Poll: Pillaging trade routes in territory of neutral civ

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by Milae, May 3, 2021.

?

Thoughts on pillaging enemy's TRs when you are inside a neutral civ's territory with open borders?

  1. Very cool

    15 vote(s)
    41.7%
  2. Not cool

    20 vote(s)
    55.6%
  3. Other (comment)

    1 vote(s)
    2.8%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Milae

    Milae Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    327
    Gender:
    Male
    What are you guy's thoughts on pillaging an enemy's trade routes when you are inside a neutral civ's territory who you have open borders with?
     
  2. SpankmyMetroid

    SpankmyMetroid Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Messages:
    296
    That should be a (small) diplo penalty against the trade recipient, since they do get benefit from it. Not that it’d probably ever stop me from plundering the camel goody bags.
     
    Tekamthi and SwirlSlayer like this.
  3. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    8,475
  4. azum4roll

    azum4roll Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,728
    Gender:
    Male
    What's the current behaviour?
     
  5. Milae

    Milae Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    327
    Gender:
    Male
    You can pillage trade routes anywhere, including when you are going through open borders of someone else.

    I personally find this not cool because there's not really much a civ can do to defend their trade route in another civ's territory and it's a pretty easy way to make a lot of money during a war by just going through their neighbours territory with a scout.
     
    Bromar1 likes this.
  6. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    8,475
    Oh I think I misunderstood your point. Your saying that currently you can pillage the TR of someone your at war with anywhere. You are suggesting that if you are in another person's territory to NOT be allowed to pillage. Is that right?
     
  7. Milae

    Milae Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    327
    Gender:
    Male
    Well yea that's my opinion but just asking if others feel the same.
     
    Bromar1 likes this.
  8. Fluffball

    Fluffball Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    360
    I like the idea of there being some sort of diplomatic penalty for pillaging trade routes going through neutral territory with the civ that owns the neutral territory. This seems realstic as for example in the First and Second World War, Germany targeted trade going to/from America and this influenced America's attitude towards Germany and their willingness to take action against them.

    Maybe the option to cancel open borders when it happens would be the simplest option.

    Generally on open borders, the option to cancel open borders with a diplo hit would be nice to have and maybe if a trade route is pillaged in your (neutral) territory you get the option to cancel open borders immediately with no diplo hit.
     
  9. SpankmyMetroid

    SpankmyMetroid Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Messages:
    296
    i like this, it would also work for diplo interactions with digging up artifacts.
     
  10. pineappledan

    pineappledan Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    6,684
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    My issue is that if you put a diplo penalty on it, even if it is more "realistic", I can't not pillage a trade route if it passes through my unit. It could feel unfair.
     
  11. saamohod

    saamohod King

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2014
    Messages:
    603
    Location:
    Unoccupied Ukraine
    I'm only ok with it if the AI is taught to deal with it.
     
  12. LifeOfBrian

    LifeOfBrian King

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2019
    Messages:
    757
    I strongly dislike this mechanic, it's completely unrealistic and, since we have no option of attaching escort troops to caravans/cargo ships (I think Civ 6 has this?), something you can't really fight against either as the human player or as the AI.
     
  13. bahamut19

    bahamut19 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2020
    Messages:
    67
    I agree with this idea.

    Historically, the reason why America ended up supporting England in WW1 may have been as simple as Woodrow Wilson had personal property he owned in Scotland and he preferred English culture. The property was used anytime Wilson was sick, which was frequent. Wilson's identity as Scottish was very important to him throughout his professional career, for better or for worse.
     
  14. azum4roll

    azum4roll Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,728
    Gender:
    Male
    As pdan said, pillage is automatic when the trade unit passes through your military unit. Any additional diplomatic penalty other than the existing ones with the trade unit owner and the trade target is too much for something you can't control.
     
  15. Recursive

    Recursive Covets Lands That You Currently Own Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,689
    Gender:
    Male
    Current penalty is -5 for destination civ (decaying over 25 turns) and -10 for origin civ (decaying over 50 turns) - turns scale with Meanness flavor.

    What I could do is make it a penalty exclusive to Morocco and only have it apply when not at war, much like the citadel penalty.

    I don't want to limit pillaging to your own borders or their borders, that's an illogical nerf. You can still attack other units in neutral territory.
     

Share This Page