You are a warmonger, you damn... Computer!

I love to play CivV. I am not a good player (just entering Emperor) but I can't complain about the game - it has its downs, for sure, but there is just so many more ups that Fireaxis deserves a prize for keeping getting better on already awesome games.

One of my favorite aspects is the Diplomacy. It is a little one-dimensional at times, but the same game with the same civilizations and map can become completely different based on how you approach Diplomacy.

Since I'm an Instigator (go Scorp!) at heart, I like to befriend Civilizations and almost always accept their 'let's smash $Civ?'.

Last night I was playing at a small islands map and after realizing the AI isn't very smart around boats, I thought it would be cool if WE could call the AI a warmonger when he destroys someone's last city. I'm not sure if Denouncing after said takeover is enough to make all the other civs go 'Oh, he is a damn warmonger!' or not, but I believe it doesn't.

What you guys think? People with a deeper knowledge of the game could you please shed some light here?

The AI makes its own warmonger/not warmonger calculations on the other civs. Civs form their opinions but you can start a chain denouncement on an AI that'll make the other AI's like the guy even less. If Greece is being an unlikable jerk then denouncing Alex will encourage the other AI's to gang up on him because they'll know you've got their support.

It can also make them like you more on an "enemy of my enemy" basis. Ganging up on the bad guy is one of the best ways to secure solid diplomacy in Civ (the other being the warmonger's best friend).

If a civ destroys another civ he will already be hated directly by every other civ, there is no need to give humans a "secondary denouncement".

The same code controls the weighting of approaches (diplo stances) for ALL civilizations, human or AI, with same modifiers, factors, etc, with very few exceptions (one that I can remember is, for example, that the code assigns an arbitrary 100% chance of a human using its nuclear arsenal when calculating chances of going into AFRAID stance, or going to war). But almost completely, it's the same code without human vs AI distinction.

Aristos said:

The same code controls the weighting of approaches (diplo stances) for ALL civilizations, human or AI, with same modifiers, factors, etc, with very few exceptions (one that I can remember is, for example, that the code assigns an arbitrary 100% chance of a human using its nuclear arsenal when calculating chances of going into AFRAID stance, or going to war). But almost completely, it's the same code without human vs AI distinction.

Click to expand...

That's good to know. Important information.

goremand said:

If a civ destroys another civ he will already be hated directly by every other civ, there is no need to give humans a "secondary denouncement".

Click to expand...

Yeah but I never said about destruction anyway.
Since you can't see if a Civ considers tthe other a Warmonger (you can know if they have denounced though), I was curious to know if there was a more plain way to 'guess' it.
They can ask you to denounce another guy, and if you deny, they go ahead and denounce you, that's why I asked what people thought about that.

Arachnofiend said:

It can also make them like you more on an "enemy of my enemy" basis. Ganging up on the bad guy is one of the best ways to secure solid diplomacy in Civ (the other being the warmonger's best friend).

Click to expand...

I didn't know you could gang up like that. If they are already friends, things get problematic, right?
In my games (was on King until recently, not much experience in Emperor yet) they are usually very pacific towards each other, and I would like a little bit more action in my games. haha
Since I play on Epic speed, a couple of hundred of years can go without a hiccup, and it is boring sometimes.


Thanks guys, those were quick and helpful.

bane_ said:

In my games (was on King until recently, not much experience in Emperor yet) they are usually very pacific towards each other, and I would like a little bit more action in my games. haha
Since I play on Epic speed, a couple of hundred of years can go without a hiccup, and it is boring sometimes.

Click to expand...

Land Dispute levels are an important part of diplo AI calculations. In other words, play with less room per civ; standard size maps with normal amounts of water (avoid archis like hell) usually are a very good expansion room limiter, but if you like large maps, either increase the MIN_CITY_RANGE value to at least 4 (if not 5), or put in more civs (from the default 10 to 12-14).

Play with 22 Civs on a standard or large map.

Aristos said:

Land Dispute levels are an important part of diplo AI calculations. In other words, play with less room per civ; standard size maps with normal amounts of water (avoid archis like hell) usually are a very good expansion room limiter, but if you like large maps, either increase the MIN_CITY_RANGE value to at least 4 (if not 5), or put in more civs (from the default 10 to 12-14).

Click to expand...

How do I do that?

MerchantCo said:

Play with 22 Civs on a standard or large map.

Click to expand...

Will do! Right after I get my ass handed to me when my actual game is over.

bane_ said:

How do I do that?

Click to expand...

GlobalDefines.xml

or use some kind of minimod that includes that variable (I do that).