AI getting away with warmongering, this NEEDS to be fixed.

[CivAddict2013]

Okay, situation. I'm peacefully playing as Ghandhi. I've done nothing to Askia. I didn't denounce Askia. I DID NOTHING TO ASKIA. All of a sudden Askia out of nowhere attacks. What's more? Nobody denounces him and he basically gets away with warmongering for free. I mean, he DoW's me AND bullies a city state, but no other Civ says nothing.

So, getting annoyed of his constant DoW's, I fight back and take 2 cities. Who's getting denounced? Me. Yes, me. I'm getting denounced but Askia declares war and no other Civ's seem to give a crap.

If anybody from Firaxis is reading this, fix this please. It's unfair how the AI can just gang up on you for no reason at all, then screw you over for fighting back.

Seriously. I could understand if I had done something to Askia, but no. I'm just chilling minding my own business, Askia DoW's me and when I try to fight back? World denunciation.

Overall, the AI ganging up on you needs to be fixed. The AI will gang up on you for no reason. It seemed in this particular game the AI was out to get me from turn 1. Banning trade with City States, taking ASKIA's side after he DoW's me and eventually world DoWing me.

So if anybody from Firaxis is reading this, fix this, please I beg of you.

 

[thelesserevil]

The AI didn't gang up on you for no reason, they ganged up on you because in their eyes, you acted as way more of a warmonger than Askia did.

DoW gives only a minor warmonger penalty compared to conquering a city, which you did twice. If you'd fought back against Askia, beaten his army, besieged his cities and then brokered for peace without actually conquering anything, you'd have been fine. You might have even gotten a city or two in the peace negotiation.

It's really no surprise they denounced you when you clearly showed you're a much bigger threat to them than Askia.

 

[CivAddict2013]

The AI didn't gang up on you for no reason, they ganged up on you because in their eyes, you acted as way more of a warmonger than Askia did.

DoW gives only a minor warmonger penalty compared to conquering a city, which you did twice. If you'd fought back against Askia, beaten his army, besieged his cities and then brokered for peace without actually conquering anything, you'd have been fine. You might have even gotten a city or two in the peace negotiation.

It's really no surprise they denounced you when you clearly showed you're a much bigger threat to them than Askia.

But why does Askia get away with it? I took two cities. In my games if I ever DoW'd somebody everyone denounces me. They shouldn't be able to do this. He should get denounced or something.

I was friends with plenty of other Civs. None of them even denounced Askia.

So I'm basically just supposed to let him come at my borders and do nothing about it? No, there should be a penalty for declaring war. In my domination games, I always get denounced for DoWing someone.

Why is he spared the penalty?

Perhaps it's just how the game sets you up for failure. Have an AI attack you, bait you into taking a city so everybody can hate you.

Askia should not be allowed to declare war for no reason and get off scott free.

So help me here. What am I supposed to do just let him constantly DoW me?

 

[DemonMaster]

Feeling better?

I have no problem with the game and I make war more often in Civ 5 than in any other civ game. Sure I can get denounced sometimes but also usually understand why.
In my latest game (I played Austria) I started next to Poland and when he refused to stop sending missionaries to me I DoW him. Germany and Russia denounced Poland, apparently they didn't like him either and when I took a city (that would cause a minor penalty). Germany and later on Russia DoW Poland after that (as a historical footnote, yes I thought it was hilarious) and also took some city. We all left Poland with Warzaw. Gandhi (one of my other neighbours) denounced me, but he denounced everybody in that game so I didn't feel more special than anybody else.

This example from my latest game is quite typical when I play the game (in BNW). Later on (modern era) I ended up in a war with Russia, mainly because I was freedom and she was order and that she wanted my land or something. I ended up with a war with the germans as well (he was autocracy) for the same reason. Both of this wars with Poland as an ally (he joined me during the war).
Good game. I guess I am luckier than you to get such a great games when I play. Lucky me.

 

[Browd]

Two scenarios:

1. Your next door neighbor punches you in the mouth one morning. In response, you punch him back, knock him out, sever his left leg, gouge out both of his eyes, and announce to your neighbors that you're going to keep the leg and the eyes. When neighbors express alarm, you reply "He started it, and I was just defending myself." Neighbors begin talking about how to deal with you before you turn on them.

2. Your next door neighbor punches you in the mouth one morning. In response, you punch him back, and after some skirmishing, he agrees to give you his new riding lawn mower and $1,000 in cash. The rest of your neighbors think your next door neighbor is nuts and got what he deserved.

You can manage other AI reactions by exercising calculated restraint. Review this thread for a great discussion of how to war without diplo penalties: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=516305

 

[CivAddict2013]

Feeling better?

I have no problem with the game and I make war more often in Civ 5 than in any other civ game. Sure I can get denounced sometimes but also usually understand why.
In my latest game (I played Austria) I started next to Poland and when he refused to stop sending missionaries to me I DoW him. Germany and Russia denounced Poland, apparently they didn't like him either and when I took a city (that would cause a minor penalty). Germany and later on Russia DoW Poland after that (as a historical footnote, yes I thought it was hilarious) and also took some city. We all left Poland with Warzaw. Gandhi (one of my other neighbours) denounced me, but he denounced everybody in that game so I didn't feel more special than anybody else.

This example from my latest game is quite typical when I play the game (in BNW). Later on (modern era) I ended up in a war with Russia, mainly because I was freedom and she was order and that she wanted my land or something. I ended up with a war with the germans as well (he was autocracy) for the same reason. Both of this wars with Poland as an ally (he joined me during the war).
Good game. I guess I am luckier than you to get such a great games when I play. Lucky me.

I guess so. But based on what you guys have said, maybe next time I'll just fight him off and not take his cities.

I do feel that it's unfair he gets away with the DoW though. There's something wrong if he DoW's me, bullies a city state and gets off scott free.

So next time I'll probably just not take his cities.

 

[thelesserevil]

But why does Askia get away with it?

They like Askia, they don't like you. Other Civs' opinion of you can make ALL the difference when it comes to whether or not they'll denounce you, or if you'll even get a significant warmongering penalty.

In a fairly recent game, I played as China and got into a war with Mongolia repeatedly, once because Assyria suggested it, and later on because I didn't like where they'd settled one of their cities. The denunciations came pouring in from all over the world, but all of them were aimed at Mongolia. I conquered most of his cities, but he got all the hate simply because they liked me a lot better.

 

[Memoryjar]

Askia is like Isabella or Cesar, a backstabber. They always DoW you if you are weak, sometimes one turn after DoF you. Mind this, if you have such AI in your neighborhood.

Browd response is your answer. Just raze its army and shoot one of its city. Negotiate peace and it give you a city/gold/lux/strategic.

 

[njmfff]

Warmongering penalty seems to have less consequences if you take cities in mid-late game. If you check out in info, you get Extreme penalty if you capture just one city in ancient\classical era.

and dunno, if you want to play peaceful, you could always bring your armies to Askia, kill his units, pillage his titles and drop his capital to red. He'll sue for peace, giving you gold and luxuries, maybe even some of his cities. AI seems to ask for peace quickly if you start pillaging his titles and if he is about to lose capital.

 

[LoneRebel]

The warmonger penalty is higher for taking cities (even if you didn't start the war) then for actually declaring war in the first place. Yes, I know it can seem unfair. I'm the sort of person whose way of thinking is "I want to live peacefully with everybody, but if someone attacks me despite that, I'll make them pay for it." So I can see the merits of making it so that other AIs are more tolerant of you taking enemy cities if said enemy started the war. They were asking for it!

However, Browd's post above humorously illustrates the problem with that way of thinking.

So yeah, one way around it is not to take his cities, and only defend yourself. If your defense is good, his constant wars will mean nothing but free XP for your troops, and may even slow down his progress in other areas. For example, I had a game where I was Persia on a Pangaea, and settled a city in a very good spot coveted by Russia, Greece, and Japan. The result was literally millennia of constant warfare, with all three civs declaring war on me, making peace after a while, and then declaring war again. Japan in particular was worrisome - they had a massive empire that covered most of the center of the supercontinent. However, none of them ever sent enough force to take that city.

But I see the problem there - what if you don't want to fight the same guy over and over again for three thousand years? If you don't take his cities, he'll just rebuild and attack you again. So I can see both sides of the argument.

One plus is that, as Browd mentioned, even without taking cities, if you kill enough of his units, the AI will sometimes offer favorable terms, giving you gold and resources and maybe even a city, without you having to conquer anything and get the penalty. So you still get something out of that war that he started, even if you didn't take any of his cities.

But again, the problem with that is that even if you slaughtered the AI's invasion force, if he still thinks he's more powerful than you, he will not offer terms. In the Persia game I just mentioned, even though I killed lots of Japanese units, Japan still had a huge empire, and so the AI still considered himself "ahead" in the war. Not only was he not offering me favorable terms, he would actually contact me every few turns offering peace in exchange for all my luxes, all my resources, and two of my cities. Um, yeah.

 

[isau]

BNW tipped the diplomatic balance on city capture in a way that, frankly IMO, simply does not work. That's basically the gist of it. See, the thing is people say "it makes sense that the AI would be wary of war mongers." Well that much is true, I guess. Except that at the same time the AI gets mad about other civs taking cities, it's simultaneously oblivious that when it takes cities the penalty will cause the conquest to blow up in its face. The situation described by the OP is ridiculous because the AI ought to know that even if it captures the player's city, it's going to get denunciations poured on it from every direction. But it doesn't, it's simultaneously offended when other civs city capture cities and somehow ignorant that when it captures a city the penalties are sky high.

 

[Walter R]

Two scenarios:

1. Your next door neighbor punches you in the mouth one morning. In response, you punch him back, knock him out, sever his left leg, gouge out both of his eyes, and announce to your neighbors that you're going to keep the leg and the eyes. When neighbors express alarm, you reply "He started it, and I was just defending myself." Neighbors begin talking about how to deal with you before you turn on them.

2. Your next door neighbor punches you in the mouth one morning. In response, you punch him back, and after some skirmishing, he agrees to give you his new riding lawn mower and $1,000 in cash. The rest of your neighbors think your next door neighbor is nuts and got what he deserved.

You can manage other AI reactions by exercising calculated restraint. Review this thread for a great discussion of how to war without diplo penalties: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=516305

Browd: Brilliant!

CivA: IMHO there are a few of these 'inequalities' in the game, but as people have often said, you are a human player and therefore a good deal smarter than the computer will ever be. I'd rather bet on me than some code any day. I expect to win my games, and by that I don't mean I demand to win I mean that the most likley outcome is a victory for me, simply because I can think and adapt; and crib loads of good advice from the Forum!
Chin up and go beat them!

edit: Oh, and if it helps...
current game: Playing England, small continents (G&K). Monty is my neighbour (again) with Dido to the south. Minding my own business, just about to settle York when the boringly inevitable Monty DOW comes, swiftly followed by Dido. Sorted them out, accepted peace deals, got on with game. Bit later on same again (AI madness really, as I had well xp longbows and pikes) - this time I captured two cities from Monty and one I'd had my eye on from Dido. Do like her elephants, pity she throws them away. Peace again. Learn Astronomy and start sailing. Meet Askia and Alex - both hostile immediately. So what? Met the rest of the civs, some Ok some guarded. Just taken Athens with my 2 SOTL and a half-dead caravel. Now I have ranged ships and a GAd. Why Athens? To use Browd's analogy he looked at me in a funny way so I cut his head off and kept it! Well I'm going Dom anyway so who cares..? Actually experience tells me to get him a.s.a.p. Leading in tech, military and land. Kitty's good and acceptably happy. Expect to win.

 

[phillipwyllie]

I find an effective way to make other civs like you more than your nemesis is to trade luxes/strategic resources with them. The longer this goes on the better it seems(there's no indication in game). You may notice the text when the AI wants to renew that reads...I forget the exact wording, perhaps there is some truth to this. Eventually most of the world could end up hating Askia and that's the time to strike. Although you must denounce Askia at some point(preferably early as any friends of his will forgive you in time). Voting another civ to be host(when you have no chance yourself) is usually a guaranteed DOF.

In short make friends before you make enemies as fiends are harder to make than enemies.

 

[apocalypse105]

Warmonger penalty is to sensetive it was implented to hate you for going domination victory which makes sence but as soon as you take 2 cities you are a hated really?


Just make it that as soon as you capture 2 capitals you are a danger to the world because you are planning to capture more look at the victory screen what is required for domination?


this is a mod that fix it. firaxis should have done a long time ago :

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=109376170

 

[Ninakoru]

I think the warmonger system is more diffilcut to game than the previous versions but yes, you conquer a CS early and that grants no diplomacy for the rest of the game, a bit too much IMO. I also made a mod to lower the penalty, but not eliminate it.

still you can work around it asking for cities in peace deals with some pressure and wiping without any diplomatic consecuences.

 

[apocalypse105]

I think the warmonger system is more diffilcut to game than the previous versions but yes, you conquer a CS early and that grants no diplomacy for the rest of the game, a bit too much IMO. I also made a mod to lower the penalty, but not eliminate it.

still you can work around it asking for cities in peace deals with some pressure and wiping without any diplomatic consecuences.

Actualy diplomacy makes more sence if you removed it other Ai olso wn't go beserck and start wars because of wars

 

[Tarbo]

I'm starting to not care about what the other think..... just blast them all and go to bad sleep well....

 

[apocalypse105]

I wonder does firaxis read the forums like they say they do?

Because there has been allready 4 topics about warmonger penalties that is broken when will they fix it?

 

[Txurce]

I wonder does firaxis read the forums like they say they do?

Because there has been allready 4 topics about warmonger penalties that is broken when will they fix it?

Yes, and every single time experienced players have shown how the "problem" can be avoided. Just because people keep posting about it doesn't make it any more of a coding issue. This particular thread hasn't even focused on the various diplomatic solutions to AI aggression... or the fact that some AI tend to denounce all serial aggressors (including Askia). There are more than enough resources in CFC to show anyone how to deal with situations like the OP's. You don't have to use them, and you have every right to complain over and over again... but don't expect Firaxis to address your problem just because you do.

 

[reddishrecue]

Well you can get away with the warmongering penalties if taking a city gives a minor warmongering penalty. Joining other civilizations against other villain civilizations and denouncement combinations contributes to successful warmongering where taking a city will give only a minor warmongering penalty.
I was Kamehameha and I ended up denouncing ashurbanipal who was getting denounced and got embargoed in the world Congress. Boudicca and other civilizations also denounced ashurbanipal on this one and even told me that our combination of denouncements are good. I was able to take Rome and 2 other cities from August with Boudicca help with minor warmonger penalties. However, Alexander was a few turns away from his usual easy diplomatic victory. This was in Immortal difficulty and although I failed to achieve victory, I didn't fail to get penalized from taking Augus' cities.