Warmonger penalties and Casus Belli doesn't work

[lamaros]

Stupid question, where are the modifiers shown? I've not noticed them...

Supposedly there is also a "stop city growing" button, I can't find that either...

 

[Zhahz]

Casus belli doesn't eliminate warmonger penalties, it just reduces them. And not by very much.

This.

My preference is to wait til someone declares on me then spank them out of existence but it is frustrating that any and all mid/late war is diplomatic suicide. Hopefully they tone this down some. Hopefully they patch sooner rather than later (Firaxis in my experience takes weeks to patch anything).

 

[Takfloyd]

Don't forget

• AIs asking you for a Joint War, then denouncing you the next turn for being warmongering when you accept
• AIs denouncing you for warmongering when you kill invading enemy units in defense
• AIs that you haven't even met declaring war on you early in the game, then remaining at war with you until you "meet" them 100 turns later
• If you dare take a city from an AI that attacked you, prepare for a -12 penalty with everyone.

 

[Danzo_87]

the tooltip said protectorate war does not increase my warmonger penalty, but the AI denounced me right after I declared protectorate war against another AI

 

[Quineloe]

http://imgur.com/a/pjCYm

I am disappointed they launched it with this feature simply not working 9 out of 10 times.

and being denounced for being better than someone at something 100% peaceful (such as great people) is just utterly ridiculous. Denouncing means even less than in any version of 5 now.

 

[kaspergm]

Here's a funny example.

• Summeria captures Stockholm (city state).
• Summeria later DOW me.
• I capture three of Sumerias cities and liberate Stockholm.
• I then give Sumeria all their cities back when making peace.
• I now have a -89 diplomatic modifier with Summeria for my warmongering

LOL?

 

[kampori]

Neither is a Colonial war, even though he's trailing three eras behind. Colonial war very often simply doesn't show up in the CB menu - which usually means CB doesn't show up at all in diplomacy..

I've launched several colonial wars. But even with half penalty removed, and I didn't raze any city or take his capital, and liberated 2 CSs, every single civ except my ally denounced me, and continued to until the end of the game.

Diplomacy, agendas, and war penalties absolutely suck in this game.

 

[Quineloe]

I've launched several colonial wars. But even with half penalty removed, and I didn't raze any city or take his capital, and liberated 2 CSs, every single civ except my ally denounced me, and continued to until the end of the game.

Diplomacy, agendas, and war penalties absolutely suck in this game.

You've never been in a situation where a colonial war should have been possible, but you couldn't declare it? See screenshots of my second post right now.

 

[kampori]

You've never been in a situation where a colonial war should have been possible, but you couldn't declare it? See screenshots of my second post right now.

To be honest, I never noticed before. I rarely declare war, I'm a bit of a Civ pacifist. But the few times I have, the Casus Belli that I have unlocked and are eligible for have shown up. (Colonial this time, and territorial I think). Liberation never seems to show, nor does holy war.

 

[Quineloe]

I'm narrowing it down now - I can only declare CB wars on civs that denounced me. Then they're all available.

That is nowhere in the game info.

Alright that's the reason - denounce, wait 5 turns, then you can CB. Pretty silly that you have to wait 5 turns before you can assist your city state, or in any of the scenarios - it's not like they can do something about it within five turns. Oh well

Feels like that should be part of the civilopedia

http://imgur.com/a/xVJO4

 

[qew]

I'm not sure why our experiences differ but so far in my current play through I've managed two wars, both times wiping out an AI and still maintain friendly relationship with one of my neighbors and neutral with another.
Are you actually working to keep the AI friendly or just ignore them and then wonder why they don't like you?

 

[isau]

When people say they are being "denounced" do they mean actually denounced, or just the leader popping in with a warning message?

If you trigger someone's agenda, they will pop in to tell you they are annoyed. It is possible that this confers an immediate loss to the invisible "influence pool," I can't be certain yet. However, it is different than an actual denouncement. It basically is a warning that means "a damage over time spell has been applied to your relationship with this leader." If you don't do something about it they will gradually grow more annoyed.

I think the thing that is crazy confusing unless you understand what it happening in the background is that after eating a penalty, the penalty appears to be dropping, so it feels like your relationship is getting better. But that's not true. Anytime the net total of your modifiers is a negative number, you are losing influence. So when the modifier on screen drops from -16 to -5 and you're thinking well they should probably be okay with me now, they actually aren't. They're still losing influence, a bit slower than before, but still on the next turn they will like you even less. It's all very confusing because the way the relationship screen is designed, the numbers look exactly like in Civ 4, where you could just add them up to determine your current relationship, but here that total seems to represent the per turn change.

 

[esoba]

Here's a funny example.

• Summeria captures Stockholm (city state).
• Summeria later DOW me.
• I capture three of Sumerias cities and liberate Stockholm.
• I then give Sumeria all their cities back when making peace.
• I now have a -89 diplomatic modifier with Summeria for my warmongering

LOL?

Yeah that's ridiculous. Had a similar experience when I just liberated a city state and pillaged some improvements before allowing a peace deal. The liberation should have eliminated the penalty (which was light) from a formal war due to denouncement.

 

[Matte979]

That's a little crazy, I assume the handing back reduction did not count correctly maybe that's a bug.

In more normal cases make sure you offset the penalties as fast as possible after a warmongering penalty. The penalty goes down by the turn. Once a little lower and the denounce wear off get those open borders, trade routes, favorable trades etc. And you get back to positive fairly quickly. And wait a while until next war.

Make sure to keep a large positive with friends so if you declare war the good offset the bad effect of the war.

I do hope they increase the positive to offset some the warmongering when your in alliance or joint war.

As stated before I wish they added some tooltip to explain that is by turn change...

 

[esoba]

That's a little crazy, I assume the handing back reduction did not count correctly maybe that's a bug.

In more normal cases make sure you offset the penalties as fast as possible after a warmongering penalty. The penalty goes down by the turn. Once a little lower and the denounce wear off get those open borders, trade routes, favorable trades etc. And you get back to positive fairly quickly. And wait a while until next war.

Make sure to keep a large positive with friends so if you declare war the good offset the bad effect of the war.

I do hope they increase the positive to offset some the warmongering when your in alliance or joint war.

Do you know if anyone has run the numbers on the best trades to improve relationships with civs? Is it gold over turn, or a lump sum? I remember seeing some numbers somewhere, but they were insanely skewed so that you would have to gift forever to erase most of the warmongering penalties.

 

[Akbarthegreat]

IMO warmongering penalties are a stupid mechanic that should absolutely not exist. From either a gameplay or realism pov. The only reason it does is because human players can beat the AI at combat so effortlessly. So for more of a challenge.

 

[bcaiko]

The core of this problem seems to be that the base warmongering penalties - even early in the game - are too high. It also seems to be a small amount of time before progressing out of the early eras where warmongering doesn't cause as much penalty - one can easily be in the medieval era in the BCs. There are large balance issues here.

 

[kaltorak]

They need to return to the brave new world concept. Where you get a light penalty for declaring hardly noticeble but each time you take a city you get a penalty depending on how many cites there are on the map and how many cities the enemy(person you are at war with) has.

I prefer totally the other way around. If I declare a war, I AM a warmonger. If somebody else declares war on me, and I win the war, it's his fault.

IMO, increase the declaring war penalty and reduce or even remove the capturing cities penatly. Or make it only take capitals into consideration.

In my actual game I have declared 0 wars, 3 times was I attacked, and now everybody denounced me bc I won the 3 wars and captured some cities. I didn't even harm them much by taking the capital or anything, just the border cities that were sending troops.
Totally illogical and antifun mechanic.

 

[esoba]

I prefer totally the other way around. If I declare a war, I AM a warmonger. If somebody else declares war on me, and I win the war, it's his fault.

IMO, increase the declaring war penalty and reduce or even remove the capturing cities penatly. Or make it only take capitals into consideration.

In my actual game I have declared 0 wars, 3 times was I attacked, and now everybody denounced me bc I won the 3 wars and captured some cities. I didn't even harm them much by taking the capital or anything, just the border cities that were sending troops.
Totally illogical and antifun mechanic.

I agree with this. Warmongering penalties need tweaking, but if someone declares on you and you wipe them out there shouldn't be penalties.

 

[Wellfooled]

I agree with this. Warmongering penalties need tweaking, but if someone declares on you and you wipe them out there shouldn't be penalties.

I think there should be fewer warmonger penalties if you weren't the aggressor, but if someone declares war on you and you conquer their entire empire despite repeated attempts at peace I think you're still warmongering with the best of them.