Always War, when I want peace?

[Cosmic Fox]

Civ 6 seems to be geared toward war always as opposed to other civs where I could maintain a level of peace throughout the game building my empire. I know some of you will say that is insane way to play and not have war. It would be boring for you yada yada, I love playing as a peaceful civilization. Sure I go to war when someone violates my space, but that is it.

Is it impossible to be peaceful in this rendition of Civ guys? I've tried peace through might nothing seems to work for me.

 

[greygamer]

In my experience you can have peaceful relations, even with civs you have had wars with (provided you didn't take any of their cities) but it does take some effort.
My personal annoyance is that even when they ceded you a city they will hate you for the rest of the game.

 

[Cosmic Fox]

Yes it has become a pain in my backside! There are those times when a cold war doesn't work you must go for a settler whom came onto your land mass. They seem only slightly mad the entire game, but if you take one or more expect wartime then entire game until you wipe them out. Quite persistent the AI seems to be I find it funny when they are outnumbered. Thanks for the reply, my post was in frustration!

I'm determined to learn this new version if it kills me, it might I am thinking about different ways to layout my beginning structure to help my late game efforts like staving off wars on multiple fronts. They are a lot smarter with the AI+ Mod, but they are still pretty dumb.

 

[steveg700]

Civ 6 seems to be geared toward war always as opposed to other civs where I could maintain a level of peace throughout the game building my empire. I know some of you will say that is insane way to play and not have war. It would be boring for you yada yada, I love playing as a peaceful civilization. Sure I go to war when someone violates my space, but that is it.

Is it impossible to be peaceful in this rendition of Civ guys? I've tried peace through might nothing seems to work for me.

Bear in mind that you are ultimately in competition with these other civilizations. Should the AI prioritize friendship with another civ over their shot at winning the game?

 

[Cosmic Fox]

You had to make a great point didn't you?

If we have good terms and neither of us are making efforts to invade I don't see why diplomacy isn't at least possible. Though I see the main point, winning and the game would be a bit boring without the wars.

Normal life I am a very passive man, rile me up and I become this tornado of destruction, the peaceful man you met is gone. You can't reflect that into a game I suppose You put it in the correct light, what can I counter with now?

 

[steveg700]

I'm currently in a game where I'm allied with Rome. He has a vast number of his units all over my territory, flitting about my capital--how kind of him to worry so much about my safety.

He also keeps sending spies to sabotage production in my capital. But according to the bonuses, I'm the love of his life. I'm meeting both his agenda (expansive empire + airpower) too. But, in the end, can I really blame the AI for being so two-faced? He's not going to win if he doesn't make some kind of move. My only niggling beef is I'm not sure why it's me he's moving against me in particular--Kongo is running away with the game more than I am, and there military doesn't look that great (there as anemic about upgrading as AI civ's tend to be).

 

[GT_OKEZ]

Civ 6 seems to be geared toward war always as opposed to other civs where I could maintain a level of peace throughout the game building my empire. I know some of you will say that is insane way to play and not have war. It would be boring for you yada yada, I love playing as a peaceful civilization. Sure I go to war when someone violates my space, but that is it.

Is it impossible to be peaceful in this rendition of Civ guys? I've tried peace through might nothing seems to work for me.

Are you talking about against the AI? At what difficulty are you playing?

Chances are that you will go to war early ( someone will DoW you because of territory). If you can beat them back and zoom ahead in tech then even if they do declare war on you it will be easy to fend off. I haven't played much against the AI recently but it seems after the patch that it does a better job calculating when it should DoW you. If you're ahead in tech and you have a decent standing army and are not breaking promises you should be left alone for the most part. Some AIs are really easy to get as friends since their leader agendas are easy to meet.

 

[GT_OKEZ]

I'm currently in a game where I'm allied with Rome. He has a vast number of his units all over my territory, flitting about my capital--how kind of him to worry so much about my safety.

He also keeps sending spies to sabotage production in my capital. But according to the bonuses, I'm the love of his life. I'm meeting both his agenda (expansive empire + airpower) too. But, in the end, can I really blame the AI for being so two-faced? He's not going to win if he doesn't make some kind of move. My only niggling beef is I'm not sure why it's me he's moving against me in particular--Kongo is running away with the game more than I am, and there military doesn't look that great (there as anemic about upgrading as AI civ's tend to be).

This is one of the things I hate about playing the AI. Even on deity it doesn't play to win (besides trying to foolishly convert the world with a billion apostles). It's like the AI already understands you will win but it will merely try to slow your progress instead of win on its own. It's for this reason I moved to the multiplayer scene.

Oh I played one game vs AI against Kongo. It says that the AI is more focused on tourism and science victories now. Maybe but I still found it willing to trade some pretty important artifacts and great works that a person trying to win a tourism victory absolutely wouldn't.

 

[Cosmic Fox]

Yes Steveg700, exactly what I mean, it seems they need to add more code to make them realize things like that. Make them play more like a human player, be much more fun for single player games at least.

GT_OKEZ, I am beginning to think that is the right direction to go in. I am playing on Prince and Warlord to learn the new style of playing. I could go up to Deity I am sure it won't matter.

I tend to get my ass handed to me in MP games because I love to build my empire. I am used to games where I am alone for a bit to build districts etc. MP you don't have that luxury, but with the AI playing such a lousy game maybe that is the right move.

 

[Nathair]

Bear in mind that you are ultimately in competition with these other civilizations. Should the AI prioritize friendship with another civ over their shot at winning the game?

Well, yeah. Where'd the Diplomatic Victory go?

 

[steveg700]

Well, yeah. Where'd the Diplomatic Victory go?

In V, diplomatic victories weren't friendly. Players were in dogged competition with the AI for city-state votes. As most noted, it was basically Economic VIctory, since you just made a point of generating enough GPT to buy them all out.

 

[steveg700]

This is one of the things I hate about playing the AI. Even on deity it doesn't play to win (besides trying to foolishly convert the world with a billion apostles). It's like the AI already understands you will win but it will merely try to slow your progress instead of win on its own. It's for this reason I moved to the multiplayer scene.

Oh I played one game vs AI against Kongo. It says that the AI is more focused on tourism and science victories now. Maybe but I still found it willing to trade some pretty important artifacts and great works that a person trying to win a tourism victory absolutely wouldn't.

In my experience, Kongo and most civ's will only part with great works, relics, or artifacts for large amounts of gold. Even the friendly ones.

I usually see one or two AI players break away and go after victory in a serious way. They just aren't as good at it as a human player. Of course, human players tend to gravitate to a single optimal way of playing (like beelining IZ's in every city), so if all civ's started being "smart", we'd see complaints about cookie-cutter AI.

 

[Nathair]

• In V, diplomatic victories weren't friendly. Players were in dogged competition with the AI for city-state votes.

  Speak for yourself, maybe. I know I had victories with support from strongly allied AI leaders. It was nice to have the option to play with some cooperation instead of straight out competition and aggression all the time