The reason why you get denounced after liberating

[Ozzy88]

This explains why Darius denounced me 1 turn after liberating him back into the game despite the fact I had conquered 3/4 of the world.

 

[qemist]

At least Civ5 is honest about this fact. Now it's so honest that, if you get backstabbed, it'll tell you it's a backstab /QUOTE]

I find that the AI usually says its a backstab even when we're not friends. So...

some quirk of programming

"The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters."
WTF?

 

[ShahJahanII]

I have never been in your position.
I wonder if the devs read these forums.
They seem to since one of Thal's ideas was used for the Germans and Ottomans.

 

[dexters]

I must be playing it 'wrong' but I've never seen Backstabbed attitude from the AI in the games I've played post June/August patch. Can someone explain what this entails? Did they agree to something then backout at the last minute and attacked you instead?

I've seen afraid a couple of times and hostile several times.

I know the AI can be deceptive, where they show 'friendly' but you know they probably aren't.

 

[Louis XXIV]

At least Civ5 is honest about this fact. Now it's so honest that, if you get backstabbed, it'll tell you it's a backstab

I find that the AI usually says its a backstab even when we're not friends. So...



"The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters."
WTF?

I'm pretty sure replying to the first part of the quote was sufficient to cover the 5 characters.

I felt what I meant was clear in context, but I'll try to give a better explanation. Of course, had you expressed your confusion in a way that was longer than five characters, I might be more able to respond.

I assume you know that I realize everything is done through programming, so, theoretically, all actions are quirks of programming. Therefore, I won't have to explain in detail about my use of phrasing as a metaphor.

People complain about everything being arbitrary. They think everyone will attack you essentially because of an entirely random dice roll. The change to add more transparency has made it clear that this isn't the case. That's what I meant. There are clear rules defining backstabs. Essentially, it indicates that, even though you thought the AI was being friendly, they were hiding their true intentions. Therefore, you should no longer believe friendly AIs declared war on you even though they still liked you.

 

[apocalypse105]

I don't think you need such significant bonuses for liberation. A diplomacy bonus should be sufficient. I do think a reduction of the warmonger penalty (especially with City-States) is a good touch. Obviously, the Civ you are war with will have a negative attitude with you essentially the same as if you conquered a city from them.

Can liberated Civilizations declare war on you? I know you have permanent open borders. They seem to dislike you, but that's not the same thing. Removing backstabbing might be a moot point if they don't attack you.

ETA: Nevermind, I think I agree completely (with the caveat of my final question). I thought you wrote that you get the science bonus. I agree they should be given techs to catch up to modernity. A simpler approach might be just to give them all the techs that are shared by both the conquering civ and liberating civ. While I suppose this could allow a theoretical huge jump in techs by a civ that never really had many to begin with, this strikes me as fairly unlikely in a pragmatic sense since most civs conquered stay conquered for quite awhile.

You know Instead of giving us a negatif diplomatic hit we should get a positif modifier in diplomacy or else whats the use of liberating?


Why would you add a option that only gives you negatif actions..

THen it isn't a choise a player wil allways pick the one that doens't give him a negatif penalty in that situation.

A choise is deciding which option you choose and face the consequences positif and negatif onces.

Ha I wonder if Firaxis will fix this the next patch. I posted 2 comments on each patch notes and saying they didn't fix the liberating capital ?

I dont thinx firaxis will ever fix it . I'm starting to thinx that they want it to be like this... Only dont know why..because it gives a negatif gameplay experiene...

Its funny if I play team games with the AI the AI gives a angry face like damn I have to work with a human... And I hate him..

 

[apocalypse105]

Sorry for dubbel post apperently my computer opened the window two times

 

[wcbarney]

Thats obviously broken but why liberate a capital? it's usually a good city to hold.

Sometimes when I'm on a conquering rampage, I start having to deal with issues. By liberating a large city that I've just captured, I don't increase my unhappiness, and I resurrect a weak civ who might have something to trade.

 

[HappyBuilder]

I, idiotically in retrospect, liberated the Arabs last night from the Greeks. Medina was something I did want eventually, but couldn't maintain it at the moment. So I brought Arabia back, finished my war with Greece, and then once things stabilized, took Medina out - incurring a wealth of diplomatic penalties. Should have just suffered with them as a puppet instead.

Perhaps that's why Harum was never appreciate of the liberation. He knew what was coming.

So basically, you get no credit for liberating a destroyed civilization with the rest of the world, but you do suffer the extinction penalty if you destroy what you once set free.

HB

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I, idiotically in retrospect, liberated the Arabs last night from the Greeks. Medina was something I did want eventually, but couldn't maintain it at the moment. So I brought Arabia back, finished my war with Greece, and then once things stabilized, took Medina out - incurring a wealth of diplomatic penalties. Should have just suffered with them as a puppet instead.

Perhaps that's why Harum was never appreciate of the liberation. He knew what was coming.

So basically, you get no credit for liberating a destroyed civilization with the rest of the world, but you do suffer the extinction penalty if you destroy what you once set free.

HB

Which is interesting, you could get multiple "extinction" penalties for the same civ.

 

[Louis XXIV]

You know Instead of giving us a negatif diplomatic hit we should get a positif modifier in diplomacy or else whats the use of liberating?

I said it should give a positive diplomatic modifier with the person you liberate. I'd also suggest reducing the warmonger penalty. It isn't a positive modifier, but less of a negative modifier.

Do me a favor. Copy and paste your posts into Microsoft Word so you can run a spell check. I'm not one to nitpick, but it's very distracting.

 

[Hamburger]

Can liberated Civilizations declare war on you? I know you have permanent open borders. They seem to dislike you, but that's not the same thing. Removing backstabbing might be a moot point if they don't attack you.

Yes they can. Greece was completely gone and I captured Sparta from Japan and chose to liberate Greece. 15-20 or so turns later Alex declares war on me so I sent him back to oblivion. I really agree that if you liberate a Civ they should be allies with you unless you later declare war on them.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Odd, I've never had that happen. Perhaps because a liberated Civ has only one city, so they generally don't have the ability to effectively wage war.

 

[Bechhold]

A player should not have to study and look at the game files in order to figure out how a feature in a game works or why it doesn't.

Brilliant work Firaxis.

 

[Louis XXIV]

They generally don't. In fact, it was kept hidden for a reason. Look at a Civ4 succession game. Some of those people had the exact mathematical formula for how to make friends and influence the AI. Civ5 was supposed to be more naturalistic. Don't aggressively settle near them or attack their city states, things like that. But people wanted more info. Now they have the more info, but the exact weight isn't given because it doesn't help. In either Civ4 or Civ5, you'd need the formula, but Civ5 doesn't pretend you have all the info.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Yeah, but I found this out last week not last year when it happened. My point being even Civ4, which prided itself most on diplomacy being transparent and reliable, can be opaque and unreliable. At least Civ5 is honest about this fact. Now it's so honest that, if you get backstabbed, it'll tell you it's a backstab and not some quirk of programming that caused them to hate you in ways you can't understand.

For the most part, the AI and I have an understanding, even if I don't know what they'll do next.

Yeah, but all that needed to happen for civ4 was to add a backstabbing penalty. Not sure why they never added one in.

Civ5 has a problem with creating long lasting relationships that can withstand war declarations. I mean, I shouldn't lose face with my allies when I declare war on a common enemy. The warmonger penalty is necessary, but it needs severe tweaking. Also, it is far too easy to lose long time friends from some punk civ at the bottom of the scoreboard denouncing every 15-20 turns. I enjoy the more fluid nature, but I don't think I should have to pursue a diplomatic victory in order to keep a descent block of Friends without worrying about a sudden drop to guarded thanks to some trivial denouncements.

They generally don't. In fact, it was kept hidden for a reason. Look at a Civ4 succession game. Some of those people had the exact mathematical formula for how to make friends and influence the AI.

Yes, but it wasn't necessary to come up with such a formula. If you traded well with a civ, kept open borders, helped them out with a war, and gave in to a request or two, you could form some good strong relationships. In civ5, I can do all those things, and still end up GUARDED because of denouncements or settling penalties (that are often waaaay exaggerated). I once got a settling penalty even though the civ was on a completely different landmass and their closest city was 5 tiles inland.


On to the original point:
If you captured an enemy capital... why are you gifting it back!? It usually takes a bit of warring to get to the capital. I don't think this needs fixing. If you captured the AI capital and then gave it back, there should be a penalty for bad planning. Seems built in naturally this way.

 

[Glassmage]

Ai's don't defend other people capitals very well...

 

[dexters]

Re: friends/diplomacy

Best to approach this game as temporary 'coalitions' no one is your friend or can be your friend if there can only be one winner.

Also a lot of the time, civs can have a 'friendly' approach but are not really your friends. Some are being deceptive, but a lot of the time, They've decided as the humans have that if there's no common borders or major disputes, its easier to be friendly and gain from trades than to be antagonistic and act like a North Korea style regime.

These AI leaders will obviously quickly switch from friendly to hostile when you grow big enough to treaten them directly, steal their CS or do something to upset them.

Roleplaying is huge part of Civving, but we just need to approach the roleplay differently with 5.
ie: more rational AI, less 'gamey' where the human player is the center of the universe.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Re: friends/diplomacy

Best to approach this game as temporary 'coalitions' no one is your friend or can be your friend if there can only be one winner...

I like this way of thinking about it. I will attempt my next game with temporary coalitions in mind instead of permanent blocks.

Good call, bro.

 

[qemist]

I like this way of thinking about it. I will attempt my next game with temporary coalitions in mind instead of permanent blocks.

I find it helps to think of moving up from one circle of friends to another. At first you have your childhood friends. They are likely your neighbors and by friending them you can gain some security. Later as your knowledge of the world expands you find there are cooler civilizations that are further away. So you friend them and dump your childhood friends (who you then kill).