Spring Patch notes

[AlannaT]

The problem is often that, even if you NEVER declare war, someone will DOW you at one time or another, and if you defend yourself and take cities, the penalty will be exactly the same. This is stupid IMHO... if someone DOWs me and I beat the crap out of him/her, well so be it, you got what you deserved !!!

But those penalties are visible - you can check your diplomatic relations and see something like "-236 Your warmongering". What Disgustipated et al. are talking about are situations where the diplomatic screen suggests that some AI likes you a lot (like +30 overall) but won't declare friendship. A few turns later it looks exactly the same (from what is visible) but suddenly they are willing to be friends.

Two possible explanations are:

* There are invisible modifiers like "-20 Even though officially there is no warmonger penalty for this type of war we still don't like anyone who is at war with anyone".
* There are more factors determining the AI's willingness to declare friendship than your diplomatic relation. Something like: They are your neighbor and consider war but if they really declare will depend on if they find a joint war partner and / or if your military score stagnates. If those conditions are met, they betray you and declare war. If not, they are open to friendship once again. I have no idea if something like this does happen because what we know about the AI programming isn't too promising. But I would certainly like it if considerations like these are behind there seemingly random mood flips. In any case I'd rather pretend that's the case than hidden modifiers. It makes for better stories .

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The problem is often that, even if you NEVER declare war, someone will DOW you at one time or another, and if you defend yourself and take cities, the penalty will be exactly the same. This is stupid IMHO... if someone DOWs me and I beat the crap out of him/her, well so be it, you got what you deserved !!!

anyways... still love this game... didn't even finish my first game of GALCIV3 and I came back to CIV6...just much more fun to play

Taking cities is not defending yourself. Once you take the offensive, you are the aggressor. You can negate the penalty by returning the cities in the peace treaty.

I prefer to pillage as an act of retribution rather than conquer. You get some yields and hinder their progress while keeping up appearances with the neighbors. Sometimes I will temporarily take a border city, then I swap its tiles to my cities before returning it.

 

[Aristos]

Your Honour, why am I the bad guy? Yeah, I stole his house, but he punched me first. Once someone does something bad to me, I can do anything I want to them, can't I?

Assault is a criminal offense, and IIRC carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. If I were assaulted by a nasty neighbor and I like his house, I would be open to a settlement that involves said property in exchange for lifting the assault charges and freeing him from prison. Plus some other perks... so yes, I "stole" his house but he punched first.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Assault is a criminal offense, and IIRC carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. If I were assaulted by a nasty neighbor and I like his house, I would be open to a settlement that involves said property in exchange for lifting the assault charges and freeing him from prison. Plus some other perks... so yes, I "stole" his house but he punched first.

In the game, as in life, the actions that we consider justifiable aren't necessarily viewed as such by others.

 

[Aristos]

In the game, as in life, the actions that we consider justifiable aren't necessarily viewed as such by others.

Whatever the law says is justifiable regardless of the view of others, that's the whole idea. But I did not want to digress from the thread, it was my silly (funny?) way of saying "it depends"...

EDIT: "playing civ games since.."... when? 91'er here.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

EDIT: "playing civ games since.."... when? 91'er here.

When did Civ first come out? I have floppies in a box in my home office somewhere. I played a ton of the Avalon Hill board game when I was in school, and decided to pick up the computer game of the same name (but not, it turns out, of quite the same nature) when it came out.

 

[Aristos]

When did Civ first come out? I have floppies in a box in my home office somewhere. I played a ton of the Avalon Hill board game when I was in school, and decided to pick up the computer game of the same name (but not, it turns out, of quite the same nature) when it came out.

So, another 91'er... nice to see some veterancy still around... where in Canuckistan?

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

So, another 91'er... nice to see some veterancy still around... where in Canuckistan?

Bluenoser

 

[Aristos]

Bluenoser

Ha, from one extreme to the other... I always wanted to get to know NS, but for now I'm stuck in BC... one day though...

Anyways, nice to "meet" you, we better stop here before we are modded...

 

[tedhebert]

Your Honour, why am I the bad guy? Yeah, I stole his house, but he punched me first. Once someone does something bad to me, I can do anything I want to them, can't I?

I agree with you up to a certain point... yes, I DID go overboard on my comment ;-) But I still think I should be allowed some retribution when I'm attacked... Not really saying I should be allowed to wipe the offender off the face of the game without any penalty, but... maybe take 1 city without a staggering warmongering panalty ???

Taking cities is not defending yourself. Once you take the offensive, you are the aggressor. You can negate the penalty by returning the cities in the peace treaty.

I prefer to pillage as an act of retribution rather than conquer. You get some yields and hinder their progress while keeping up appearances with the neighbors. Sometimes I will temporarily take a border city, then I swap its tiles to my cities before returning it.

I understand... I, on the other hand, want to teach them a lesson But I DO like your tile swapping trick... very devious, wouldn't have tought about that one...

Ha, from one extreme to the other... I always wanted to get to know NS, but for now I'm stuck in BC... one day though...

Anyways, nice to "meet" you, we better stop here before we are modded...

QC here... and I,m sure there are WORSE places than BC to be stuck in NS, on the other hand !!! hehe JK, been to NS once, loved the place, cabot trail rocks

 

[Aristos]

I agree with you up to a certain point... yes, I DID go overboard on my comment ;-) But I still think I should be allowed some retribution when I'm attacked... Not really saying I should be allowed to wipe the offender off the face of the game without any penalty, but... maybe take 1 city without a staggering warmongering panalty ???

Problem with that is where to stop: 1 city? 2? 12? You think 1 city should be WM free, others will argue it should be 12... the idea of the system is fine, WM is there in stead of some kind of "pariah" making mechanism (ala UN), and it mostly achieves that purpose even if it seems harsh at times...

I understand... I, on the other hand, want to teach them a lesson But I DO like your tile swapping trick... very devious, wouldn't have tought about that one...

Now that infrastructure is outside the city center, the lesson IS destroying it without the need to take the city... compare the USA and USSR post WW2: one liberated half of Europe without taking anything for it (but corpses), and the other took the other half for itself. No doubt who is the pariah of history, or is there?

QC here... and I,m sure there are WORSE places than BC to be stuck in NS, on the other hand !!! hehe JK, been to NS once, loved the place, cabot trail rocks

Oh, no, "stuck" as in "not able to move for now", the province is beautiful, the mountains are awe inspiring... some of the mountain goats though , well, not inspiring at all, but all in all a very nice place...

 

[Kryxal]

But those penalties are visible - you can check your diplomatic relations and see something like "-236 Your warmongering". What Disgustipated et al. are talking about are situations where the diplomatic screen suggests that some AI likes you a lot (like +30 overall) but won't declare friendship. A few turns later it looks exactly the same (from what is visible) but suddenly they are willing to be friends.

Two possible explanations are:

* There are invisible modifiers like "-20 Even though officially there is no warmonger penalty for this type of war we still don't like anyone who is at war with anyone".
* There are more factors determining the AI's willingness to declare friendship than your diplomatic relation. Something like: They are your neighbor and consider war but if they really declare will depend on if they find a joint war partner and / or if your military score stagnates. If those conditions are met, they betray you and declare war. If not, they are open to friendship once again. I have no idea if something like this does happen because what we know about the AI programming isn't too promising. But I would certainly like it if considerations like these are behind there seemingly random mood flips. In any case I'd rather pretend that's the case than hidden modifiers. It makes for better stories .

It would be nice if we could see the current state of relations half as well as we can see the per-turn changes. That's especially true for civs you have an agreement with...

 

[Aristos]

It would be nice if we could see the current state of relations half as well as we can see the per-turn changes. That's especially true for civs you have an agreement with...

I am not convinced at all by the theory that the modifiers we see are "per turn"...

 

[DWilson]

Note that you can sometimes take a city, but only in peace negotiations (not be force, so to speak). So, to extend the real world analogy, sometimes the courts or judge could rule that a city is just compensation, but you have no right to claim that compensation before it's been ruled yours.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Note that you can sometimes take a city, but only in peace negotiations (not be force, so to speak). So, to extend the real world analogy, sometimes the courts or judge could rule that a city is just compensation, but you have no right to claim that compensation before it's been ruled yours.

There's some game whackiness there, for sure. Beating someone up, then returning a city you captured in exchange for another city of theirs shouldn't, in mind, result in differing warmongering penalties than keeping the city you took and that they agreed to cede to you. That, of course, leads to the question of what the heck did the developers actually intend "cede" to do, and why doesn't it do it?

 

[Karmah]

There's some game whackiness there, for sure. Beating someone up, then returning a city you captured in exchange for another city of theirs shouldn't, in mind, result in differing warmongering penalties than keeping the city you took and that they agreed to cede to you. That, of course, leads to the question of what the heck did the developers actually intend "cede" to do, and why doesn't it do it?

Someone here explained to me the history behind the cede mechanism ,but it is such an absurd mechanism any explanation seems never to stick in my mind.

 

[Aristos]

Speaking of which, I am razing the heck out of Kongo right now to eliminate him as competitor, and still can maintain two alliances regardless of the 100+ WM points... who needs Loyalty when you can have Rubble...

Edit: that is IMM, by the why...

 

[bbufa]

Religious emergency changed the "count down"? I kept my religion dominion for 16 turns, the emergency completed the next turn (no need to wait 30 turn as before).

 

[cvb]

That, of course, leads to the question of what the heck did the developers actually intend "cede" to do, and why doesn't it do it?

Well, as far as I know, the "cede-mechanism" is intended to be the 'running bug' of civ6: set free in the vanilla release and (will be) squashed with the very last patch of the 2nd expansion. In between funny people mention it in every 6th thread ...

 

[Jarms48]

I understand... I, on the other hand, want to teach them a lesson But I DO like your tile swapping trick... very devious, wouldn't have tought about that one...

Yeah, it's a pretty good trick if you're not planning on expanding your empire further. You can pillage all their tiles and districts, capture the city and swap any land you desire to your own, and then negotiate peace with even greater yields. The other benefit is because you're returning the city you're not getting as many warmonger penalties.