Taking enemy capitals

[Abaxial]

I have just noticed that for every enemy capital you occupy, you lose 5 diplo favour per turn. Is this new? It seems to penalise going for a domination victory somewhat.

 

[Shibooyeah]

You shouldn’t be doing well in diplomacy if you’re declaring war on people lol

 

[criZp]

It seems to penalise going for a domination victory somewhat.

Yeah that's the thing about diplomacy, it's more about getting along than dominating people.

 

[comatosedragon]

I have just noticed that for every enemy capital you occupy, you lose 5 diplo favour per turn. Is this new?

Yes, it is a welcome addition made by the most recent patch. Full patch notes here (scroll down to Free Game Update): https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/patch-notes-maya-gran-colombia-pack-may-2020.28276/

 

[yung.carl.jung]

You shouldn’t be doing well in diplomacy if you’re declaring war on people lol

Not sure that is true in real life actually, just look at crooks like Kissinger It seems some of the most violent countries enjoy some of the best diplomatic relations nowadays: My own Germany, Japan..

But for Civ it should definitely be this way!

 

[Archon_Wing]

It's pretty brutal but conquering your neighbor was always the default strategy. I think it should scale like -3 for 1st capital, -4 more (for a total of 7) for the second, and -5 more (for a total of 12) for the 3rd, etc.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

It's pretty brutal but conquering your neighbor was always the default strategy.

For like 5% of the playerbase, sure For me it is also the go-to method. However recently I am unsure if it is actually the fastest..

 

[DWilson]

Not sure that is true in real life actually, just look at crooks like Kissinger It seems some of the most violent countries enjoy some of the best diplomatic relations nowadays: My own Germany, Japan..

But for Civ it should definitely be this way!

I would note these IRL civs currently do not hold any foreign capitals. It didn't go well for them diplomatically when they did.

 

[Victoria]

Best change they made in the patch.

 

[bbbt]

It mostly just prevents a Dom path to a diplomacy victory.

If there were more intense resolutions available targeting specific players, it might be more of a general issue.

 

[Victoria]

It mostly just prevents a Dom path to a diplomacy victory.

No. It is a valuable source of gold for an army and quite rightly stops you having a say in congress.

 

[UWHabs]

No. It is a valuable source of gold for an army and quite rightly stops you having a say in congress.

I don't tend to sell my diplo favour, but yeah, previously you conquer the world you would have so much diplo favor that you could win every vote yourself. Now, if you're getting a -10 per turn penalty, you will often lose votes, and won't be able to simply pick which option you want.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I would note these IRL civs currently do not hold any foreign capitals. It didn't go well for them diplomatically when they did.

The Soviet Union held North Korea for some time and the USA essentially had their own dictator installed in S Korea for 10 years after the war, after which he was replaced by another dictator for another few decades. They never meaningfully "held" Seoul, but that isn't really necessary anymore, times have changed. But okay, we're going off topic here so I'll stop

 

[Casworon]

Warfare has been nerfed in some way with almost every patch since the games release.

Loyalty, emergencies, the battering ram and siege tower changes, less diplomatic favour etc etc.

It's nice too see some more changes to weaken it. But warfare is still an extremely strong approach. Arguably still the strongest.

I think the game needs something to differentiate conquered cities from ones you have founded yourself. The 'negative loyalty due to grievances with cities founder' works here. But then you just wipe out the founder completely and once they are removed from the game you no longer have any grievances with them, and then the conquered cities no longer have the negative loyalty modifier.

Always seemed like a bit of an exploit that. I would have thought completely wiping another civ out should come with an even greater loyalty malus rather than reducing it

 

[bengalryan9]

Best change they made in the patch.

Agree 100%. If I had to read one more poster bragging about how good Mongolia is at diplomatic victory with a pic where 90% of the world was conquered I might've had to get snarky...

"Diplomination" deserved to go.

 

[Archon_Wing]

For like 5% of the playerbase, sure For me it is also the go-to method. However recently I am unsure if it is actually the fastest..

That would depend on available space and how much you stand to gain from alliances (as well as how useless their cities are). But as you know, since the AI cheats, their cities no matter how bad, usually have value.

I suppose island maps would not be a good map to invade your neighbor on.

 

[Sostratus]

Now, if you're getting a -10 per turn penalty, you will often lose votes, and won't be able to simply pick which option you want.

*Looks at Carbon Recapture providing 30 Favor per instance*
Gunther, shovel more Kohle into ze Hansas, we must produce our OWN favor for the war effort

I actually quite like it. Warmonger? You basically give up any chance of being eligible for foreign aid projects. It's a really simple, impactful change. We still have some issues with the efficiency of domination growth vs peaceful growth, but it's a great step into the right direction. Hopefully future patches can build on balancing out some of these victory types.

 

[Victoria]

I played a game last night with Aztec, Poland and Russia on the continent using a fairly standard technique of mine.
I befriended Monty and when he attacked Poland taking a city I joint warred against Jadwiga with Peter.
Having completely wiped out Jadwiga they both had 150 grievances against me which soon dropped to 0.
If the -10 loyalty had remained in those Polish cities a while longer it would have slowed my war on Peter.

Now the thing that I am unsure about is wether it is a good thing or bad for that -10 to vanish.
Part of me says it should stay, just to hobble domination a bit more but I realise Jadwiga is now dead, she is forgotten. I did work at playing the diplomacy game to get back to 0 grievances but that is irrelevant. It’s a bit like Bruce Willis in The Fith Element, take out the leader and the rest cave in. I would like it hobbled more and feel it is war weariness that is letting us down here, it reduces too much at the end of war and the effect on those cities would be similar.
The only trouble is that if you do not completely wipe out a civ you get two loyalty Negatives after war, would that be too much, I am pretty sure it would cause something more Interesting post war resolution issues and may be a good thing.

 

[Casworon]

Yeah I'm curious about those things as well.

Looking up what causes civs to be defeated. Its having no cities left and no settlers. So theoretically it could be possible to test a game where no civs are fully defeated by using the in game editor mod and giving every civ a settler hidden somewhere in the perma frost at the top and bottom of the map where they cant get out.

I think keeping the 'Grievances with city founder's modifier and not being able to get rid if it via just wiping somone could be a big change in terms of slowing conquest snowballs

 

[Victoria]

no civs are fully defeated by using the in game editor mod and giving every civ a settler hidden somewhere in the perma frost at the top and bottom of the map where they cant get out.

I am not sure what that test is for... to keep them-10? I believe when loyalty was introduced this was the case but complaints or a bug got it removed. I think it was OK but a patch stopped the -10 degrading.... not sure I can remember.

slowing conquest snowballs

I feel they do not really want to do this too much. It is a valid victory route. The idea is to stop Dom being used for other means, hence the -5 per capital.