1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Military Emergencies

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Dux1, Feb 17, 2019.

  1. Dux1

    Dux1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    132
    I'm hoping that someone can help me understand some game mechanics here. A little background: I've had Civ 6 since launch, but I pretty much skipped R&F until now, and now that I'm experiencing these features in GS, I'm a little confused.

    In my current game, which is still only in the medieval era, there have been two emergencies thus far, and both were military emergencies that were triggered by city captures. The first was against Russia for capturing a single Australian city. I thought it was strange that the entire world would be brought together for this as an "emergency," particularly since not everyone knew everyone else yet (creating a bizarre situation where you are meeting with players you can't identify), but this at least seemed to follow the mechanics listed in Civlopedia somewhat: Russia was leading in a victory type (culture, although it was way too early in the game for this to be of any consequence), and they did indeed capture a city. Interestingly, Russia was my ally at this time, so I was not allowed to vote on the emergency, but the Civlopedia confirmed that this is how it's supposed to work, so I figured that's fair enough. Likewise, despite the fact that the whole world was about to go war with my ally, I wasn't obliged to defend him, which was completely unintuitive to me, but again, this layer of the mechanic was at least confirmed by the Civlopedia (evidently, alliances are null and void when "emergencies" are involved). At this point, I thought I could at least make sense of the mechanic, even if it seemed oddly designed.

    Then the second emergency was called. This time, the Zulus were the target for capturing a tiny (2 pop) Khmer city, but here's the thing: The Zulus were not leading in any victory types. When the vote came up in the World Congress, I was again not allowed to participate, but unlike the first situation with Russia, I did NOT have any special relationship with the Zulus (no alliance or declared friendship) that should preclude me. One other AI civ (Hungary) was also inexplicably excluded from this vote, but other than that, everyone else agreed to embark upon a consequence-free war with the Zulus for the "emergency" of a tiny city being captured relatively early in the game. My assumptions based on the Civlopedia data, which were confirmed by the first emergency with Russia, were shattered now.

    So now I am left with more questions than I have answers, and I'm hoping you folks can help elucidate things for me:
    1. What exactly is required to trigger a military emergency? Does it happen every time a city is captured? Is it just random?
    2. Is another civ (presumably, the one that was attacked) deciding to "call" the emergency, or does the game just do it?
    3. What determines who can and who cannot vote on emergencies? In my Zulu example above, why was I not allowed to participate in the vote?
    4. If the point of the military emergency is to recapture a city that was lost, why is it that anyone can just take the city for themselves? Wouldn't it make far more sense to require them to liberate the city?
    5. This is more of an opinion poll, but: Does anyone else feel like this mechanic doesn't really make a whole lot of sense? Why would the whole world consider a single city capture an "emergency," and why would allies not be obliged to defend an ally who is being attacked by literally everyone? Why isn't the city at the center of the emergency required to be liberated, and why does everyone involved remain at war even after the emergency has been resolved?
    TL;DR: I don't understand military emergencies, and if anyone could answer the 5 questions above, I would really appreciate it. Thanks, everyone!
     
    Hatchie likes this.
  2. AriochIV

    AriochIV Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,617
    Location:
    San Jose, California
    I think that it's randomly determined by the game, but it's possible that the victim may have a chance to call for it like with disaster emergencies. But even if so, it would still be random whether the option to call for it is granted by the game, so in either case there's a random element.

    You can't vote for the emergency if you haven't met the target civ, or if you're allied with the target civ.

    As in R&F the emergency against aggressors is actually a boost for aggressors, since I don't think I have ever seen one succeed (that I wasn't participating in). I guess it's mainly a thing to give the player an excuse to go to war.
     
    Dux1 likes this.
  3. Dux1

    Dux1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    132
    @AriochIV Thanks for the info. I suppose it may have been a bug that I couldn't vote on the Zulu emergency, then, since I had met them already and was not allied with them, yet I still wasn't allowed to participate in (or vote on) the emergency. I may submit the save to Firaxis.
     
  4. ExemplarVoss

    ExemplarVoss Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2016
    Messages:
    349
    Really? All of the ones I've seen pop against AIs have been successful. A swarm just appears and descends on the target, and then spreads out and usually razes a couple more cities because they take the target so fast, they can't peace out yet.

    The main thing seems to be the emergencies are actually a use for the completely wasteful armies the AIs are set to build.
     
  5. Dux1

    Dux1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    132
    Just had another military emergency occur later in the same game. This time the target was Australia, a civ I had denounced. Nevertheless, I was inexplicably not allowed to vote on the proposal once again. It seems to me that when an emergency occurs and who gets to have a say in it is just randomized, which is very disappointing. Am I missing something?
     
  6. AriochIV

    AriochIV Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,617
    Location:
    San Jose, California
    I just had a situation occur in which I was the target of a military emergency vote, but I was allowed to vote. Odd that you can vote against an emergency targeting you, but not one of your allies. Kind of goofy and inconsistent, really.
     

Share This Page