About Militarism

[8ha8ha]

I would like to know the effect of militarism (stability + 1 per occupied city) can be accumulated forever?

E.G. 1. I am English, I occupied Paris. And then I change from militarism to Imperialism/colonization, is the effect of stability + 1 continuous?

E.G. 2 I am English, I occupied Paris. And then it independent. And then I re-occupied, is the effect of stability + 1 continuous???

 

[gilgames]

No and no. Afaik militaism gives bonuses: since you changed to it, provides +1 for each city you captured. thats it.

 

[8ha8ha]

No and no. Afaik militaism gives bonuses: since you changed to it, provides +1 for each city you captured. thats it.

It seems Imperalism is so so Powerful that even I use Portugal, imperalism provide me more stablity than Colonalism (Provided that I occupied Spanish history+contested land)

 

[AbsintheRed]

I would like to know the effect of militarism (stability + 1 per occupied city) can be accumulated forever?

E.G. 1. I am English, I occupied Paris. And then I change from militarism to Imperialism/colonization, is the effect of stability + 1 continuous?

E.G. 2 I am English, I occupied Paris. And then it independent. And then I re-occupied, is the effect of stability + 1 continuous???

No and no. Afaik militaism gives bonuses: since you changed to it, provides +1 for each city you captured. thats it.

Actually it's yes and yes.

It seems Imperalism is so so Powerful that even I use Portugal, imperalism provide me more stablity than Colonalism (Provided that I occupied Spanish history+contested land)

Indeed, Imperialism is a powerful civic. Although I think Colonialism is much better for Portugal, unless you want to (and manage to) have a big empire with 10+ cities in unstable areas.

 

[8ha8ha]

Actually it's yes and yes.

Indeed, Imperialism is a powerful civic. Although I think Colonialism is much better for Portugal, unless you want to (and manage to) have a big empire with 10+ cities in unstable areas.

At least for English it will be better to use imperialism even there is a mission for get 7 colonies.

 

[8ha8ha]

Actually it's yes and yes.

Indeed, Imperialism is a powerful civic. Although I think Colonialism is much better for Portugal, unless you want to (and manage to) have a big empire with 10+ cities in unstable areas.

And So for English the best way is to change militarism --> destroy Scotland+Wales+France-->Change Imperalism and build cities in Ireland/Isle island? Also in this mod it will be better to wait other to build the city and then use militarism to occupy the city instead of building the city by my own?

And I would like to ask whether the stablity penalty for declaring war is permanent? After signing peace/destroy the rival, does the penalty still exist? And how about the systematic declare war?(Such as Germany vs Austria, or the envy war since finishing 2 Missions?)

 

[AbsintheRed]

And So for English the best way is to change militarism --> destroy Scotland+Wales+France-->Change Imperalism and build cities in Ireland/Isle island? Also in this mod it will be better to wait other to build the city and then use militarism to occupy the city instead of building the city by my own?

Not really. Conquering a city in an unstable province results in quite harsh stability penalties.
Sometimes I'm afraid they are a little too much, at least initially.
Apart from the base penalties, the city being in revolt, the economic and happiness penalties can be a singificant negative factor too.
While most of these are going away after a while, founding the city in unstable territory is much safer, especially with Imperialism.

And I would like to ask whether the stablity penalty for declaring war is permanent? After signing peace/destroy the rival, does the penalty still exist? And how about the systematic declare war?(Such as Germany vs Austria, or the envy war since finishing 2 Missions?)

It's piling up in the background. A civ being involved in many wars is more unstable on the long run.
While this is not necessarily justified historically, it was mostly implemented this way for gameplay reasons:
Lategame negative stability modifiers are needed, to counterbalance the extra stability from new buildings.
For the same reason researching some techs add -1 stability throughout the game (~10 in total IIRC).

 

[8ha8ha]

Not really. Conquering a city in an unstable province results in quite harsh stability penalties.
Sometimes I'm afraid they are a little too much, at least initially.
Apart from the base penalties, the city being in revolt, the economic and happiness penalties can be a singificant negative factor too.
While most of these are going away after a while, founding the city in unstable territory is much safer, especially with Imperialism.

It's piling up in the background. A civ being involved in many wars is more unstable on the long run.
While this is not necessarily justified historically, it was mostly implemented this way for gameplay reasons:
Lategame negative stability modifiers are needed, to counterbalance the extra stability from new buildings.
For the same reason researching some techs add -1 stability throughout the game (~10 in total IIRC).

IMO,
a. The conquested city would probably have better building+Population rather than I build it by my own. Especially for early country (France, Germany, etc.)
b. I will have no pressure to investigate Banking ASAP then.

So Militarism is very powerful then.

 

[8ha8ha]

Not really. Conquering a city in an unstable province results in quite harsh stability penalties.
Sometimes I'm afraid they are a little too much, at least initially.
Apart from the base penalties, the city being in revolt, the economic and happiness penalties can be a singificant negative factor too.
While most of these are going away after a while, founding the city in unstable territory is much safer, especially with Imperialism.

It's piling up in the background. A civ being involved in many wars is more unstable on the long run.
While this is not necessarily justified historically, it was mostly implemented this way for gameplay reasons:
Lategame negative stability modifiers are needed, to counterbalance the extra stability from new buildings.
For the same reason researching some techs add -1 stability throughout the game (~10 in total IIRC).

Also , for Norwegian, if they using militarism conquest and burn a city with population below 6, they will get +1 stablity? That sound terrible as I can always find a new city or broken independent states and then burn burn burn??

 

[gilgames]

Thats music to my ears ))))

 

[AbsintheRed]

Also , for Norwegian, if they using militarism conquest and burn a city with population below 6, they will get +1 stablity? That sound terrible as I can always find a new city or broken independent states and then burn burn burn??

Well, the Norwegian UP reduces stability penalty from razing cities in the following way:
By default it's 0 for razing 1-2 sized cities, -1 for 2-5, -2 for 6-9, -3 for 10+
For Norway it's 1 less for each (remains 0 for 1-2 sized cities)

While IMO the Militarism civic is entirely separate from this, you are right on the overall effect.
With the +1 from Militarism taken into account, you get +1 stability for conquering then razing. For 1-2 sized cities with everyone, and for Norway for 3-5 sized cities too.

I could change the Militarism bonus, so it's only applied if you keep the conquered city.
I'm not really sure whether that would suit the civic more or less.

 

[8ha8ha]

Well, the Norwegian UP reduces stability penalty from razing cities in the following way:
By default it's 0 for razing 1-2 sized cities, -1 for 2-5, -2 for 6-9, -3 for 10+
For Norway it's 1 less for each (remains 0 for 1-2 sized cities)

While IMO the Militarism civic is entirely separate from this, you are right on the overall effect.
With the +1 from Militarism taken into account, you get +1 stability for conquering then razing. For 1-2 sized cities with everyone, and for Norway for 3-5 sized cities too.

I could change the Militarism bonus, so it's only applied if you keep the conquered city.
I'm not really sure whether that would suit the civic more or less.

And I found that conquest a land by militarism (-2+1= -1) = settle a new contest city (-1)
So If i am english, I found that conquering Burgandy + Genoa+Venice is more important than settling the Isle Island + Ireland. Genoa is much much much much wealthy with wonder(s) and developable (Poor English, sorry) than a Rubbish Isle Island without even a poor harbour

 

[Rafaelito]

What about the Byzantine Empire starts with "imperialism" as they were, indeed, an empire?

 

[AbsintheRed]

What about the Byzantine Empire starts with "imperialism" as they were, indeed, an empire?

Yeah, the promised Byzantine updates are also already implemented.