As all of us are aware, the Fall Patch severely changed the way the AI responds to the "warmonger threat". Being someone who prefers domination, I was one of the many who protested the change in other threads. The new penalties seemed a bit too severe now. My opinion about the new system came after a game as Mongolia. This was my first victory on emperor and one of the most rewarding games when I actually won (some time after turn 400). The madness started after I took two Iroquois cities (including one capital) and left him with only one city left (out of 3). Fractal gave me a Pangea setup, therefore by the time I started fighting, I knew all 11 civs. After I finished my war with the Iroquois I got denounced by a few and shortly after I declared war on my next victim, the entire world declared war on me. Luckily, because the Mongols are awesome (and this was an emperor game) I was able to fight against everyone at the same time even though I was in the middle of the Pangea and surrounded and eventually win. I played a couple of conservative games after that with very little warring and then started a new game with the Huns. I decided to not care about the new system and go all out war to take advantage of the early UU. This time Fractal gave me two continents (or maybe a Pangea with a bottle neck - I'm still exploring the world). I completely wiped the Zulu, Spanish, Assyrian while the Dutch watched and did nothing but trade with me. I then wiped the Byzantine after I met Portugal and (edited addition)the Shoshone . Currently in this game I have declaration of friendship with 4 of the remaining civs and no one has declared war on me and only the Shoshone denounced me. This is after I wiped 4 civs while one (then two) others watched. I'm extremely confused as to what happened. I was hoping a comparison of the two situations couple help me and others who are having issues with the new system better understand it and work with it. Here are some of what I think are the relevant differences: -In the Mongol game I knew everyone before the wars started, therefore the penalty stacked with everyone at the same time and amounted to a bigger penalty which snowballed once denouncements started and led to world war. -In the Mongol game, my military was fairly small but successful. I took a lot of territory with very few troops. With the Huns, I've been among the 4 biggest armies. Perhaps that would work as a deterrent from war. However it doesn't quite explain the DoF requests. -In the Hun game I completely eliminated 4 civs whereas in the Mongol game I didn't start "genocide" until after everyone was at war with me. Does the number of witnesses influence your reputation that much? I've read several times on this board that witnesses will ruin your reputation with civs you meet after the fact. Edit: -the Mongol game I had taken 2 cities (1 capital) and just started a war with a second civ but had not yet taken any of their cities. In my current Hun game I've taken a total of 4 capitals and 12 additional cities from the 4 civs I wiped. Perhaps I'm missing other factors but I'd like to hear your input.