Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Dearmad, Feb 17, 2019.
Buncha crybaby warbabies!
The main issue I had with warmongering penalties was that they were meaningless. Everybody hated you, but so what? They didn't actually do anything about it.
R&F improved that a bit with the alliance system, as warmongering penalties reduced your changes at alliance bonuses. But those bonuses are pretty meagre so still not a significant issue.
Since GS boosted alliances by tying diplomatic favor to them, I presume the game continues to evolve in a direction that creates additional challenges for warmongering - now measured with the new grievance system. But from reading GS player reports, it sounds to me like it has a way to go before the cost of bad relationships would approach the benefits of holding an extra city.
You don't really expect the AI to ignore you if you are conquering civs and breaking promises, do you? That shows you're a threat and untrustworthy.
Sometimes, yes. If an AI civ have never even met the civ you conquered (or betrayed) and especially if they don't have any diplomatic insight into what you are up to around the world then, yeah - I do kind of expect the AI to live up to it's level of ignorance and ignore your actions. IMO then the receiving civ's level of diplomatic information about other civs should affect the amount of grievance a receiving civ can get from the aggrieving civs transgression(s). Things that should cumulatively reduce (or increase) Grievances gained would include existing Alliances, Friendships, and Denounciations as well as whether receiving civ have contact with the aggrieved civ and/or have any diplomatic presence with the aggriever.
Separate names with a comma.