The whole "denoucing" thing

[MinnesotaRuss]

I guess I don't understand the harm in being denounced. One is the time I am surprised attacked; I defend and then capture some or all of the opponent's cities. So what were you expecting? I would just let you attack me and not give it back? The other is I surprise attack someone else. This one I can understand. I was the aggressor.
So, my question again (I asked this one before) is what is the big deal with denunciations? Does this indicate that the other civ is about to attack me or just doesn't like the idea of fighting or war? (Boo hoo!)
And is there some way to induce a civ to declare war on ME? making demands or something. I assume the war weariness is somehow affected by who attacks whom. Is that correct?

So there are 3 separate questions. I do enjoy getting wisdom from all the more experienced civers.

 

[Rosty K]

You can't do certain things with that civ while denounced (like send delegation/build embassy). Also, after some turns they are eligible to declare the Formal War. Although, I heard somewhere that denunciations are automatically mutual, so you can Formal War them as well.

As for making them DoW you, in my experience it's easy, you don't even need to try hard Helps if they have one of the more stupid agendas. Working provocations are forward settling and sometimes converting their cities. Don't know about demanding stuff, never tried. Not keeping a large standing army is also a good way. Just build some units to 1-2 turns remaining, and finish them if the enemy actually decides to show up for war. Never tried that myself though, but I normally keep a smallish army and have no problem with neighbors declaring wars anyway (they rarely show up though).

 

[ShakaKhan]

In the ancient era, declaring a surprise war generates no warmonger penalty, so there's really no point in denouncing, other than public relations.* From the classical era on, you generate warmonger points with other civs if you declare war. Surprise wars generate full warmonger points. All of the other "causus belli" war declarations have a reduced amount of warmonger points that you generate, but most of them are only when you attack certain cities. Liberation wars, for example, generate no warmonger points at all, but only if you are attacking and liberating, not keeping, cities owned by one of your allies. The simplest and earliest form of causus belli war declarations is formal war, which you only have to denounce a civilization 10 turns before declaring war, and then your warmonger penalties are halved. So for simplicity's sake, if the game is in one of the later eras and you want to declare a war, try to plan out a denouncement 10 turns before declaring war (i.e. when you are positioning your troops.) However, if the AI denounced you, then you don't have to wait the 10 turns, you can declare a formal war the next turn if you're ready.

*I'm not 100% sure it applies to civilization6, but in previous civ games denouncing adds a negative diplomatic modifier to the civilization being denounced for all other civs in the game that have met both parties involved. However, if you denounce a civilization A and civilization B is friendlier with civilization A than they are with you, then civilization B will induce a more significant negative diplomatic modifier against you. In other words, denouncing could be used as a tool to tip the scales of one civilization to declare war on another civilization, but in actual practice it seems that they declare war based on opportunity and convenience rather than diplomatic standing most of the time.

 

[isau]

Denouncing is also a formal notice to all other players that players X and Y publicly dislike each other. On a technical level, Denouncing temporarily "locks in" a negative status rating between the two players, and it can't improve until the denouncement expires or a war happens followed by a conclusion.

FYI, if you are the person who does the denouncing, you need to wait 5 turns to start a formal war. But the person receiving the denouncement can declare formal war immediately, with no wait.

 

[Scaramanga]

In multiplayer it's used to clog up the notification area and maybe cause an annoyance they have to escape key out of.

 

[Victoria]

Denouncing is a very important aspect of diplomacy.

If you denounce someone that is the enemy of someone else you get +9 which I think decays 1 point every couple of turns (need to check) so it is a short term diplomacy boost with potential friend/allies

It also gives a similar negative to their friends. It's a way of polarising groups in the game although it does get more complicated when agendas are considered.

A denounce is both ways so you can declare a casus either way. This means it's better to be denounced that denounce if you do not want negative modifiers with certain civs.

If I attack civA when civ B has denounced them and I would normally get -10 diplomacy with player B (just an example number) because they denounced civ A they do not think I am so bad and get 20% less warmonger so they think -8 of me not -10. The -20% counts for citiy capture warmonger points also.

Denunciation is one step from war, so while traders can still happily operate you cannot open borders or send delegations but a denunciation does not remove your envoys, only war does this.
You also naturally cannot denounce declared friends and allies.

...so yes, denouncing is a key part of diplomacy, a way to limit warmonger points to some degree, a wat to help make friends and certainly should be taken into consideration when choosing both war and friends.

@ShakaKhan just being a little pedantic to clarify correctly warmonger points.
A formal war if full warmonger points. - not a surprise war
A surprise war is 150% of full
A territorial war is 75% of full
A holy or colonial war is 50% of full
A justifiable war to claw back an ally CS, civ city or your own city is 0%

Naturally city taking adds warmonger points that I have seen quoted as 50% of full but I am not convinced this is correct. Not sure yet on taking last city or capital city either.

The warmonger points for a full or formal war are currently

Ancient = 0
Classical = 6
Medieval = 12
Renaissance =18
Industrial + = 24

These degrade 1 point every 2 turns
The confusing thing is what damn era am I in? Well the weight of the declaration tells you.. light, medium, heavy, egrarious but that's for a formal, if surprise it is bumped up.

 

[Leyrann]

If someone declares war on you and you take one of their cities you've become the agressor, so you get the warmoner penalty and (probably) denounciations. If you return the city, you don't get any lasting warmonger penalty however, and it shouldn't be too hard to get some luxery resources, a lot of gold and gold per turn and possibly great works though, if you do that.

Just compare to the real world - Germany attacked the Soviet Union, but people in the West nevertheless disliked how the Soviet Union kept control over East Europe.

 

[Victoria]

You do not 'get the warmonger points' as far as I am aware.

They still have the warmonger points for declaring war
You get the warmonger points for taking a city or 3... the issue people have is they raze a city which triples city warmonger and gives a permanent -20 with the civ you cannot remove

All warmonger points decay at 1 point per 2 turns

Taking a city gives you a -18 with the civ for the you have my city. This is easily removed the moment you give that civ any city at any time. Just make a city on the ice.

 

[Leyrann]

Taking a city gives you a -18 with the civ for the you have my city. This is easily removed the moment you give that civ any city at any time. Just make a city on the ice.

That's a nice trick. Didn't know it yet. Guess I should just conquer 3 cities in my current war and then give one of them back afterwards because I only want the front ones...

 

[Victoria]

Just make sure what you give back has no luxuries

 

[Leyrann]

Just make sure what you give back has no luxuries

Why would that matter? I'm taking the third city only with the purpose of removing the "you occupy one of our cities" penalty by returning it afterwards. My settlers are actually really expensive because I expanded for more than two civs worth of land, so I'd rather not build a settler for the purpose of giving away a city. Easier to just conquer an extra city and then give it back after peace.

 

[Victoria]

True... if you give back a city without amenities it is a negative amenity for them rather than a positive, more chance of deals also.

 

[Victoria]

Just who is an enemy?
So taking a scenario from tonight

Spain has denounced me
Rome has denounced me but I want to try and repair it. The screen shows a denounce between Rome and Spain
Arabia is a declared friend and I want to encourage that (he has lots of marmalukes) The screen shows a denounce bewteen Arabia and spain

I now denounce spain to get a +6 denounced an enemy with Rome and Arabia
The trouble is Arabia has the denouncement but not Rome

On further inspection
I see that Arabia denounced Spain and so consideres Spain their enemy and soince they are my friend they are +6 with me.
I see Rome was denounced by Spain so perhaps they do not consider Spain their enemy,,, or maybe its because Rome denounced me

I see more testing needed but thought I would let you know this whole denouceing thing may be important for who is an enemy of who

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

I denounce you for making this thread.

 

[Victoria]

For what reason... maybe "you just plain don't like me?"