalty disappeared from England (but I still have enough negative modifiers to remain Guarded with her since I told her to "stuff it" a few times when she made requests regarding CS, where I settle, etc) and even Darius merely dropped to "early concerns".
Between the Inca, myself and several allied CS, we Ravaged Darius down from the number two contender to 3 measly cities (he even gave me his highest Pop city when begging me for peace - a mistake on my part since I dropped to -23 Happiness and had to spend my entire amassed fortune allying with every CS with different luxuries to manage it down to where it'd be -9 by next turn to avoid uprisings).
Warmongering penalties completely gone for the two civs I wanted as allies and I've had plenty of enjoyable action conquering cities, slaughtering units and leaving the landscape dotted with city ruins and pillaged improvements.
You aren't completely hosed diplomatically even if you eliminate a civ entirely from the game if you put forth some effort to repair relations/do damage control.
I now have a solid alliance with Morocco/Inca and have established England and Persia as the "evil empires" despite the fact I'm the only one who's eliminated anyone from the game. Even did so much damage to Persia that England smelled blood and DoWed him to take one of his cities close to her lands, so they won't be uniting against us anytime soon.
And to think, I still have 4 more civs to meet when I get caravels...
Nah, any moron with 2-3 cities can usually defend if not caught unprepared... (if AI Shaka has only 2 cities by the time Impis come out, then he's been having a bad game and ran out of expansion spots)
Well, I guess it's personal preference, but I'd rather "kill" someone indirectly, or rather leave them barely alive so I can enjoy using them to my advantage
after all, just rushing in and putting them out of their misery is too crude and brainless for my tastes, I need something more cunning, more devious... don't you find that torturing someone and have them serve your purposes is way more satisfying that wiping them out?And really if you had a bad week and want to destroy everyone directly without any need for insidious plots, then just have the "always war" option on
Here you don't have to worry about lack of trade deals or RAs and just go to town with your troops.Willy forward settles me on a fantastic location after offering me a DoF? I smile. Then, unbeknownst to him I bribed Boudicca to Dow him... then I took the city from her and returned some workers to him... he is grateful and becomes my "victim" for the whole game, and I get to keep the city. MWAHAHAHHA to me, THAT is the beauty of civ right there.
Wodan
Deity
According to some, I think you're supposed to ally with another AI, destroy all the units of the 2-city warmonger, and let your ally take their cities.
Do I have it right?
NASAROG
Prince
There is one thing I absolutely hate about this iteration of CIV, DIPLOMACY!!! I hate it. I'm an isolationist. I prefer to be left alone. To give me a chance to enjoy the game, I play on islands. This gives me a chance to play on harder difficulties against the aggressive A.I.
It's what I did as well, except I didn't need it to clean the slate after taking Darius's city as I had enough a good reputation to bear the minor diplo hit for that without effects. I waited and rather liberated William's only off-shore city from Suleiman when I decided to take his capital.
But I concur that liberating a minor city from your target or manage to get the last city in a peace deal is even better (and probably what the true gentleman warmonger would do).
But I had a great deal of allies who didn't mind modest warmongering in that game, that left me more leeway.
What I find especially powerful in that warmongering play style is getting all those cities with the buildings intact and all the original population.
Similar threads
