4 crucial Warmonger questions

Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
938
Location
New York
Not sure if this has been answered, but here goes...

Ok. We all know that in the current iteration of CIV, taking over ONE city will begin a cascade of denouncements for being a warmonger, which is something any smart player will avoid. I have four questions regarding this system:

  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with CIV B. I declare war on HIM and take over his cities. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they know of my past warmongering?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with CIV B. He declared war on ME but then I took over his cities. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they know of my past warmongering?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with both CIV B and CIV C. I declare war on CIV B and take over his cities, making CIV C denounce me and probably hate me for the rest of the game. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they somehow know of my past warmongering due to the existence of CIV C (aka, the witness civ)?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with both CIV B and CIV C. They BOTH declare war on me, but I take over his CIV B's cities, making CIV C denounce me and probably hate me for the rest of the game. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, they somehow know of my past warmongering due to the existence of CIV C (aka, the witness civ) even though he was also at war with me?
 
I'm not an expert, but due to viewing similar prior discussions on these message boards, I believe the answers are...

No
No
Yes
Yes
 
The answer is NO to everything. The warmonger score is added to each AI civ when a players make a city conquest or YOU declare war. Then this bonus is applied to every civ YOU know, doesn't matter if you have common known civs with others, you must know that civ directly to get that warmonger score.

The best option is to kill everyone in sight before knowing other players. While they will not get warmoner hate against you, you will be perma-denounced by your neighbors and is easy your neighbors became friends with civs far away, THEN you get a opinion hit in such civs because a friend of them have denounced you.
 
I'm not an expert, but due to viewing similar prior discussions on these message boards, I believe the answers are...

No
No
Yes
Yes
As a recent asker of these sort of questions and a receiver of the answers, subsequently tested in games.
I will add that in case of the two later questions, later met civs will know of the denouncements (while they are in effect) but not the cause.

One question for me remains unanswered:
There appears from discussion an early warmongers penalty separate from and additional to the DOW and city taking penalties.
Is this the case?
And if so, when is it safe to DOW and only get the DOW pentaly not the extra one?


cheers
John
 
One question for me remains unanswered:
There appears from discussion an early warmongers penalty separate from and additional to the DOW and city taking penalties.
Is this the case?
And if so, when is it safe to DOW and only get the DOW pentaly not the extra one?

There's no "early" penalty, and no simple answer to your question. It will vary a lot based on factors like which Civs are in the game and how many there are, the map size, the leve you play on.

The game takes into account to calculate things the estimated # of cities that fit on your map size vs. the # of cities currently founded (incl. CS). If you have 5 civs and 24 CS on a small map (thus 29 out of the estimated 52 cities founded by turn 2), the warmongering penalties on turn 2 will already be much lower than if you have the same set up on a huge map.

The difficulty level influences things a lot: on Deity the AI will expand fast, and thus the warmongering penalties decrease much faster than on Prince where often the AI will take forever to gain the happiness to expand and will stick to 3-4 cities for most of the game. On a huge map, that can mean heavy warmongering penalties, since only a small percentage of the estimated total cities that could fit on the map ever get settled.

Which Civs are present, and how many there are, also influence this. If you have Hiawatha nearby, not only the total of cities founded will rise faster, but attacking him, who has a lot of cities early on, will be less costly than if you have a bunch of Civs playing a Tall game.

Another factor: each leader has a WarmongerHate level which modulates the raw Warmongering Amount you get (the formula for the raw Amount is (1000 * Est. number of cities) / Real number of settled cities = Warmonger Amount. This is modulated by WarmongerHate level and give the final penalty you get from each ruler that know you. Just one denouncement is much higher than a minor warmonger penalty.

If you have a lot of Civs with a low WarmongerHate (ie: they tolerate some warmongering) in your game, or spawn near leaders will low ones, the warmonger penalty will not be as bad - it will be as high, but will have a much lower impact on diplomacy. If you spawn near Bismarck and Suleiman and have a very good relationship with one of them, and bring him to attack the other with you (which halves any penalty), you can probably seize some cities without destroying your friendship with your ally (Bismarck also completely forgives some DoWs - giving you a neutral/gray modifier for that). If however you spawn near Maria Theresa, who hates warmongers, she'll likely hate you the whole game if you take even one city from your aggressive neighbor very early (you need to be stronger than her to shut her up, she won't dare denounce you then).

The very general rule is that the impact on diplomacy is much lower the closer you get to a fully settled map (could be in the Renaissance in some games, only much later in others, or much earlier than this on the highest levels if the map isn't huge), but the other factors all enter into play and make it vary from game to game.
 
Not sure if this has been answered, but here goes...

Ok. We all know that in the current iteration of CIV, taking over ONE city will begin a cascade of denouncements for being a warmonger, which is something any smart player will avoid. I have four questions regarding this system:

  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with CIV B. I declare war on HIM and take over his cities. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they know of my past warmongering?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with CIV B. He declared war on ME but then I took over his cities. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they know of my past warmongering?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with both CIV B and CIV C. I declare war on CIV B and take over his cities, making CIV C denounce me and probably hate me for the rest of the game. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, will they somehow know of my past warmongering due to the existence of CIV C (aka, the witness civ)?
  • I am playing as CIV A on an isolated island with both CIV B and CIV C. They BOTH declare war on me, but I take over his CIV B's cities, making CIV C denounce me and probably hate me for the rest of the game. Later in the game, when I encounter the other CIVS, they somehow know of my past warmongering due to the existence of CIV C (aka, the witness civ) even though he was also at war with me?

  • No
  • No
  • No
  • No
The last two are a bit of a trick, though, since anyone who meets you later may well know about the denunciations, which can often lead to its own diplomatic problems.
 
Thank you EK, you have answered my question.

There is no seperate early warmonger penalty.
The taking of cities penalty is higher earlier on, because the total number of cities on themap is less and your opponent will have less both factors in determing base penatly adjusted for the each civs warmonger hate/ tolerance.
cheers
John
 
As several people have mentioned, the answers to all four questions is "No," with the caveat that a denunciation from a civ which still exists will be known to your new acquaintances (they just won't know the reason for the denunciation.)

I would also add that, if you break a Declaration of Friendship with country B or country C, even though you kill them both before meeting any other civs, each and every new acquaintance will mysteriously know of your perfidy.
 
Interesting stuff. This is good to know.

Does anyone have a link to a chart somewhere that shows each leader's warmonger hate level?
 
Thanks for the heads-up. I want to try a new game as an early warmongerer (either Assyria or The Huns) and try to start on a small continent with 2 Civs. My goal is to wipe them out by late Classical age, build up my island empire during Medieval and then meet other civs in Renaissance. Hopefully, if I get rid of them quickly enough, the other Civs will like me for who I am (a closet warmongerer lol).
 
That used to be possible in civ 4 where that is the early rush of a civilization where other civilizations didn't know and you didn't receive the "You declared war on our friend." penalty. However, in civ 5, whenever you conquer a city, there is a warning before you capture a city where it'll tell you whether you get a warmongering penalty. Whether it is a major warmongering bonus or a minor warmongering bonus depending on the city.
 
That used to be possible in civ 4 where that is the early rush of a civilization where other civilizations didn't know and you didn't receive the "You declared war on our friend." penalty. However, in civ 5, whenever you conquer a city, there is a warning before you capture a city where it'll tell you whether you get a warmongering penalty. Whether it is a major warmongering bonus or a minor warmongering bonus depending on the city.

The penalties apply only to the Civs you've already met. You meet a Civ one turn after you captured a city and they won't know.

What can affect them, though, is if you get denounced as a result of warmongering (or anything else beside). The denouncement will affect their view of you until it's no longer in effect (but they won't know why, so they won't add any warmongering penalty to that), and when you meet a new Civ you don't yet have positive relation modifiers to mitigate the denouncement, so this might affect you very badly (not getting deals with the new Civ, or even get denounced early), thus the idea of the previous poster to wipe out all civs on his continent/island before he meets anyone else. Denouncements made by dead Civs don't affect anyone.

For e.g. I think the devs had in mind the Mongols could now be played this way (which will work only on specific maps, and it wouldn't be an easy strategy to play) and that isn't far from the historical Civ (early rush of conquest to expand, followed by peace and stability, and encouraging foreign friendships and trade. It's wide, with settling as much and early conquest instead):

Small continents might work best as on archipelago the risk is high to have a lot of neighbors reachable by trireme and scouts than can cross one tile of water to you as early as Optics:

- You don't explore by sea early on. You want to avoid discovering off continent neighbors early. If your neighbors have triremes, you kill those ships to stop them from exploring. Better yet, you deal with their coastal cities as a priority and raze them. No one without Optics at worse and maybe Astronomy if you're lucky will be able to discover you before you want to be discovered.

- You start conquering early (also getting cities via peace treaties to accelerate matters), favoring cities with unique luxuries, razing those that bring nothing at this point (you can resettle there later once you control the land and have raised your happiness enough) never neglecting to upgrade luxuries. You send TR to CS for gold, or you bully them. You build all happiness buildings or pick happiness beliefs.

- If you have one neighbor to conquer, you finish him off. If you've got 2-3, you try to finish at least two off if they denounced you (to avoid 2 denouncers influencing one another and creating a loop of denouncements), or you get powerful enough to intimidate them so they won't dare denounce you a second time (their first denouncement should stop having effects by the time you'll explore and discover other Civs). This way your early warmongering won't have any lasting diplo effect. You can conquer or not the city states nearby, depending if you need them more as allies and for TR than you might benefit from the cities (you can even keep them for last, if coastal they may become your coastal cities/trade hubs when you're ready to open up to the world). You can very well get screwed if you have many other Civs than can reach you very early, then you have to adapt and change strategy depending on when it happened and how bad your diplo is.

Once (if!) your "big empire" is on the tracks, you assign your caravans internally for growth, start catching up on infrastucture you neglected in favor of units to conquer, start exploration, try to meet many CS and Civs, get your economy in better shape and start increasing your happiness with trade deals (you should have many extra resources), alliances with Mercantile CS, finish to settle your land. Then you switch to a peaceful wide game, or for a long-ish peace while you slowly prepare to launch a Domination campaign.
 
Thanks for the heads-up. I want to try a new game as an early warmongerer (either Assyria or The Huns) and try to start on a small continent with 2 Civs. My goal is to wipe them out by late Classical age, build up my island empire during Medieval and then meet other civs in Renaissance. Hopefully, if I get rid of them quickly enough, the other Civs will like me for who I am (a closet warmongerer lol).

I did exactly (or almost exactly) this as Assyria, starting on a continent with Poland, Brazil and Egypt. Took out Poland first because they're the biggest pain about warmongering, but managed to own the continent entirely before receiving any visitors from the west.
 
It's possible for Shaka to be friends with other civs. In a recent game Shaka did all his conquering very early on. Later on when he asked for a DOF and I said yes I expected the usual "don't get too close, or else.." reply but instead I got "glad to see you're friends with Shaka...." reply from a few civs......

You can get away with early warmongering if you haven't met anyone yet(except your victim).
 
I tried this a couple times; both times I was on a continent with one other civ and two CSs. Wiped everyone out and no one ever knew it happened :mischief:
 
For three and four, if you're not planning on wiping out the other civ who witnessed your warmongering, you may need to make friends with the other civs quick before a chain denouncement starts. You probably can't make friends with everyone immediately, but at least you'll have people to have your back to counter the other. Alternatively, you could bait your enemy into taking a couple of cities, especially your allied city states. That would surely give them the hate they (don't) deserve.
 
  • No
  • No
  • No
  • No
The last two are a bit of a trick, though, since anyone who meets you later may well know about the denunciations, which can often lead to its own diplomatic problems.
This is the most correct answer based on my knowledge also.

It should be added that civs not *only* determine warmonger hate based on the score you earn from DoW and capturing cities, but also by the percentage of total civs on map you have eradicated. If you have terminated 25 % (+/- 50% based on third party's warmonger tolerance) of civs you will get a SEVERE warmonger penalty, and if you have terminated 40 % (+/- 50 %) you will get a CRITICAL warmonger penalty. This penalty is applied no matter whether contact was established at the time the deed was done or not.


It should also be mention that from my knowledge of the game code, the +/-50% based on warmonger tolerance is NOT applied to the penalty you get from capturing cities etc. but only applies to the number of civs you need to kill to get the permanent penalty. However, this might be done in a part of the code I don't know of, so I might be mistaken on this.
 
I have a question that i think fits here, i'm playing continents with Indonesia, there are 2 continents with 5 civs each, i'm ahead in tech so i already met everyone but nobody else has caravels, if i DoW a civ from my continet will the leaders from the other continent know? (sorry my english is bad i hope this makes sense :()
 
I have a question that i think fits here, i'm playing continents with Indonesia, there are 2 continents with 5 civs each, i'm ahead in tech so i already met everyone but nobody else has caravels, if i DoW a civ from my continet will the leaders from the other continent know? (sorry my english is bad i hope this makes sense :()

I suspect in your situation they wouldn't know about your warmongering, at least the human player has no idea if for e.g. Rome that he's met is or isn't at war with the civs he hasn't met. I guess it's the same rule for the AI. But I've never been in this exact situation before, so I'm not sure.

Beware, though. If you get yourself denounced by your neighbor(s) and the denouncement(s) has not expired by the time the two continents meet, the effects of those denouncements will apply. You could go from being friendly with the other continent to suddenly losing all of them as friends.
 
Top Bottom