It annoys me to no end...

[dthompson32]

Poca plops one of his super land grabbing cities right next to my capital, then on the next turn I put a city sort of in his general direction. Next turn he pops up all mad at me for settling in his lands.

I really want an option that I can tell the other civs, "if you settle anywhere near my capital, I will leave all of your cities as smoking ruins."

 

[Arachnofiend]

That option exists. You can go to the leader screen and tell them to stop settling near you.

 

[Guandao]

I would like to see a picture please

 

[Naudilent]

Does a civ ever apologize for settling too close? They always just laugh and insult my diplomatic skills then get mad over it.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

If you have a military strong enough to punish them for it, they will promise to stop.

 

[cpm4001]

...why don't you just kill him? Rather than threaten to reduce his cities to smoking rubble, go ahead and do it!

 

[reddishrecue]

Keep an expansion promise.

 

[joshua43214]

...why don't you just kill him? Rather than threaten to reduce his cities to smoking rubble, go ahead and do it!

Warmonger Penalty...

You know, the one that every one thinks is so wonderful...

 

[joncnunn]

That option exists. You can go to the leader screen and tell them to stop settling near you.

It exists, (and you can even do it before they settle); but the AI will settle the site anyway even if it says it won't.
What you have to do in early game if you really don't want an AI settling too close is have military units guarding your next city sites and DOW a settler that gets too close; enslaving into a worker. Later in the game after there's a lot fewer tiles in which its possible to plant a city you can just plant any unit in the few tiles left in which a city is allowed.

The other thing to do is don't share your embassy before you've finished founding your first ring of cities with any AI other than those you are positive have already seen your capital. AI won't send a settler to a tile it hasn't seen yet, but an embassy gives them free visibility to how great a location your capital is. There's no real point in establishing ancient era embassies anyway other than that tile visibility. It's not until much later that AI would have cash for you to sell things to via DOF / RAs can be signed anyway.

 

[Vitruvius]

When dealing with these expansionist neighbours, or any guy who went liberty tree. Declare war at the very beginning and steal a worker. And dont ever make peace. Keep a look out on the area around you that you want to claim and dont let him send settlers over. The reason you want to declare war on him asap and dont make peace is because 1. He hasnt met many other people yet and the penalty will wear off with the people he has met after awhile. 2. You dont have to declare war again if you have to in the future and avoid the penalty, you can keep killing his units and settlers with no one else knowing.. 4. You slowed him down with worker steal. 5. You can still make friends with his friends even when you are at war. 6. Not making peace prevents him from denouncing you.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[Babri]

Warmonger Penalty...

You know, the one that every one thinks is so wonderful...

Destroy his army & threat his capital. Your opponent will automatically surrender his city to you.

 

[joshua43214]

Destroy his army & threat his capital. Your opponent will automatically surrender his city to you.

this will work maybe 25% of the time on high difficulty. I can't count the number of times I have done exactly this against Greece, Siam, Ottomans, Shoshone, and others and have them still demand all my resources and my cities. Some civs just never surrender...

 

[Novalia]

It's cuz your army is <snip>.

Moderator Action: Inappropriate language removed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Babri]

this will work maybe 25% of the time on high difficulty. I can't count the number of times I have done exactly this against Greece, Siam, Ottomans, Shoshone, and others and have them still demand all my resources and my cities. Some civs just never surrender...

This definitely works on King/Emperor,not sure about immortal & deity. The key is that you need to have one of the largest armies among all civs + you should not be labeled as a warmonger. Once declared a warmonger, civs would prefer dying than giving up to your demands.

When the 'I am staring in defeat' dialogue starts on leader screen they generally accept your demands. You need to beat their army plus pillage tiles or attack their cities a bit. In extreme cases civs would refuse but when their city goes in red health they'll give it up to you.

 

[joshua43214]

This definitely works on King/Emperor,not sure about immortal & deity. The key is that you need to have one of the largest armies among all civs + you should not be labeled as a warmonger. Once declared a warmonger, civs would prefer dying than giving up to your demands.

When the 'I am staring in defeat' dialogue starts on leader screen they generally accept your demands. You need to beat their army plus pillage tiles or attack their cities a bit. In extreme cases civs would refuse but when their city goes in red health they'll give it up to you.

I have seen city states with larger armies than me on Deity even when I play domination. Getting one of the largest armies on even Immortal will bankrupt you in a heart beat, and its just not possible on Deity. In one game I had a war against the Ottomans, I pillaged every tile in his empire, had all 4 of his cities at 0 hit points, and completely destroyed his army. He still was demanding all my lux's and cities. I have similar experience against some of the other AI's as well.

 

[Socratatus]

That option exists. You can go to the leader screen and tell them to stop settling near you.

Like she said.

Then if they say `No way`, go and attack.

 

[Makavcio]

It exists, (and you can even do it before they settle); but the AI will settle the site anyway even if it says it won't.

I keep seeing this over and over again and it's simply completely untrue.

When you demand something from AI, it weights its option. If they dislike you, they will always refuse. If they specialize in something and you want them to stop it, they will refuse. If they badly need something and you want to deny it to them, they will also refuse. These are straightforward situations.

More often than not AI civs agree to stop doing whatever they were doing that upset you.
They will stay true if:
1. That action was not vital to their interests;
2. They like you well enough;
3. They are not backstabby-pants.
(pure speculation: 4. You are intimidating enough.)
Many a time have I demanded from a tall-builder not to settle my lands and his settler pranced away. In most cases, these were Persians or the Hindu.

Keep in mind that religion is an exception here. Every convert is already a hostile action, so you know that they either like you but little, or they are planning to backstab you.


EDIT:
One more thing.
AI sees such demands as a grave insult. If they were neutral towards you or only somewhat friendly, in the long run, it can be a better idea just to kill the settler and let them forget about your little skirmish. Paradoxically, AI tends to be more willing to forgive a war than such demand.

 

[headcase]

This is where a simple Casus Belli system would be useful. Neither human nor AI should suffer as much a warmonger penalty when the civ they're fighting against settled near their capital.

It doesn't even have to be something you specify. The warmonger warning window could just automatically subtract warmonger hate for certain things:
- they settled near you (more hate discounted according to how close to your capital and how many cities)
- They converted a city when you have your own religion (this discount should be minor in comparison to "settled near us").
- Warmonger hate already existing on the civ being attacked
- etc

 

[Quineloe]

this will work maybe 25% of the time on high difficulty. I can't count the number of times I have done exactly this against Greece, Siam, Ottomans, Shoshone, and others and have them still demand all my resources and my cities. Some civs just never surrender...

Augustus offered 4 of his remaining 5 cities last night when my Panzer army had surrounded Rome and knocked it down to 50% hitpoints, Immortal difficulty.

I think I had around 20 Panzers, 4 artillery and 2 machine guns with maybe half a dozen infantry back home. Definitely not the largest army on the map.


In an unrelated, equally important question: If someone declares war on you, can I take cities of his when he begs for peace and therefore clean up territory without suffering any warmonger penalty?

 

[joshua43214]

Augustus offered 4 of his remaining 5 cities last night when my Panzer army had surrounded Rome and knocked it down to 50% hitpoints, Immortal difficulty.

I think I had around 20 Panzers, 4 artillery and 2 machine guns with maybe half a dozen infantry back home. Definitely not the largest army on the map.


In an unrelated, equally important question: If someone declares war on you, can I take cities of his when he begs for peace and therefore clean up territory without suffering any warmonger penalty?

20 Panzers?!?
Not counting aircraft, this would be the total size of my endgame army if I was steamrolling a domination victory (2 armies composed of ~6 arty, 2 mounted, ~3 range each). Why would you possible want to pay the upkeep on such a huge army if not going domination? And why would you want 4 expo's when you want his cap if going domination?

My point stands, you need a stupidly huge army to get the AI to cave in. 32 units just to get the AI to surrender is so massively wasteful of hammer and gpt it is crazy.