Having it last one era is a huge step up from the entire game. You see the suggestion was not put there to fix the game, just to take it in the right direction. It boils down to the fact that just because your a warmonger at one point does not mean you should be penalized the whole damn game for making some mistakes. The hows and whys and specific rules that should be changed in order to fix this does not matter to me. The important thing to me is that it gets fixed. The whether too's and why for's are for those people, the developers to decide.
Do you get a warmonger penalty if you denounce first
- Thread starter apocalypse105
- Start date
Having it last one era is a huge step up from the entire game. You see the suggestion was not put there to fix the game, just to take it in the right direction. It boils down to the fact that just because your a warmonger at one point does not mean you should be penalized the whole damn game for making some mistakes. The hows and whys and specific rules that should be changed in order to fix this does not matter to me. The important thing to me is that it gets fixed. The whether too's and why for's are for those people, the developers to decide.
You can fix it. But it takes some effort and some time. But over time if you stay peaceful the AI will be less hostile to you. Helping an AI, making trades, etc will help you to get a better relationship. But it is quite normal that it takes effort.
apocalypse105
Deity
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 2,705
How do you fix it?
Its a bad mechanic . They wanted to put a negatif result of war into the game in civ 4 this was civ4 war weariness.
But that wasn't permament wich balanced it out perfectly.
marvelharvey
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Messages
- 34
Slightly off topic, but I just experienced a weird warmonger penalty on an immortal game.
I was playing as Korea and decided to I was going to turtle up for most of the game, focusing on science, and eventually switch to domination with Stealth Bombers.
My capital was production starved, so around turn 30, I decided to steal a worker from a nearby city state. I grabbed the unit, then immediately sued for peace. Sadly, I hadn't been paying attention, the city state was under the protection of Arabia, turning hostile towards me. Nothing wrong with that.
I continued on my merry turtled-up way, not bothering anyone. But then around turn 100, suddenly the whole world turned hostile/guarded or denounced me, all of them declaring me a war mongering menace. For that 'less than one 1 turn of war', 70 turns ago, where no cities were captured.
Has anyone else experienced such a penalty? I was under the impression that you were allowed to declare war once 'for free' and the war penalty applied from your 2nd DOW onwards. I understand Arabia being pissed at me, but unsure why the rest of the world turned. Although I'm guessing a bug.
I was playing as Korea and decided to I was going to turtle up for most of the game, focusing on science, and eventually switch to domination with Stealth Bombers.
My capital was production starved, so around turn 30, I decided to steal a worker from a nearby city state. I grabbed the unit, then immediately sued for peace. Sadly, I hadn't been paying attention, the city state was under the protection of Arabia, turning hostile towards me. Nothing wrong with that.
I continued on my merry turtled-up way, not bothering anyone. But then around turn 100, suddenly the whole world turned hostile/guarded or denounced me, all of them declaring me a war mongering menace. For that 'less than one 1 turn of war', 70 turns ago, where no cities were captured.
Has anyone else experienced such a penalty? I was under the impression that you were allowed to declare war once 'for free' and the war penalty applied from your 2nd DOW onwards. I understand Arabia being pissed at me, but unsure why the rest of the world turned. Although I'm guessing a bug.
apocalypse105
Deity
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 2,705
You where probably winning and had a low military so everyone atacks you there.
marvelharvey
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Messages
- 34
Yeah, I'm used to being denounced/attacked when my military is weak (and it certainly was). It's the fact that everyone thought I was a warmonger that got me scratching my head.
NotSure
King
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2011
- Messages
- 712
Did you give Arabia the "Our affairs are none of your business" response? In my experience, if you say, "my bad" (can't remember what the actual response is), then that will usually cool off the "protecting" AI. Once the denouncements start though, it can snowball quickly.
The Arabian AI has a tendency to befriend other AI (and then back-stab them later). Most AI seem to be programmed to suck-up to a more powerful civ that is willing to be friendly (Arabia fits this description I'm guessing?). IMO, "warmongering menace" is the modifier chosen for display because you haven't done enough to trigger any of the other modifiers. The real problem is the other AI are playing the suck-up game and targeting you as the three-legged antelope. This brings us back to the weak military. The AI says "warmongering menace", but it means, "You're weak and we want in on the dog-pile and diplomacy bonuses." I also suspect there may be some extra-special hate for pushing around city states.
1veedo
Chieftain
I think civs decide if they like you or not based on a bunch of different factors and then will chose "reasons" not to like you. If you've declared war a couple of times against someone then they might list warmongerer as a reason.
I'm testing a game I just finished, I'm at war with three people, and "friendly" with three other people because "they desire friendly relations". I declared war once in the past although I had only met that one single civ at the time. I had also been in a defensive war where two civs teamed up on me and I captured 5 cities (though no capitals). The people I'm at war with list me as a warmongerer as one of the reasons they don't like me.
Before the third declaration of war I was only a warmongerer to the two civs I was at war with. After declaring war with the third civ his status also said he thought I was a warmongerer. None of the other civs seem to care at all that I've declared war against those civs. I have been trading with them all game so maybe that's why they like me.
One civ likes me so much I demanded something form him, denounced him, told him not to settle close to me and he is still friendly and never listed me as a warmongerer (I thought if I made him mad that would show up). His reasons listed changed from "we desire friendly relations" to "you denounce the same enemies as us" (+1) / "you made a demand of us"(-1) / "you denounced us"(-1) / "you told us not to settle near you"(-1). That's three negatives and one positive reason *listed* but he's still friendly.
Just to test further I declared war on him, he now lists me as a warmongerer but the other two civs are still friendly and only "desire friendly relations" -- they have not listed me as a warmongerer.
Still it's very confusing someone needs to do a write up about how diplomacy works in this game.
Please and thank you to anyone who does
tl;dr Civs decide whether they like you based on a bunch of different factors and what they list in their status isn't the complete story. It's not like Civ 4 where they list a bunch of reasons and add everything up linearly to decide whether they like you or not.
I'm testing a game I just finished, I'm at war with three people, and "friendly" with three other people because "they desire friendly relations". I declared war once in the past although I had only met that one single civ at the time. I had also been in a defensive war where two civs teamed up on me and I captured 5 cities (though no capitals). The people I'm at war with list me as a warmongerer as one of the reasons they don't like me.
Before the third declaration of war I was only a warmongerer to the two civs I was at war with. After declaring war with the third civ his status also said he thought I was a warmongerer. None of the other civs seem to care at all that I've declared war against those civs. I have been trading with them all game so maybe that's why they like me.
One civ likes me so much I demanded something form him, denounced him, told him not to settle close to me and he is still friendly and never listed me as a warmongerer (I thought if I made him mad that would show up). His reasons listed changed from "we desire friendly relations" to "you denounce the same enemies as us" (+1) / "you made a demand of us"(-1) / "you denounced us"(-1) / "you told us not to settle near you"(-1). That's three negatives and one positive reason *listed* but he's still friendly.
Just to test further I declared war on him, he now lists me as a warmongerer but the other two civs are still friendly and only "desire friendly relations" -- they have not listed me as a warmongerer.
Still it's very confusing someone needs to do a write up about how diplomacy works in this game.
Please and thank you to anyone who does
tl;dr Civs decide whether they like you based on a bunch of different factors and what they list in their status isn't the complete story. It's not like Civ 4 where they list a bunch of reasons and add everything up linearly to decide whether they like you or not.
Pax_Romanus
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2011
- Messages
- 85
If you wipe out a Civ, all the others will hate you. I was started a war against the Ottomans, who were at war with both India and Siam, I took both of Sulemains cities, Ghandi and Rham both denounced me for taking their spoils. Then every other nation denounced me, even though I was the big dog atm. Of course, I had taken Darius' capital in a defensive war, and then wiped out the Ottomans, who were the worlds largest supplier of wine, but here's the thing: I took the capital first, no denouncment, even though that was my second capital. Took Sulemains last city; warmongering menace, and eventually a world war against me, on the defensive, caught completely off guard. Not a game I cared to finish.
My observations: start a war, bad. Wipe someone out, bad. Steal someone's spoils of war, absolute hatred. Cut off a shipment of luxuries to a Civ, even if you sell it right back, greedy warmonger. Retaliate and take opponents cities as a Civ w/ strong military, good for you! Wanna be friends? Outside of a clique; God save you. Just my observations, experiences may vary.
My observations: start a war, bad. Wipe someone out, bad. Steal someone's spoils of war, absolute hatred. Cut off a shipment of luxuries to a Civ, even if you sell it right back, greedy warmonger. Retaliate and take opponents cities as a Civ w/ strong military, good for you! Wanna be friends? Outside of a clique; God save you. Just my observations, experiences may vary.
That may be true, however I have stolen Wu Zetian's war spoils countless times. One game she had declared war on Arabia, who was situated between me and her. This was early on in the game, (like 400 AD) they were the only two nations I had met. I had no DoF with either nation. Arabia was displayed as Friendly and China as Neutral. China had the game's largest military. Not exactly sure on Arabia's, but I was in 3rd place in terms of military size and that military advisor told me that Arabia's Military is not as strong as mine, don't make 'em feel insecure during meetings. Zet-zetian captured two of his cities (one was brand new), and Mecca and Medina was relatively close to my border, so I warred and Arabia I decided to send over some Horsemen. Medina was guarded by like, one spearman so I easily took that city and then moved some horsemen over to Mecca which had nearly fallen to China. They got the city to 1 HP for me, then my Horseman walked in and took Mecca.
After all this, Wu Zetian still had no opinion, instead giving me the we fought common foe bonus. She displayed as friendly then, also saying she wanted friendly relations. But that wasn't there previous to my declaration.
Whoever mentioned it earlier in this thread, I agree that there needs to be a balance between who thins what about who based on how many cities they took, units killed, how long war lasted, etc.
After all this, Wu Zetian still had no opinion, instead giving me the we fought common foe bonus. She displayed as friendly then, also saying she wanted friendly relations. But that wasn't there previous to my declaration.
Whoever mentioned it earlier in this thread, I agree that there needs to be a balance between who thins what about who based on how many cities they took, units killed, how long war lasted, etc.
