[NOT BUG] Diplomatic Victory is impossible to get

[inevitable7]

I took over all the city states and almost all the competing AIs and as a whole, we only get 4 votes... You need 10 votes to win so it's impossible for any of us to win by the diplomatic victory. I had the vast majority of the world's population and I only got 2 votes? Maybe I had too many puppet states but I don't think thats the reason.



I remember in Civ 4, even if there is just the player and one AI, if you had the necessary population, you could still win with the diplomatic victory. This is not so for Civ 5.

BTW, Catherine is hot, I'd do her.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Opponent civs are always going to vote for themselves. Every civ has one vote, the owner of the UN gets two. The only way to win diplomatically is to be a favorite of most city states. Obviously, if you war-mongered and killed them all, you can`t win diplo victory. In a way, that is a lot more realistic than winning a conquest victory masquarading as a diplo victory, like what you describe from Civ IV.

 

[Abyss08]

That still doesn't change the fact that it is literally IMPOSSIBLE.

The game should at max require the number of votes available.

 

[Doskias51]

I have won a diplo victory just a few hours ago on Prince.


The Pen is Mighter
http://steamcommunity.com/id/doskias51/stats/CivV

It is all about liberating civs and city state allies.

 

[Abyss08]

I have won diplo victory myself, but look at the screenshot...

In his specific situation it is impossible. Its not a game breaking bug, and either way he'd never win a diplo victory in that situation, but still it should only require as many votes as exist if even for aesthetic value.

 

[DalekDavros]

The other votes are still available; someone just needs to liberate the city-states first.

 

[AustinYQM]

I have won diplo victory myself, but look at the screenshot...

In his specific situation it is impossible. Its not a game breaking bug, and either way he'd never win a diplo victory in that situation, but still it should only require as many votes as exist if even for aesthetic value.

If its impossible, its your fault.

It was possible when the game started and became impossible via your actions. If I destroyed your entire civ it would be impossible for you to claim any form of victory. It was possible when the game started. You broke it.

 

[ainwood]

I've listed this as "possible". I think its actually that the city states and other civs have been captured, but the messaging could be tidied up.

 

[Rub'Rum]

I have won diplo victory myself, but look at the screenshot...

In his specific situation it is impossible. Its not a game breaking bug, and either way he'd never win a diplo victory in that situation, but still it should only require as many votes as exist if even for aesthetic value.

You've conquered half the world and disintegrated all city states (thus reducing available votes) and expect to be considered a master of "diplomacy"?

The master of diplomacy would be the guy who would liberate them, and other civs, from you.

 

[warpstorm]

This is working as designed. Conquerors are not diplomats.

 

[S.ilver]

Pretty sure this is WAI. The reason being why should they reward you a diplomatic victory for being a warmonger?

If another civ were to march through your empire and recapture your conquests (liberating the city states and other civs on the way), they would be able to win a diplomatic victory. In this case, you'll probably be better off going for domination.

 

[__jack__]

They probably forgot to rescale the 10 minimum vote to the number of player still alive, in your case 2 should be the trigger to win...

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I think this is intended... "eliminated" city-states can be liberated

So can "eliminated" civs.

So the total 'voters' is always constant, never changing... "eliminated" voters merely abstain

 

[SatanasOz]

At first I was completely on the side saying that it works as designed.

But playing a recent "peaceful" game made me think. I was playing huge continents in a totally non aggressive way, building wonders, befriending as many city states as possible. The guys on my (the smaller) continent bullied around a bit and were told their place. I even liberated a capital and two city states.

BUT: Napoleon, on the other continent, was wreaking havoc and conquered each and every city on his super-continent before the industrial age. The point now is: there now not enought city states left to win diplomatically - even when I captured none of them.

So, my point: were is the "peaceful" diplomatic victory in this case? I played 3 games now, and by the time the UN was build, there were not enough city states left. Which leaves me with the two options: go and rase BBEGs capital or get your blue helmets on and liberate some the old fashioned way. In any case, not realy diplomatic.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yep... you have to go liberate some City States (or Civs) that Napoleon conquered.

And it is Very diplomatic... just diplomacy by 'other means.'

You have to "make the world safe for diplomacy".

Otherwise you just cconquer any city state that is Not your ally, instead of allying all of them.

 

[This is Aru]

Napoleon is trying to win the game too. He needs to block you from having enough votes.

 

[ainwood]

This is working as designed. Conquerors are not diplomats.

Thank-you.

 

[neoTask]

Maybe it is by design but this design is a little bit illogical from cultural and political view. It should not matter how I played or how my opponents played before as conquered civilizations are conquered and will not vote. How in the world is it possible to get into a situation where at some point one can not be elected because there is not enought countries even when every country left would give a vote for the same country? It is simply illogical.