This annoys me...

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Miserable Old Git, Nov 18, 2021.

  1. Miserable Old Git

    Miserable Old Git Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2021
    Messages:
    29
    Gender:
    Male
    When another power declares a suprise war on you, you fight him back. Right?

    So why on earth do you then generate grievances with the other powers? Even those you are friendly with.

    Surely, if war causes grievance, it should be the agressor who generates the grievances, not the defender.
     
  2. Ranger0001

    Ranger0001 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2021
    Messages:
    38
    This has been one of the most complained about issues in civ 6. And I think we can all agree with you: it's super stupid.
    If anyone knows of a mod that fixes this please let me know.
     
    SaboteurINT likes this.
  3. Maximo the Xth

    Maximo the Xth Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    The kindergarten discussion again "But he started it"..?
    No, just because someone issued a declaration of war you are not the good guy when you enslave their citizens and burn their cities. Also, unlike in Civ5, your are actually allowed to retaliate a bit. Declaring a surprise war on you gives the other party 150 grievances. So you can do your evil deeds worth 150 grievances before you will notice any diplomatic repercussions.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2021
  4. Miserable Old Git

    Miserable Old Git Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2021
    Messages:
    29
    Gender:
    Male
    But...

    I wouldn't dream of enslaving his citizens and burning his cities if he hadn't unilaterally declared war, and

    I try to offer peace and he spurns it.

    So, I'm forced to generate grievance whether I will or no.

    This can't be right.
     
  5. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,447
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I just get annoyed when supposed warmongers like Gorgo and Alexander criticize me taking cities. Not to mention Shaka.
     
    Vargas1, kaspergm, racha and 4 others like this.
  6. MrRadar

    MrRadar Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,868
    In retaliation you can go and pillage their lands. All the tiles, everything that’s improved, and also all the districts, every single one, burn them down, pillage all the buildings, have a considerable windfall of pillaged science, culture, faith and gold yields. And nobody will bat an eye. No one. Isn’t this enough of a revenge? Then in a peace deal you can demand all of their remaining gold and gpt, if you still feel sour. Some great work, maybe.

    But cities have a grievance price. If surprise attacked, you can take and keep a city, maybe two. Take one more, before you peace out and give it back in the peace deal, to avoid a permanent -8 diplo modifier. That will be ok.

    But if you want massively overreact and destroy them completely in a retaliatory tantrum, do have some permanent friends or allies beforehand, with declarations of friendship and all that. Your declared friends and allies will not mind at all your little genocides, as long as you renew the friendships and alliances on the turn of expiry, because they will still get negative modifiers that will kick in pretty soon if you neglect renewals.
     
  7. bbbt

    bbbt Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,393
    Your crazy neighbor attacks you with a gun. You:

    Defend yourself and disarm him - your friends would be like good job
    Chase him away, follow him home, shoot him in the back as he flees - some friends would say he had it coming, others would call it an overreaction.
    Chase him away, follow him home, kill him, his wife, his mother, his 3 kids, his dog, his guinea pig, and then burn the house down - your friends would think you are psycho.

    That's the general idea.

    I do wish there was more variation in response (depending on whether the AI was say Gandhi or Alexander, what they thought of the opponent, what they think of you, etc) as well as more options (making them your vassal for example).
     
  8. Miserable Old Git

    Miserable Old Git Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2021
    Messages:
    29
    Gender:
    Male
    In England, shooting him in the back would give you a life sentence; and quite rightly!

    This isn't a crazy neighbour, it's an imperial power. This is Germany overrunning France. Should we have rolled over in 1940?
     
  9. Zaarin

    Zaarin Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,966
    Location:
    Babylon 5
    sad Neville Chamberlain noises :mischief: Fun fact: Poland wanted to assassinate Hitler in 1936, but France and England wouldn't support them.

    Grievances were a step in the right direction, a large improvement from the previous warmongering penalties, but they're still not quite right. In general the entire system could do with a healthy dose of Realpolitik; generally nations only care if you invade another nation if it threatens them, impinges on their sphere of influence, or otherwise directly affects them--especially in the Bronze Age. Persia didn't go to war with Rome because they were an imperial menace; they went to war with Rome because Roman Legions were on their doorstep.
     
  10. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    6,030
    Well if they see you taking territory they worry that you were using a squabble as a pretext. Reasonable I guess but it would be nice if it where more granular.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  11. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    4,343
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    More Fun Fact: members of the German General Staff were scared out of their monacles that Hitler would get them into a war they were 10 years away from being ready for in 1936 and wanted to depose him, but he kept on getting away with his gambles because Britain and France let him, and so the Generals dodn't think they could get away with trying to overthrow a Winner, and did nothing . . .

    The problem in game terms is how you define a Cv's interests so that the AI can handle it and the Hman player cannot manipulate it to his advantage. What constitutes a "doorstep"? What constitutes, geographically, a Sphere of Influence? - And recognize that the definitions will not be the same in all Eras or to all Civs.

    For that matter, what constitutes Over-Reaction? The Romans, Greeks, and numerous other 'civilized/cultured' peoples thought nothing of demolishing an entire city and selling all the inhabitants into slavery, and only got upset (in the case of the Greeks) when somebody (Athens) went Overboard and slaughtered every adult male in the city and then sold the rest into slavery - and one can argue, I think, that no one wold have said anything if the inhabitants of the city had been Persians or Carthaginians instead of fellowGreeks . . .
     
  12. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    11,828
    Nope, they declare a surprise war on you, so you have 150 grievances on them, you can take 2 smaller cities and not gain grievances back, or you can sell them back for money and peace.
    Oh, you want to completely destroy them because they wanted to better themselves? Then yes, you are the bad guy. fine, stop there and the other civs will eventually forgive you and you have a nice big empire, oh you now want to better yourself? Then you will be hated and deserve it. Is it really that hard to understand? I suspect you just don’t like it even though it works.
     
  13. Zaarin

    Zaarin Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,966
    Location:
    Babylon 5
    That is indeed the question. I think sphere of influence is actually rather simple: other civs that the civ has invested in diplomatically (be they major or minor civs) are that civ's sphere of influence; how peeved they are with you for meddling depends on how invested they are. One might add modifiers based on distance (that grow less significant with advancement in the tech tree).
     
    Victoria likes this.
  14. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    11,828
    Never thought about that too much, invasion in Iraq? Invasion in France, champagne region devastated?
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  15. Zaarin

    Zaarin Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,966
    Location:
    Babylon 5
    That's why I suggested the modifiers for distance decrease over time. In 1096 it took a major diplomatic undertaking by the Byzantine emperor and the Pope to get Western Europe mobilized to respond to a perceived threat to the Holy Land; in 1917/1941 it took considerably less to get the United States to protect its sphere of influence in Western Europe at a much greater distance.
     
    Victoria likes this.
  16. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    4,343
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    You could link "perceived sphere of influence" to either Technologies that affect communication or transportation, like Navigation, Radio, etc, or simply to turns of travel time between Capitals - the problem being that either one could result in "Sphere of Influence/Interest" changing in a single turn and giving a Causus Belli that didn't exist when the war started.

    I think, therefore, that the definition will have to include some kind of 'build-up' period representing at the start, the Possibility or Capability of extending influence and then the increasing importance of that Interest and influence that builds over time. Possibly the initial trigger could be simply Contact - physical or diplomatic, and the development of Interest to the point where it constitutes a driving factor in specific Diplomatic/Military actions would be measured in Travel Time, Trade Routes established, travel and communications technology, having the same religion, civics, social policies, government, etc.

    Have just been reading a new book on a history of the Greeks in which it points out a possible early application of this IRL: when Alexander's army got to the banks of the Indus River, he could not get them to go any further: they essentially mutinied and insisted on going home, because they could not see any conceivable 'sphere of influence' or interest for themselves that extended that far from Greece or Macedon. Of course, until they got there, India was to the Greeks literally Terra Incognita - they knew absolutely nothing about it and had never had any contact of any kind with it. It is rather hard to develop an interest in something of which you have 0 knowledge.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  17. aieeegrunt

    aieeegrunt King

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2021
    Messages:
    780
    Gender:
    Male
    It seems annoying but the logic behind it is sound and frankly this game badly needs as many anti snowball mechanics as possible
     
    ezzlar likes this.
  18. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    6,030
    Well, it's been an incremental improvement. At least as it was in AC or Civii the AI can't plop a city in the center of my civ for no reason whatsoever.
     
    Kjimmet and Thormodr like this.
  19. aieeegrunt

    aieeegrunt King

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2021
    Messages:
    780
    Gender:
    Male
    I never hated that. I felt it modelled the very real and very complex problem of what (if anything) to do about migrants, refugees and ethnic enclaves in your cuv, especially if you are nominally a “free” society
     
  20. Andrew Johnson [FXS]

    Andrew Johnson [FXS] Warlord

    Joined:
    May 15, 2020
    Messages:
    292
    Gender:
    Male
    Hm... OK, it's true that Greek-Indian connections went into high gear only after Alexander's conquests (and remained far more prevalent than we normally assume based on a standard historical narrative - there's Buddhist influences in some Greek philosophy, and certain Buddhist symbolism made it into Christian symbolism), but there are earlier links. Greek and Hindu myths have some parallels (sky-king who throws lightning bolts, check; giant mountain home of the gods, check; "lay siege to a city just to get your wife back", check), and Greek and Sanskrit share linguistic roots. So, there was indeed some form of contact between the two, although not the point that there would be later.

    But you're right in that the average Greek soldier in the 400s BC didn't know any of this, and likely thought that the similarities that were were simply because that's how religion or language worked (or, more to the point, they didn't care about these things and were tired of carrying this spear across the world). Of course, many of Alexander's soldiers weren't Greek at all, but were from other areas (including India), recruited along the way (though these would have been the footsoldiers and not the generals). And the question of "why are we doing this?" leads to a question of diminishing returns - not necessarily that it's terra incognita (or, άγνωστη γη) and a fundamentally hostile and foreign land, but that "I went to war to get a good pile of money and fame and bring it back home... so... I've got that pile. Now where's home?".

    So, of course you're right in this, and about the idea of "we're way outside of our sphere of influence" in the larger conversation, but I do want to underline the links made between Asia and Europe in the time AFTER Alexander - Chinese silk in Roman courts, Indian-Greek kingdoms, Buddhist thought in Greece, etc. And, of course, the fate of Rome and the fate of India (and Han China, though it did not fall) were linked when Central Asian populations started to push outwards on all front around AD 300s.
     
    E.man, Kjimmet, Zaarin and 3 others like this.

Share This Page