Killed or Captured Civilians During War should not exist unless they were theirs.

[ElliotS]

This is the dumbest diplo penalty I've ever seen. Why should an AI across the map care if I killed someone's great people? I would actually be happy that such a thing happened.

I can understand AI's resenting you for killing their civvies, but the fact that unaffiliated parties care is absurd. Warmonger penalties are harsh enough on the diplo front.

In my current game as Arabia Denmark declared war on me and in my process of defending myself from his endless wave of units I've gotten a permanent penalty with all civs. Objectively I really don't think I deserve this.

At the very least this is another modifier that should be co-signed to a "Role playing mode" toggle. I personally just think it has no place in the game.

 

[JamesNinelives]

I think it exists to create some kind of disincentive for declaring war and then just stealing the AI's workers or settlers. That kind of play isn't really much fun when it happens to you. Luckily the AI don't do it very often, so it's mostly humans who benefit.

 

[azum4roll]

It only becomes a global penalty if you killed too many civilians.

 

[Recursive]

This is the dumbest diplo penalty I've ever seen. Why should an AI across the map care if I killed someone's great people? I would actually be happy that such a thing happened.

I can understand AI's resenting you for killing their civvies, but the fact that unaffiliated parties care is absurd. Warmonger penalties are harsh enough on the diplo front.

In my current game as Arabia Denmark declared war on me and in my process of defending myself from his endless wave of units I've gotten a permanent penalty with all civs. Objectively I really don't think I deserve this.

At the very least this is another modifier that should be co-signed to a "Role playing mode" toggle. I personally just think it has no place in the game.

It's not a permanent penalty, it decays over time (albeit fairly slowly).

I think it exists to create some kind of disincentive for declaring war and then just stealing the AI's workers or settlers. That kind of play isn't really much fun when it happens to you. Luckily the AI don't do it very often, so it's mostly humans who benefit.

I didn't create the penalty, but I did tweak it precisely as a deterrent this kind of stealing.

It only becomes a global penalty if you killed too many civilians.

Yes, but early game units, particularly Settlers, count for more "civilian killer" points.

I'm open to suggestions on how to change it, but I think the deterrent to cheesy early game stealing strategies is beneficial to AI play.

 

[Zanteogo]

I like it because it adds a bit of "realism", and as Recursive said it helps limit cheesy play.

My only issue with it is it can be impossible to avoid from "normal" warfare. If an AI decides to stick 6 workers in a city I am attacking there isn't a way around not taking them.

It would be nice to get the "return unit" message pop up, even if at war with the owner. Perhaps not get any diplo bonus for returning if at war though.

 

[ElliotS]

I'm open to suggestions on how to change it, but I think the deterrent to cheesy early game stealing strategies is beneficial to AI play.

Well as far as changes I have three ranked in order of how agreeable I'd guess they would be to everyone. (Though all are less extreme than removing it and I think could have majority agreement.)

Number one I think is a slam-dunk: It should only apply if you declare the war. There is no cheese strat that doesn't involve you declaring war, and as mentioned it's most frustrating when you're defending and people get pissed at you for it.

The second one is that it should decay faster with players that you didn't steal from. I might care that you just got a power boost from stealing a worker, but it will quickly only matter in the sense of what results you get from that worker. I've always held that the most important factor is strength. If you're strong, I don't care how you got there; You're a threat.

The third is that it should be removed or lowered with city captures. If you go to war and steal a ton of workers, maybe it makes sense. If you go to war and take a city, I don't think you need to double-dip. The act of taking a city is already killing civilians. That's why pop drops. Often a lot. And warmonger penalties reflect it well.

 

[Deljade]

Does the penalty apply to Caravan plundering?

 

[Recursive]

I like it because it adds a bit of "realism", and as Recursive said it helps limit cheesy play.

My only issue with it is it can be impossible to avoid from "normal" warfare. If an AI decides to stick 6 workers in a city I am attacking there isn't a way around not taking them.

It would be nice to get the "return unit" message pop up, even if at war with the owner. Perhaps not get any diplo bonus for returning if at war though.

Well as far as changes I have three ranked in order of how agreeable I'd guess they would be to everyone. (Though all are less extreme than removing it and I think could have majority agreement.)

Number one I think is a slam-dunk: It should only apply if you declare the war. There is no cheese strat that doesn't involve you declaring war, and as mentioned it's most frustrating when you're defending and people get pissed at you for it.

The second one is that it should decay faster with players that you didn't steal from. I might care that you just got a power boost from stealing a worker, but it will quickly only matter in the sense of what results you get from that worker. I've always held that the most important factor is strength. If you're strong, I don't care how you got there; You're a threat.

The third is that it should be removed or lowered with city captures. If you go to war and steal a ton of workers, maybe it makes sense. If you go to war and take a city, I don't think you need to double-dip. The act of taking a city is already killing civilians. That's why pop drops. Often a lot. And warmonger penalties reflect it well.

It doesn't apply to civilians captured on a city tile, so three is already the case.

The issue with 2 is that it uses a single value per player, and the decay rate depends on the player you stole from's opinion towards you. If any player's value is above 50, the player gets a global penalty to opinion. I'll note that I didn't design this system.

Run once per turn:
               if(!IsAtWar(eLoopPlayer))
               {
                   if(GetNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer) > 0)
                   {
                       if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_FRIEND)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -10);
                       }
                       else if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_NEUTRAL)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -5);
                       }
                       else if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_COMPETITOR)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -3);
                       }
                       else
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -1);
                       }
                   }
               }

"NumTimesRazed" can be thought of as "civilian killer points". The same value is used when razing cities: (5 * era #) is added per turn of razing.

Both 1 and 2 would require a new memory value to be added in order to work correctly.

I'll look at this penalty when redesigning the Opinion system, which is my next planned change.

Does the penalty apply to Caravan plundering?

Yes.

 

[Deljade]

Yes.

Well, it has happened quite a few times that a civ would declare war on me, or a defensive pact of mine, and their Caravans to me were automatically plundered, I was baffled by seeing this penalty in my recent peaceful run game and did suspect that it's the Caravans... which is totally dumb, I did not even plunder them myself they just got auto captured... in defensive wars! Hilarious.

 

[ElliotS]

It doesn't apply to civilians captured on a city tile, so three is already the case.

The issue with 2 is that it uses a single value per player, and the decay rate depends on the player you stole from's opinion towards you. If any player's value is above 50, the player gets a global penalty to opinion. I'll note that I didn't design this system.

Run once per turn:
               if(!IsAtWar(eLoopPlayer))
               {
                   if(GetNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer) > 0)
                   {
                       if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_FRIEND)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -10);
                       }
                       else if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_NEUTRAL)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -5);
                       }
                       else if(GetMajorCivOpinion(eLoopPlayer) >= MAJOR_CIV_OPINION_COMPETITOR)
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -3);
                       }
                       else
                       {
                           ChangeNumTimesRazed(eLoopPlayer, -1);
                       }
                   }
               }

"NumTimesRazed" can be thought of as "civilian killer points". The same value is used when razing cities: (5 * era #) is added per turn of razing.

Both 1 and 2 would require a new memory value to be added in order to work correctly.

I'll look at this penalty when redesigning the Opinion system, which is my next planned change.



Yes.

So I wasn't super clear with #3 I guess. I mean that no matter how you got the penalty, it should be removed if you take a city.

As far as the other stuff, then my suggestion would be to just outright remove the penalty and just have it factor into how much AIs resent you after a war.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Well, it has happened quite a few times that a civ would declare war on me, or a defensive pact of mine, and their Caravans to me were automatically plundered, I was baffled by seeing this penalty in my recent peaceful run game and did suspect that it's the Caravans... which is totally dumb, I did not even plunder them myself they just got auto captured... in defensive wars! Hilarious.

This is kinda strange, huh?

 

[Recursive]

Okay, will look at this.

 

[Tekamthi]

On OP topic, I rather enjoy these AI diplo penalties that align with certain "human" qualities. Seems rather universally disliked when unarmed people are killed irl, and the diplo penalties capture this well enough. That said, the OP situation of a player across the map getting upset should only be in play if that player can actually observe what happened (ie the tile is visible to that civ on the turn the civilian is killed.. maybe this is already current state? not sure).

I really enjoy the capturing and freeing of civilians aspect, when it comes up. Wish this could be more prominent feature for all civilians.. recently i have noticed that freeing a settler that was taken from me only gives me back a worker, muting the value of trying to rescue these units -- a step in the wrong direction if you ask me.

Maybe caravans shouldn't be insta-plundered, but immoblizied for x turns prior to being killed? This would provide some interesting secondary objectives in war, encouraging player to hold an otherwise low-value area where they've immoblized a caravan, or similarly attack into tiles they'd otherwise ignore etc.

 

[Zanteogo]

On OP topic, I rather enjoy these AI diplo penalties that align with certain "human" qualities. Seems rather universally disliked when unarmed people are killed irl, and the diplo penalties capture this well enough. That said, the OP situation of a player across the map getting upset should only be in play if that player can actually observe what happened (ie the tile is visible to that civ on the turn the civilian is killed.. maybe this is already current state? not sure).

I really enjoy the capturing and freeing of civilians aspect, when it comes up. Wish this could be more prominent feature for all civilians.. recently i have noticed that freeing a settler that was taken from me only gives me back a worker, muting the value of trying to rescue these units -- a step in the wrong direction if you ask me.

Maybe caravans shouldn't be insta-plundered, but immoblizied for x turns prior to being killed? This would provide some interesting secondary objectives in war, encouraging player to hold an otherwise low-value area where they've immoblized a caravan, or similarly attack into tiles they'd otherwise ignore etc.

Topics like these sorts have a mini divide between people who lean towards role playing and people who lean towards this as a "chess" game. Neither one is wrong, but sometimes certain changes just lean one way or the other. The global diplo dislike of taking civilians leans towards the role playing side. I would like to leave it (mostly) as it is now, but with maybe a tweak or two.

It doesn't apply to civilians captured on a city tile, so three is already the case.

Didn't know that.

 

[Tekamthi]

Topics like these sorts have a mini divide between people who lean towards role playing and people who lean towards this as a "chess" game. Neither one is wrong, but sometimes certain changes just lean one way or the other. The global diplo dislike of taking civilians leans towards the role playing side.

I disagree on the distinction as you've defined it.. "roleplaying" involves story elements, which are not present in either form discussed here. The diplo penalty in this case is simply the rules of chess, so to speak.. there are differing perspectives on how sim-like vs gamey-abstraction VP/civ should be, and perhaps this is the difference here. The civ franchise has always been a balance of both, though I suppose in my mind it strives to be more a sim-style game than others like risk etc... On the other hand, its less of a sim and more gamey than some other grand strategy titles. Anyway point taken, the correct balance is somewhat subjective. If the penalty were limited just to civ's that could "see" what happened, i suspect this might be a good compromise

 

[Recursive]

On OP topic, I rather enjoy these AI diplo penalties that align with certain "human" qualities. Seems rather universally disliked when unarmed people are killed irl, and the diplo penalties capture this well enough. That said, the OP situation of a player across the map getting upset should only be in play if that player can actually observe what happened (ie the tile is visible to that civ on the turn the civilian is killed.. maybe this is already current state? not sure).

I really enjoy the capturing and freeing of civilians aspect, when it comes up. Wish this could be more prominent feature for all civilians.. recently i have noticed that freeing a settler that was taken from me only gives me back a worker, muting the value of trying to rescue these units -- a step in the wrong direction if you ask me.

Maybe caravans shouldn't be insta-plundered, but immoblizied for x turns prior to being killed? This would provide some interesting secondary objectives in war, encouraging player to hold an otherwise low-value area where they've immoblized a caravan, or similarly attack into tiles they'd otherwise ignore etc.

If your own Settler is turned into a Worker when recaptured from Barbarians, that's a bug.

I'll remove this penalty from trade units as a first tweak. Easiest way to handle it, plus they already have their own penalty.