Apostolic question: elegible infidels?

[lilnev]

Being on the wrong end of a holy dogpile is just about the worst thing that can happen in a game of civ. So I need to know, who can and who can't be the target of a "declare war on the infidel" resolution. In particular:

A civ with a different state religion, but the AP religion present in a few cities (thus a voting member but not a full member). My guess is they can't be targetted, as a "yes" vote would have them declaring against themselves....

A civ with No State Religion, and no cities with the AP religion.

Anyone know?

thanks,
lilnev

 

[KMadCandy]

the civilopedia says that one of the resolutions is "Declare War: Vote to have all members declare war on a voting member, or to declare war on a non-member already at war with any full member. Full members cannot be declared on in this manner."

in my current game, i had the option to start a holy war vs. Huayna, a non-member, since full member Boudica was already at war with him. so the non-member, no cities with AP religion is definitely an infidel that can be targetted.

reading that civopedia text it seems to say that if a voting member and a full member are already at war, then a vote can happen for all members to go to war with the voting member. i don't remember if that's come up in my games so i can't swear from experience, just from looking it up.

i'd not count on your logic My guess is they can't be targetted, as a "yes" vote would have them declaring against themselves...." would mean it can't happen because it wouldn't make sense, because, well, this is civ4 where not everything makes sense

 

[lilnev]

So full members are always safe, voting members are never safe (but by definition they have the option of adopting the AP religion and becoming a full member), and non-members are safe as long as they're not already at war with a full member? But a voting member who is targeted could choose the Defy option, and any defiance causes the vote to fail, so he could choose to deal with some unhappiness rather than get dogpiled....

peace,
lilnev

 

[KMadCandy]

or maybe not...

i tested it. in this game, HC was the only one without any buddhist cities. i went into WB, gave him buddhism in one city, so now he's a voting member, but he did not convert. in WB i had Miss B declare war on him again. i then hit shift enter a bunch of times until a vote came up to see what options i'd get. during that time, Wang Kon offered me a DP, i declined, and the very next turn he declared war on HC. ummmm, wang honey, that would have cancelled the DP ya know?

first things first ... during the shift-entering i got a great random event, +1 hammer to the forge in my capital, that i probably won't get when i go back and really play, so you owe me one .

the results ...

the votes i could pick were:


there's no option there for everybody to pile up on HC, who is now a voting member. there definitely was an option "declare war on Huayna Capac" back when he was a non-member during the first war Miss B declared on him.

i don't think that the fact i WB'd the declaration of war futzed with the results, because in between that time and the turn i could call a vote, Wang declared on his own, without any WB-enhancement from me. but i include the info about how i set it all up in case that does alter the results in any way.

the wording in any event is at the very least confusing. "stop the war against Wang Kon" ... this is a war he declared maybe 3 turns ago. i'd not exactly call that a war of aggression some big meanie is fighting against him *boggle*. and the civilopedia made me expect to see "everybody pile up on good ole' punching bag HC" pop up as a voting option, but it ain't there.

i suppose it could matter whether the wicked heathen declared on the poor innocent true believer vs the true believer declared on the heathen? that's not mentioned anywhere in the pedia tho. i'm actually not sure who i had declare the war in my testing, and since i did it in WB the event log doesn't have a record of it, it was just magic.