Oh no I got ... as my nieghbor

Anyway, on topic, I hate starting next to Curtin, he always wants to DoW me when I'm wanting to focus on my cities and getting them productive. No one else seems to do that (except Teddy, once).
My best guess here is that the minority of civ's that are disinclined to attack CS's become more inclined to attack what they see as a weak civ. That's often the human player.
 
CIv's team are history buffs, they must know all about Ghandi and all the other leaders in the game. They could've fixed this "bug" a long time ago but decided to leave it. Could be it's just a popular joke and why not since it's just a game after all.
There you go. You got it right there. These are the same goofballs who were like "Scottland? Golf courses, lolz!" and "Canada? Mounties & hockey rinks! Totsstereotypicaladorbs!"

They think a nuke-happy Ghandi is a cute trope to preserver, therefore they do so.
 
They are like any bully, once they have a bloody nose they learn to behave
Sad part is in my experience, they don't... One screwy thing about this patch is that if you hold one of their cities (despite not having any grievances since they were the ones who started the war) they can and will still call an emergency on you and get the bonuses. This is pretty screwed up.

So the best thing to do if you don't kill them completely is to raze everything you capture.
 
I am really really surprised so little hate to Curtin and Lautaro as neighbours.

Australia nearby means advanced civ in science which you surely want to eliminate, but declaring on them means +100% to their unit production.
Mapuche nearby means if you want to kill them, you don't want golden age, so problems with loyality while fighting them

While killing so hated Russia is rarely a problem. Just pillage temples so Peter cannot recruit warrior monks
 
I am really really surprised so little hate to Curtin and Lautaro as neighbours.

Australia nearby means advanced civ in science which you surely want to eliminate, but declaring on them means +100% to their unit production.
Mapuche nearby means if you want to kill them, you don't want golden age, so problems with loyality while fighting them

While killing so hated Russia is rarely a problem. Just pillage temples so Peter cannot recruit warrior monks

Speaking of which, Australia's UA should really be Russia's UA historically :D
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Germany.
  • Takes out all the city states you meet early
  • Hates you for being suzerain of any CSs he hasn't conquered
  • Loves forcing his religion on you
  • Loves to settle all the nearby land
  • Has high powered cities all game
 
Sad part is in my experience, they don't... One screwy thing about this patch is that if you hold one of their cities (despite not having any grievances since they were the ones who started the war) they can and will still call an emergency on you and get the bonuses. This is pretty screwed up.
if you want 2 cities, take 3 and give 1 back and all is well, they love you after a while. It’s an old trick but still removes the -18 for occupying one of their cities. Either that or give them an ice city.
They cannot call an emergency later, only at the time, it may be delayed due to Congress stupidity - that is the only screwed up thing I know about.
 
if you want 2 cities, take 3 and give 1 back and all is well, they love you after a while. It’s an old trick but still removes the -18 for occupying one of their cities. Either that or give them an ice city.
They cannot call an emergency later, only at the time, it may be delayed due to Congress stupidity - that is the only screwed up thing I know about.

Stupidity indeed. We had already peaced out for several turns, and they already ceded the cities too. I still even had some leftover grievances against them; so technically, everyone agrees I took no more payment than what I'm entitled to take given their crimes against me. All was well...

And then suddenly a message pops up that they must resist my "aggression"--what??? What aggression? They started that war!
 
And then suddenly a message pops up that they must resist my "aggression"--what??? What aggression? They started that war!

This has already come up so many times before. Yes, they may have started the war, but it was you who took the city in the end. That was too asymmetrical a response. Also, in the world's eyes, what if you actually coveted some lands of your neighbour and just used the occasion to cunningly provoke them in to declaring on you? It is not just white and black out there, there's a lot of grey. What if in this situation you were in the shoes of Prussia, and your neighbour in the role of France in 1870? Sort of, of course, just a somewhat believable example, don't look too deep into it.

Just accept the fact that taking a city with your army and keeping it is considered a serious business in Civ VI. If you want to punish the aggressor, destroy their armies and burn his lands, take reparations in gold and gpt in a peace deal, but do not keep the cities you've taken with your troops. At least not all of them, give some back. And if you do want that city badly, hurt them until they agree to give it to you in a peace deal, without you actually taking it with your troops.
 
I never fond of Mapuche, Vikings and Aztecs. Particularly if they're neighbours.
One annyoing thing is that 'borderland capitol'. Player will be so vulnerable if this happens even if your rivals have their seat next to yours.
Having city states next to capitol still better. as long as they don't go to war against player even on their own or joined player's enemy.
 
It can take me a month sometimes to finish a game, so I haven't had that many next-door neighbors to compare. But it seems to me that, compared to Civ 5, the Civs in Civ 6 are a pretty homogenized lot -- no one really stands out. In Civ 5, I remember playing as the Aztecs just so that I wouldn't have to deal with them, and Venice would drive me to distraction. Also, I play with the sound off, so I don't have musical preferences to think about.
 
This has already come up so many times before. Yes, they may have started the war, but it was you who took the city in the end. That was too asymmetrical a response. Also, in the world's eyes, what if you actually coveted some lands of your neighbour and just used the occasion to cunningly provoke them in to declaring on you? It is not just white and black out there, there's a lot of grey. What if in this situation you were in the shoes of Prussia, and your neighbour in the role of France in 1870? Sort of, of course, just a somewhat believable example, don't look too deep into it.

Just accept the fact that taking a city with your army and keeping it is considered a serious business in Civ VI. If you want to punish the aggressor, destroy their armies and burn his lands, take reparations in gold and gpt in a peace deal, but do not keep the cities you've taken with your troops. At least not all of them, give some back. And if you do want that city badly, hurt them until they agree to give it to you in a peace deal, without you actually taking it with your troops.

In practice, with grievances from a surprise war, I can actually burn down a city or two...

Supposedly murder/genocide of civilians is better than just occupying a city, giving that logic... as emergencies cannot be declared on a city that is already razed...
 
Oh you are to kind! Euthanasia is too good!
Just keep pillaging them with a Casus forevermore.

bubbles+have+mercy.jpg


I am not going to put up with the endless denouncing for pillaging. Plus the fresh denouements from everyone else will set me up perfectly to declare a formal war.
 
Barbs make horrible neighbors. To paraphrase a line in The Terminator:

"Listen, and understand. [They are] out there. [They] can’t be bargained with. [They] can’t be reasoned with. [They don't] feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And [they] absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."
 
I do know which civ the AI's hate to have as a close neighbor. Hint: It's me.
 
If you don't like the game music, why not turn it off and fire up Spotify in the background?
 
Ghengis, because he eats up my other neighbors
Mvemba, because I never have a religion fast enough for him
Curtain and Roosevelt, because they are hypocrites about peace
Seondock, because hwatchas can be nightmarish to deal with if she gets aggressive
 
Top Bottom