A moderate warmonger penalty is -16!!??

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Dustbrother, Oct 22, 2016.

  1. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,182
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    If the underlying relationship Is good, it seems fairly easy to recover from the penalty. I went from -44 from dowing Brazil twice including one surprise war in the industrial/atomic era to no penalty within 50 turns . Brazil still hated me I'd course and China who is right next to me had other issues. But my diplomacy with the other Civs improved

    Gandhi went from debouncing to freindly ; Kongo went from denouncing to neutral. Greece went from denouncing to unfriendly (we never had good relations)
    I can't comment on the penalties themselves but I had expected my diplo game was ruined when I got the penalty. That was not the case.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2016
  2. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    Well, there possibly is a cap to the invisible score.
     
  3. esoba

    esoba Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Messages:
    146
    Part of my problem is that I can have no warmongering penalties and still cant get DoFs from a civ that has a different government or agenda that dings you. The numbers need a little adjusting to make the system better. I can deal with penalties for surprise war and non-justified wars, but hard work to build relationships should pay off in alliances and DoFs even if the government is slightly different. Maybe it's just playing as Rome and a unique game, but I have yet to have a single DoF in the
    Epic game despite no surprise wars or non-CB wars, not to mention hardly any wars....period.
     
  4. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    There's no question that, like a lot of thinks in this iteration of Civ, successful diplomacy requires having a basic understanding of the system before you begin a game, and careful planning throughout. I wouldn't be surprised if in your current game, your diplomatic opportunities were lost a long time ago.

    I think a lot of people aren't going to like this, because it's natural to want something like Diplomacy to be intuitive. Like you can just start wheeling and dealing with other civs and things work out how you'd expect.
     
  5. esoba

    esoba Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Messages:
    146
    Oh, you mean understand like knowing there are agendas and attempting to meet them. Or trading as soon as possible, or giving favorable trades. Or sending delegations and establishing embassies. You mean information like that? Like not warmongering or declaring surprise wars? Or not capturing cities. Cause I already know that and it still doesn't help.
     
  6. isau

    isau Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,071
    I think they should keep the penalties as is (8/16/32) but increase the rate of decay to 2 per turn, or even 3. Assuming + - to mood is additive, that would be the same, overall, as halving the warmonger penalties, but still create a fast rate of change right away in the first few turns after the war. It's the decay at 1 per turn that appears to be egregious, not the actual penalty.
     
  7. esoba

    esoba Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Messages:
    146
    Good points, but that initial penalty smack is enough to frequently cause most of the world to immediately denounce you even in a CB war. That to me is a problem. Decay should go quicker, but the initial hit is also a substantial issue, especially with CBs.
     
  8. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    No, I mean more like understanding the system of DOT, so that you don't let someone have a -2 for 50 turns, thinking that achieving a +10 is now enough to allow you to maybe take a city state or something. Basically plan out your path by the numbers with the realization that it's numbers over time that matters, not just the numbers themselves.
     
  9. isau

    isau Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,071
    I need to test this part more. It is possible that a war declaration has an immediate penalty in addition to the long term one and that is why denouncements come so fast. Or possibly that the denouncements aren't based on mood at all (which would be weird, but is possible).

    That said--what are people observing? Are you declaring war and getting denounced that same turn? Or did other civs need a few turns before they react, and only denouncing after they become Unhappy?
     
  10. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    Rate of decay is a misnomer.

    You're talking about rate of decay.... of a value that is already a rate of decay :) By the time the ROD you're talking about hits 0, the damage is already done and is irreversible. I think the issue is simply the curve.

    A -24/turn should not equal -24/turn. It should be down-converted into something gentler IMO.
     
  11. esoba

    esoba Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Messages:
    146
    That makes sense and I do believe that many people understand the "over time" aspect. However, heals over time also need to include a substantial boost just like war causes an immediate hit that then decays. As an example I declared a CB against Egypt and took 2 cities which I subsequently gifted to London as both were on her little island and I wanted to make a new friend. Instead, no boost to relations with England and she denounced me, and DoWed me about 10 turns later. I get that in that circumstance Egypt would hate me, I'm cool with that, but gifting cities should give a substantial boost that then decays over time, just like warmongering does. Then there is a way to influence both in positive and negative ways.
     
  12. jekke

    jekke Warlord

    Joined:
    May 29, 2014
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    foreign core area
    Actually, could someone please explain what is the whole point of switching from "absolute" penalties to their derivatives, as discussed above? Isn't yet another way of hiding actual information from players (I doubt many will integrate their attitude penalties over turns)?
     
    CaiusDrewart and esoba like this.
  13. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    Well one problem with this system is that it complete prevents any kind of instant reaction from an opponent which isn't realistic. (unless that also happens behind the scenes like some have speculated...).

    I think we should have a combination of both kinds, and it should be crystal clear via some kind of icon which is which. Example:

    Severe Warmonger Penalty: :c5moves::c5minus:20
    Severe Conqueror Penalty: :trade::c5minus:4
    You Traded: :trade::c5plus:2
    Current Standing: :c5minus:32

    :c5moves: = one time hit
    :trade: = DOT

    The one time hits would eventually disappear from the screen. They're just there to show you recent actions you took that affected the total. Maybe they only display for 10 turns or so.

    The level of severity of both could be influenced by the casus belli system. Why have both kinds? Because with only a system that does DOT you lose instant relationship changes. And some acts should be viewed with such disgust or favor, that they could cause instant swings of a relationship level.
     
  14. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    Because there are lots of small things that once can do that probably shouldn't tip the scales, but rather should improve relations over time. For example, starting a trade route or giving a favorable trade deal. Since the AI is benefiting over time, it makes sense that they warm up over time, too. Again, this leans itself more toward planning ahead and plotting. I think it's a good idea.
     
  15. jekke

    jekke Warlord

    Joined:
    May 29, 2014
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    foreign core area
    Yeah, I should have probably asked it a bit differently, as these are two different things. I do understand that a trade route could give the ongoing + in relations as long as it is active, so derivative-like bonuses make sense (as well as instantaneous btw). But the real question is, why not showing them both? I mean, the relationship screen could look like this:
    Trade routes +4 +1 (Meaning: +4 is the integrated value contributing to the total relations, +1 is the per turn change)
    Ongoing war -10 -2 (you are currently at war getting -2 per turn and you have accumulated -10 pts already)
    Governments +1 -3 (you were getting a bonus for similar governments, got the modified to +smth, then you switched governments and started to get a -3 penalty per turn, the integral is at +1 currently)
    Razed their cities -7 +1 (penalty decreasing 1 per turn, currently at -7)
    and so on.
     
  16. isau

    isau Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,071
    I like it better this way. It works well with the agendas and now that I understand the numbers mean, the whole agenda system makes much more sense. I just think they need to make the screen make more sense, and bring down the total damage a war declaration does by increasing rate of decay of the damage over time effect.

    For example, if Kongo is upset about you not bringing religion to him, you get hit with -6 influence per turn until you fix the problem. Once you do, you get a bonus to the relationship, and it will gradually improve. If they did it differently he'd flip from angry to pleased instantly.

    Knowing this now, I should have expected conflict with Kongo in my recent Arabia game. He already didn't like me, and I should have done something to heal the relationship earlier, so that in the time it took to bring religion to him the relationship wouldn't bottom out and result in a denouncement (which is its own damage over time effect).
     
    Big J Money likes this.
  17. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,030
    Oh yeah who knows how it got so muddled when it got to us. I blame publishing deadlines. I'm sure their QA or playtests pointed out how unclear it all is, but changes to features and balance are often made last minute, and the UI team doesn't have time to finalize an updated design that is perfect, can be implemented fast enough, and has no risk of introducing new bugs that would cause even worse issues just before shipping the game.
     
  18. isau

    isau Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,071
    Did some more thinking about this issue and am changing my recommendation. I think instead of a big hit to relationships, the penalty should be more subtle but longer lasting. So, assuming fractions are allowed (they seem to be based on the First Impression modifier), I think -16 should be around -4 decaying at a rate of about 0.2. That's still significant damage but its steadier and gives the player an opportunity to try to heal it to maintain relationships. The more I think about it, counteracting a -16 penalty is unlikely to happen and will probably send AIs careening into Denouncements, like we've been seeing. A longer penalty at a lower amount would work better.

    It would basically give the player the chance to be like "Yes I started that war... but here's some open borders and a share in the treasure I stole, does this change your outlook?"

    And if you just ignored everyone's opinion the gradual damage would affect you, eventually. You just wouldn't get there right away.
     
  19. Our_DeCay

    Our_DeCay Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    Excellent find, Isau! This really geared up my diplomacy game. I've been paying attention to it closely and you've seemed to nail it right. Thanks for sharing.
     
  20. Matte979

    Matte979 Jedi Master

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2001
    Messages:
    291
    Location:
    Chicago
    Some things to add.

    1. Meeting AI with units instead of scouts gives in some cases penalty, and those early penalties will add up if you don't offset them with positive things like delegation and open borders.
    2. An AI will declare war based on other things than just relations standing (Army size etc.), but in most case not if your a friend
    3. An AI will denounce based on actions (War, Agendas) but only once below a certain relationship level
    5. As mentioned Agendas makes a huge difference again in the beginning, diplomacy needs to be managed or will turn into bad relations.
    6. Max relations seem to scale with difficulty. (Not confirmed) Could be something else that set the max.
    7. Accept that if you warmonger you will have a difficult time making friends in CIV6
    8. Scaling as its always decays 1 per turn at any speed, it currently is to high on Quick and Standard.
    9. Quick progression make this worse as less time to let the penalty decay.
     
    Our_DeCay likes this.

Share This Page