Too often: No counter-action except declaring war

[JamesNinelives]

Technically the "event" already exists for some of the passive-aggressiveness done by the AI, like spying.

It does? I wasn't aware of this. Now I want to try declaring war on someone for spying on me .

 

[InkAxis]

If you are going for domination and warmonger aggressively, diplomatic penalties in their current state are of minor concern.

I think the causus belli system could be much more though. If you're a small civ that doesn't really do war but someone forward settled you - you can declare a war of territorial expansion, which means you can claim cities that are right nearby but not swallow the continent. Warmongers have little stopping them from just taking every city, so this could help with that, with giving massive anti-warmonger to enemies if you declare war the wrong way and giving really big war weariness. Additionally, the AI will look at you like you broke a promise so you'll have lots of different penalties depending on how you declare war. And you can't just declare war and take an entire continent.
But, I do kind of agree that diplomatic penalties can be very weak, so it will be difficult to balance, so it will take a lot of work if we want to properly have it as a feature. Also there are other things that take priority over this. So I doubt it'll get implemented but we'll see.

 

[azum4roll]

It does? I wasn't aware of this. Now I want to try declaring war on someone for spying on me .

Currently you can click on the notification and choose to denounce, demand them to stop, or forgive. We just need to add another option of DECLARE WAR, and make both WAR and DENOUNCE options receive less backlash from other civs, even the spying civ's friend.

 

[CppMaster]

Currently you can click on the notification and choose to denounce, demand them to stop, or forgive. We just need to add another option of DECLARE WAR, and make both WAR and DENOUNCE options receive less backlash from other civs, even the spying civ's friend.

But when an AI declares a war against someone, you don't know the reason either, so you can't say if it's justified. Should a player have an option to explain himself, but not AI?

 

[azum4roll]

On the other hand, the AIs can denounce with different reasons while the player doesn't. We need @Recursive to make it fair to both sides.

 

[Recursive]

On the other hand, the AIs can denounce with different reasons while the player doesn't. We need @Recursive to make it fair to both sides.

The reason for adding new denouncement messages was to explain to the player why the AI was angry, since vanilla does a poor job of it. The AI doesn't act on the information.

Casus Belli is something I'm thinking about, but UI work would definitely be required.

 

[CppMaster]

Casus Belli is something I'm thinking about, but UI work would definitely be required.

I'm glad to hear that! Damn, you make so much progress

 

[Xaviarlol]

I like the idea of limited wars, such as airstrikes against buildings, tile improvements, military units etc. Really wish there was an option to do this rather than all-out conquer cities war.

 

[Tugboatspotter]

I like the idea of Causus Belli from Civ6 that you have different reasons to go for a war that reduce diplomatic penalty. They could reduce gaining war weariness in this mod, because soldiers would be more motivated to fight.

Honestly the causus belli system from civ 6 is perhaps my favorite mechanic from that game, that mechanic totally changes diplomacy with regards to war. And that you can get unique causus bellis and that some UAs leverage it is very cool. I would really like it in VP but it would probably be difficult to implement.

I agree that this is a great mechanic, but I don't think it is appropriate for VP, since it has been designed from the ground up for civ vi.

In my view, I don't really think much needs to be changed. VP has been war-heavy and diplomacy-light for long enough to know what to expect, and most players seem to be perfectly happy with that.

 

[CppMaster]

I agree that this is a great mechanic, but I don't think it is appropriate for VP, since it has been designed from the ground up for civ vi.

In my view, I don't really think much needs to be changed. VP has been war-heavy and diplomacy-light for long enough to know what to expect, and most players seem to be perfectly happy with that.

Why not? VP already has war weariness and diplomatic modifiers, so it would be compatible.

 

[Tugboatspotter]

Why not? VP already has war weariness and diplomatic modifiers, so it would be compatible.

Personally, I am satisfied with the diplomacy in the game. If the consensus is to implement it, then I have no objections.

 

[Cokolwiek]

VP has been war-heavy and diplomacy-light for long enough to know what to expect, and most players seem to be perfectly happy with that.

 

[CppMaster]

Oh, C'mon, @whatever, AI diplomacy may not be perfect, but it's very good and it's getting better.

 

[Recursive]

Oh, C'mon, @whatever, AI diplomacy may not be perfect, but it's very good and it's getting better.

@Cokolwiek has generally had favorable reviews on AI diplomacy - I think he's reacting negatively to the idea of VP being war-heavy and diplomacy-light, which I can honestly agree with.

 

[usadefcon1]

I like the idea of limited wars, such as airstrikes against buildings, tile improvements, military units etc. Really wish there was an option to do this rather than all-out conquer cities war.

Try the mod Hex Conquer. It allows you to capture territory without capturing cities while at war.

 

[usadefcon1]

Here's the link:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/attachments/hex-conquer-borders-only-zip.554067/

 

[ICanHasName?]

I think it might be interesting if citadeling someone gave them the option to escalate or accept. If they escalate I have the option to either declare a war or abandon the citadel.

War is still the counterplay but it means the aggressor has to declare. A CB type system would probably be great but that is of a far larger scope.

Second, citadel should probably come with some warmonger. Basically I think its simulating a border skirmish or Crimea type thing, it should have diplo costs as such (maybe it does already?) I'd also like to see citadels get taken in war even without the nearby city being taken. A whole system of taking hexes might be a bit much.

 

[dailyminerals]

If there's going to be a lessened penalty in regards to WW and diplomacy, those benefits need to be explicitly communicated to the player at the time they become available. Too often the "declare war" option in the dialog box when confronting leaders isn't ever an actually reasonable response.

What would otherwise be a good system is being able to commit the same action the AI did against you back against that civ with little or no diplo penalty, or after warning the AI enough times to not do something, that you could eventually take that repeated action as a declaration of war on you by them for the purpose of diplomacy and defensive pacts.