How to avoid/undo Warmonger label

[Mr_PeaCH]

I'm in search of some feedback if anyone has given thought to how and why a player gets the Warmonger label from the AIs.

Current thesis: Regardless of which side started the war, if the player is winning and gets a peace offer from the AI and does NOT take it - they get a big Warmonger penalty. Even if you take a later peace offer (such as after you finish sacking and claiming the city you were after) it is too late, Warmonger-wise. Conversely, if a player takes the first peace offer by the AI, Warmonger penalty is much less.

Does it play that way for anyone else or am I imagining?

Further thoughts: Feels like the AIs never, ever forget that you were labeled a Warmonger. There ought to be some diminishment over the ages (Ancient, Classical, Medieval...) so you can get a do-over when you've decided you've got all the land you want and are going to 'play nice' from here on out. Especially when "they started it!".

 

[Cymsdale]

Removing all other players from the map brings all warmonger penalties to zero.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I'm in search of some feedback if anyone has given thought to how and why a player gets the Warmonger label from the AIs.

Current thesis: Regardless of which side started the war, if the player is winning and gets a peace offer from the AI and does NOT take it - they get a big Warmonger penalty. Even if you take a later peace offer (such as after you finish sacking and claiming the city you were after) it is too late, Warmonger-wise. Conversely, if a player takes the first peace offer by the AI, Warmonger penalty is much less.

Does it play that way for anyone else or am I imagining?

Further thoughts: Feels like the AIs never, ever forget that you were labeled a Warmonger. There ought to be some diminishment over the ages (Ancient, Classical, Medieval...) so you can get a do-over when you've decided you've got all the land you want and are going to 'play nice' from here on out. Especially when "they started it!".

You get warmonger points from

1. Declaring War
2. Taking a city*
3. Razing a city
4. Keeping a city once you declare peace

*This is removed if you give the city back in the peace deal

so if you take a bunch of someone else's territory you will get a lot of warmonger points as you take those cities.
(you will get more points in the peace deal...or reduce your warmonger score if you give the cities back)


I'm pretty sure refusing a peace deal does not give warmonger points.

 

[smartcanuck1988]

Removing all other players from the map brings all warmonger penalties to zero.

That's pretty much how it feels to me too. Once you become a warmonger (which doesn't take too much), you may as well embrace it

Supposedly the system was designed to help you "tick" your way to a positive relationship eventually. But the number (and weight) of positive factors is so small that unless you are really conceding ALOT you will be hated by the AI no matter what.

 

[steveg700]

That's pretty much how it feels to me too. Once you become a warmonger (which doesn't take too much), you may as well embrace it

Supposedly the system was designed to help you "tick" your way to a positive relationship eventually. But the number (and weight) of positive factors is so small that unless you are really conceding ALOT you will be hated by the AI no matter what.

And some of those few things you can do to get positive bonuses, like delegations and embassies, require the consent of the other civ, who won't grant it if they don't like you. Given that that warmongering penalties are not small or incremental, but rather large and abrupt, it really is just a point of no return. I've had civ's I've just met be extremely displeased from warmongering I did eras past.

What's really whacked is that my net diplo modifiers for being in line with a civ's agendas can be +10< and that civ will still be unfriendly.

Feels good to commiserate like this.

 

[blasto]

I guess if it was too easy to placate the AI there would be more complaints of boring games where the AI never declares war.

 

[Morningcalm]

You can try to offset it by giving the AI gifts, but the warmonger penalty will always be far higher, so there's really little way to make the other AIs not hate you. It seems no AI in Civ VI like to see other warmongers (whereas in Civ IV there were some who respected warmongering or at least didn't penalize it as much).

 

[bmrigs]

When I ask that the Al not to settle too close to me and they say they will only for me to see the next city even closer then I just take and never relinquish it. To hell with warmonger penalties.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You can try to offset it by giving the AI gifts, but the warmonger penalty will always be far higher, so there's really little way to make the other AIs not hate you. It seems no AI in Civ VI like to see other warmongers (whereas in Civ IV there were some who respected warmongering or at least didn't penalize it as much).

Did you mean civ 5? Civ 4's only warmonger penalty was for declaring on that civ directly (-2, permanent) or on a friend (please or higher towards your target, -1). If everyone was cautious or lower with the target, the only person who cared was the target. It was even possible if everyone was annoyed with your target to launch 100 nukes on that civ without any diplomatic repercussions...aside the huge negative with "civ" that's left after doing so anyway.

However since those modifiers were pretty shallow and permanent it was a limited system. 5's was a little more nuanced, but also had some nonsensical elements and didn't work all that well (IE taking 1 city was very often not equal to taking another city that would otherwise be identical due to size of your target, plus the ability to game the heck out of that).

 

[smartcanuck1988]

I guess if it was too easy to placate the AI there would be more complaints of boring games where the AI never declares war.

In my games the AI rarely declares war anyway except early on when warmongering isn't high anyway. All these negative relationship factors do is make it impossible to make any reasonable trade deals and cause constant repetitive annoying leader sequences denouncing you.

 

[Morningcalm]

Did you mean civ 5? Civ 4's only warmonger penalty was for declaring on that civ directly (-2, permanent) or on a friend (please or higher towards your target, -1). If everyone was cautious or lower with the target, the only person who cared was the target. It was even possible if everyone was annoyed with your target to launch 100 nukes on that civ without any diplomatic repercussions...aside the huge negative with "civ" that's left after doing so anyway.

However since those modifiers were pretty shallow and permanent it was a limited system. 5's was a little more nuanced, but also had some nonsensical elements and didn't work all that well (IE taking 1 city was very often not equal to taking another city that would otherwise be identical due to size of your target, plus the ability to game the heck out of that).

Civ IV AI hated it when you declared war on a friend of theirs, for example, and did appreciate it when you joined them in a joint military effort against a mutual foe. Civ V's diplomacy I found to be unsubtle and lacking as it too used heavy warmongering penalties, and had limited diplomacy in trading alone (though you could trade UN votes which was new).

 

[Lucius_]

It helps if you have declared friendship before war. Those AI's you are friends with seem to not be affected as heavily by your mild warmongering. They will remain friendly, though may not renew the DoF later. This, of course, is only to a certain limit of warmongering. Taking a few cities and your friends will stay friends. Once you remove someone from the map entirely, that's it though.

 

[SirSaab]

Speaking of warmongers, treacherous Trajan and Passive Aggressive Victoria just joint DoW on me, and they wete both "friendly."

She is an utter backstabber in every game I have encountered her in, and I HATE HER STUPID FACE. Trajan at least, is usually honorable, but clearly she whipped up some imperialist voodoo on him or something!

Grr for schizo AI. Come on Ed Beach! You saved us from Jon Schafer's vanilla CiV diplomacy! What compelled you to revisit it in this edition??? GAH!

 

[Zenstrive]

Once you go to war for whatever reasons, all of the AIs will hate you.

 

[Francis Xavier]

Overall I've found that, unless you become allies with someone, you're more or less always in a state of cold war in civ VI. Seeing as how there's no victory condition that requires you to be good in diplomacy, I've found on deity that I mostly just ignore everything and everyone. Gorgo is really easy to be allied with - she loves it when you are a warmonger, and loves it even more when you take all their stuff in the peace deal. I've also managed to get good friends with Gilgamesh, Trajan, Brazil, China and Germany before just playing the game normally.

Overall, diplomacy wise, except for the very early game with surprise wars, the AI is extremely reluctant to actually act on their denouncements. They'll huff and puff all day, but will seldom take action. And usually the rest of the world hates the rest of the world, so it's not just you they hate. Although, I have had some games where there was virtually no world wars going on and everyone was relatively friendly with everyone else, even declaring friendship / alliances, etc.

 

[Francis Xavier]

That being said - if you don't want to be shackled by big warmonger penalties you better go to war really early (and finish the war early) or use a CB like Colonial War. You can also liberate city states and other territory conquered.

 

[Tamir Lenk]

Problem with Gorgo. If she declares war on you, she will never quit. Even if you slaughter her troops, she won't sue for peace. So you have to obliterate her cities, ending up a world monster ... for a war she started.

 

[3EchoSix]

The new update just adjusted warmonger penalties. They also adjusted relationship timers. Might help?

• Reduced Warmonger penalties in most instances, and adjusted how this reacts to returning versus keeping a city. The last city conquered from a player now provides a heavy warmonger penalty, even if you have a Casus Belli against this player, because you are wiping out a civilization.
• Adjusted relationship decay rates.

 

[Mr_PeaCH]

The new update just adjusted warmonger penalties. They also adjusted relationship timers. Might help?

• Reduced Warmonger penalties in most instances, and adjusted how this reacts to returning versus keeping a city. The last city conquered from a player now provides a heavy warmonger penalty, even if you have a Casus Belli against this player, because you are wiping out a civilization.
• Adjusted relationship decay rates.

Let's hope so; thanks for this.

I think the consensus however is that once there is peace it's almost impossible to ever restore relations and said AI will forever be "unfriendly" if you keep or raze their city. I can see the case for this but realistically I don't feel like the player should have to pay for such hubris through the ages. At some point the AI should get over it and realize it hasn't been their city for more than 2000 years; time to let it go.

It tends to be 'just one' city. AI pulls the same act every time and moves a settler well inside what you had begun to consider 'your turf'. Only there hasn't been time to generate the adequate number of settlers yet to formally claim it. Often you aren't even yet in a position where you could warn them not to settle too close (not that it ever does much good but still 'casus belli') So is it better to strike the settler down (and take it for yourself) via a surprise war action. Or watch them start their city. Then formally denounce and ultimately casus belli?

 

[juanpavo]

The new update just adjusted warmonger penalties. They also adjusted relationship timers. Might help?

• Reduced Warmonger penalties in most instances, and adjusted how this reacts to returning versus keeping a city. The last city conquered from a player now provides a heavy warmonger penalty, even if you have a Casus Belli against this player, because you are wiping out a civilization.

And some of those few things you can do to get positive bonuses, like delegations and embassies, require the consent of the other civ, who won't grant it if they don't like you. Given that that warmongering penalties are not small or incremental, but rather large and abrupt, it really is just a point of no return.

Along these lines, what I'd really like to see is:

• Warmonger penalty reduced with any civilization that player enters a joint war with

Once everybody hates each other, there should be a way to recover some "love".