Extreme Warmonger Penalty?

[Convict]

Okay, I was trying to think of the context where I had remembered it

Circumstances were that I had agreed to a Declaration of Friendship early on and the AI sent a settler into what I considered my territory. I seized it (as you do). The penalty I received for breaking the DOF was certainly known by Civs I had not met at that point.

(Oops I see ZXCVBOB said much the same).

 

[Sclb]

It's actually 20 turns for troops near border.
Some of the promises if you break them, they're globally known, but some of them aren't. I just don't understand. For example, if you backstab a friend, DoW when you're passing through, it's global, but when you broke the promise to settle close to someone, it isn't.

 

[beetle]

Some of the promises if you break them, they're globally known, but some of them aren't. I just don't understand. For example, if you backstab a friend, DoW when you're passing through, it's global, but when you broke the promise to settle close to someone, it isn't.

I think it is only killing off a civ that is not known globally.
Breaking a promise not to settle or buy land is just with the one civ anyway.

 

[historix69]

Early war surely is to prefere since your enemies usually do not have too many DoFs with other civs and warmonger penalty is reduced in early eras.

I currently play on huge, marathon ... Spain, my neighbour, forward settled me early so that I usually would have started a war to "correct" borderlines and take their cities including Madrid with temple of Artemis. However I already had placed 4 cities and wanted to go for National Wonders so I delayed it. AI in this game is rather pathetic ... After 600 turns, most of them still have only 3-4 cities, an estimated 60% of landmass is unsettled. So after reaching industrial age (and finishing all National Wonders), I decided to go for Spain with its 4 cities and then expand to build a bigger nation. By the time, Spain has moved on from former isolated civ to a beloved friend of all other civs (except Attila, who was at war with everybody else). After catching a spanish spy, I denounced and declared war and quickly conquered their 4 cities ... I got 2 x Big Warmonger Penalties and 2 x Extreme Warmonger Penalties ... Diplomacy now is completely stalled, the attitude infos are completely in red ... I had DoFs with all civs except Spain and Attila for the past 500 turns, allthough some of them might have expired recently ... It is a map where you can place maybe 100-200 cities but taking 4 cities is too much ...


(The other civs in this game are all still medieval/renaissance, so they are no threat and I really did not care for diplomacy ... When I have time I look for opportunities for war and attack neighbours when they have no DoF with other civs. However when working on National Wonders, the increasing production costs usually keep you out of war/expansion until renaissance. And if you do not go to war then, you usually win the game accidently by repetitively clicking "next turn" which is no fun ...)

 

[Kin]

Hitler conquered Europe and I don't read where there was upheaval in Germany anywhere. Also same applies to Japan and Italy.

So why the unhappiness at all.

 

[historix69]

Some historic empires :


The Empire of Alexander the Great

Spoiler :

The Roman Empire

Spoiler :

The Roman Empire in 117 AD, at its greatest extent at the time

The Mongol Empire

Spoiler :

The Ottoman Empire

Spoiler :

The Russian Empire

Spoiler :

The British Empire

Spoiler :

All areas of the world that were ever part of the British Empire.

The American Empire (1898)

Spoiler :

WW2 : 1942 Axis vs Allies

Spoiler :

WW2 : Japanese Empire 1942

Spoiler :

 

[beetle]

So why the unhappiness at all?

What it is measuring does not seem to have a good name. It is not happiness, it more akin to administrative capacity. And, historically, as empires expanded, they had trouble keeping everything smoothly under control.

I like to think of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. You the player are Caesar. Your domination run is going well enough. But you have been at -10 unhappy for too long, so your army has to swing back home to take care of rebels spawning near the cap.

 

[NebulousJaguar]

What it is measuring does not seem to have a good name. It is not happiness, it more akin to administrative capacity. And, historically, as empires expanded, they had trouble keeping everything smoothly under control.

I like to think of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. You the player are Caesar. Your domination run is going well enough. But you have been at -10 unhappy for too long, so your army has to swing back home to take care of rebels spawning near the cap.

I really like this explanation and it makes real sense.
The happiness system of Civ5 doesn't bother me at all and I always had a thought that it virtualized some aspect of advancing a civilization. Perhaps if it was actually named differently, many players would not complain about the apparent limitations.