Warmongering menace to the world? Really?

[Ajuga]

They seem to accuse you of warmongering when you capture cities a certain way. If you are attacked, and retaliate, and capture one or two cities of your attacker, most civs will not accuse you of warmongering (there are exceptions, especially if that civ has it in for you already).

At the point where the civ starts offering peace treaties, if you capture a city, you risk the warmonger accusation. The more cities you capture, the more likely this will happen. Once it happens, I don't know of it ever going away.

It can even be gained entirely from defensive wars, if you are capturing cities. What you do with those cities doesn't matter. Declaring war also seems to factor into it. They seem slightly more tolerant of you when you are attacked, as long as you don't become too aggressive.

Of course, there are times when you can be attacked repeatedly, and fend off the battle, and if you move into enemy territory and attack, you risk the warmongering bit. I have never gotten it from simply defending my territory, only for attacking (even if I didn't declare war).

It is one of the risks of war, the more effective your fighting is, the more you risk a warmongering charge.

City-states have more diplomatic weight to them. When you capture or declare war on city states too often, you will have some interesting diplomacy problems. Other civs will look down on you as a warmonger, and city states may refuse any diplomacy with you. Eventually, some of them will declare a permanent war on you. So in general, use discretion when attacking city states (unless you're Attila, because he's made to capture city states and anger people).

You sure about that?

I'm currently in a game where:

- Spain settles near lands that I coveted, declared war on her and took their capitol and two other cities (that I burned to the ground), leaving her with one city.

- After the war with Spain I decommission my entire army, bringing my military rank to the lowest. Carthaginian's leader Dido declares war on Spain, takes her last city and then declares war on me.
I take that puppeted city and burn it and took another city for good measure and burned it.

- After about 50 turns Babylon the runaway declares war on me. After being defensive for about another 50 turns (and refusing peace a couple of times) I liberated a city state captured by Babylon, burn a small city he created and took and annexed his capitol as well as two other fairly sizable cities.

Right now:

Spain is deaded by me and Dido.
Siam is deaded by Babylon.
Arabia is hanging by a thread (Dido and Babylon are harassing him), he doesn't find me a warmonger but doesn't like me either.
Greece is huge and a runaway, he doesn't find me a warmonger and absolutely loves me for some reason.
The Inca are huge, getting beaten by Greece, he doesn't find me a warmonger also loves me.
Dido used to despise me prior to our war and after it but at the moment is my strongest ally. (And doesn't find me a warmonger.)

The only one that is openly against me is Babylon at this point, but everybody else hates him for being the previous runaway.

I've taken the most cities and capitols, yet nobody really hates me.
Even though I had one of the smallest armies pre-Babylon war.

 

[RedFuneral]

In the last game I got the warmongering trait for attacking Sweden for the sole purpose of capturing a settler they had sent to my lands. I had a DOF with a few civs who didn't care but most of the others started calling me a warmonger. Throughout the next 50 turns all but one Civ(Japan) lost the warmonger modifier. Maybe because they started warmongering as well? Though Japan was one of the most aggressive so that makes little sense. What really surprised me was that later on when I attacked Sweden again and captured 2 cities all it did was solidify Japan's belief in me being a warmonger(it went from dark red to bright, I think that's what it means). Again no one else cared. Maybe the fact that I took his peace offer after capturing the cities helped. I'm sure he would have given one sooner but I had convinced Spain that we should attack him so it blocked out the possibility of peace for 15 turns. 'you have a deal to attack this player for x more turns'.

 

[Glassmage]

OP is a warmonger menace.

 

[ragan651]

You sure about that?

I'm currently in a game where:

- Spain settles near lands that I coveted, declared war on her and took their capitol and two other cities (that I burned to the ground), leaving her with one city.

- After the war with Spain I decommission my entire army, bringing my military rank to the lowest. Carthaginian's leader Dido declares war on Spain, takes her last city and then declares war on me.
I take that puppeted city and burn it and took another city for good measure and burned it.

- After about 50 turns Babylon the runaway declares war on me. After being defensive for about another 50 turns (and refusing peace a couple of times) I liberated a city state captured by Babylon, burn a small city he created and took and annexed his capitol as well as two other fairly sizable cities.

Right now:

Spain is deaded by me and Dido.
Siam is deaded by Babylon.
Arabia is hanging by a thread (Dido and Babylon are harassing him), he doesn't find me a warmonger but doesn't like me either.
Greece is huge and a runaway, he doesn't find me a warmonger and absolutely loves me for some reason.
The Inca are huge, getting beaten by Greece, he doesn't find me a warmonger also loves me.
Dido used to despise me prior to our war and after it but at the moment is my strongest ally. (And doesn't find me a warmonger.)

The only one that is openly against me is Babylon at this point, but everybody else hates him for being the previous runaway.

I've taken the most cities and capitols, yet nobody really hates me.
Even though I had one of the smallest armies pre-Babylon war.

It differs from civ to civ. Not everyone will hate you for being aggressive, especially if they are hostile to the same civs. And from what I've been reading, it seems it doesn't always display the warmonger modifier if it isn't significant.

 

[Browd]

And from what I've been reading, it seems it doesn't always display the warmonger modifier if it isn't significant.

Or if the civ is being deceptive.

 

[smallfish]

Or if the civ is being deceptive.

They all are.

You ever walked your first settler (and I mean the first and not just someone who got spammed out of your capital first) past those settled down civs and see what their reactions are to you?

It ain't pretty; they have it in you from the get-go, these sociopathic immortals

 

[nokmirt]

OP is a warmonger menace.

So am I. I have done murder! Haven't we all? Saying that, I have not DoWed anyone. What happened in the game I am playing now is that I refuse to DoW with Polynesia on the side of my neighbor the Byzantines. So, a few turns later they declare war on me. At the same time, the Maya DoW me as well from the north.

I knew the Byzantines were going to attack, because my military was weak. Being a more experienced player, I quickly built walls in my cities and switched to military production. My finances were in a good place at that point. When Theo came over she had one huge army. Cataphracts and swords, CBs and catapults. To face them, I barely had a scratch force. I bought three swords amd converged them towards the city being attacked, Barcelona. Those three units along with a CB and a pike defended against this montserous force. Really they had no chance though due to a bottleneck and terrain was in my favor. Still it was quite a battle and they came in two large waves each had to be destroyed and forced to retreat. After that they fell back to their cities and a few turns later they asked for peace. One thing that helped me defeat their attack was that the AI still loves to stick units in the water where it shouldn't. I dearly wish they could fix that.

In the meantime, in the north the Mayans attacked with warriors and atlatlists. They were no real threat my northern city held them off with a CB in the city, then I brought a pike over to support them. Anyway, I am going to take out the Mayans, which will lead me most likely to warmonger status. Even though they were the initial aggressors. If you want a large empire this is what you have to do. You have to conquer. I will keep two of their cities. Burn one and leave them in the remaining worst city. Then I can turn on the Byzantines and attack them. After that I will try to have peace on the main continent. During this when I am able, I plan to send my caravels off to find the Terra continent. Which was my idea to begin with, exploration, not war! Funny how wars always find me no matter what. Even if I don't look for them.

 

[Jelster]

Also, CSs should not get along like peaches and cream. CSs were always fighting each other.

That would be interesting. You are the ally of a CS and another CS starts a war with it... All you would need to do is either gift them units, or just get in the way and make it difficult for the other CS, you wouldn't even have to go to war.

 

[smallfish]

That would be interesting. You are the ally of a CS and another CS starts a war with it... All you would need to do is either gift them units, or just get in the way and make it difficult for the other CS, you wouldn't even have to go to war.

In anicient times it was much more easier. The offending civ would request you to WIPE their rivals out for them.

So much glee to be had when Singapore got into a shooting war with Kuala Lumpur... and I attacked S'pore with Panzers and Mech Inf, because KL was cultural, was much closer to tis stocks of uranium between their lands and they requested me influential assistance.

 

[Biologist]

You ever walked your first settler (and I mean the first and not just someone who got spammed out of your capital first) past those settled down civs and see what their reactions are to you?

Once, when first starting out on Emperor, I got disgusted with my 3rd or 4th bad start in a row. Instead of settling I just took my starting units and started walking west. I walked across a huge, flat desert for about 7 turns before encountering Washington in the middle of the desert (he seemed to have found the only oasis and river). I then settled my capital on his border, began researching Archery immediately, and started spamming out warriors. Once Archery was finished, I declared war. Using the nearby hills and my capital's bombardment, I destroyed all of Washington's units and then proceeded to capture his capital.

Then, because I had forgotton to uncheck OCC from a previous game, it burned to the ground. Needless to say the other nearby AIs were not best pleased with me.

 

[nokmirt]

That would be interesting. You are the ally of a CS and another CS starts a war with it... All you would need to do is either gift them units, or just get in the way and make it difficult for the other CS, you wouldn't even have to go to war.

Or there could be some incentive the CS offers if you support it. Maybe a trade resource for 30 turns or something other than just straight influence. With improved diplomacy more interesting deals could be signed. Rather than just the boring old run of the mill agreements.

 

[smallfish]

Or there could be some incentive the CS offers if you support it. Maybe a trade resource for 30 turns or something other than just straight influence. With improved diplomacy more interesting deals could be signed. Rather than just the boring old run of the mill agreements.

I certainly do find it odd that the CSes aren't more... aggressive towards their neighbors and rivals this days. Sure they might eventually wound up shooting at each other, but whenever it comes to asking a big daddy power to help them out in the long run, its more like "slap a ticket on that speeder's wrist" rather than running down that rival with tanks.

Sure bullying is ultimately beneficial and harmless, but you'd figure that some of those disagreements would eventually spiral into an event that will get those CSes to call out for a global hitman to take the shot and not just sit there and rely on their own lonesome eh

 

[nokmirt]

I certainly do find it odd that the CSes aren't more... aggressive towards their neighbors and rivals this days. Sure they might eventually wound up shooting at each other, but whenever it comes to asking a big daddy power to help them out in the long run, its more like "slap a ticket on that speeder's wrist" rather than running down that rival with tanks.

Sure bullying is ultimately beneficial and harmless, but you'd figure that some of those disagreements would eventually spiral into an event that will get those CSes to call out for a global hitman to take the shot and not just sit there and rely on their own lonesome eh

I wanted to point a few things out I was thinking of...

First, I have to laugh at the bullying part. They have made the warmonger penalty sit on my mind so much that I figured bullying a CS would just become one large headache. They add something new like that and pyschologically, I don't bother to attempt it. I'm afraid they'll brand me into an international outlaw. That would be just my luck.

This is why diplomacy needs to improve. Rules are too one sided and therer is no room for reason and logic, which are needed to not only make decisions, but so the other AIs understand more clearly why...you may have made those decisions. Then it can act accordingly, based on how it sees things. Furthermore and most importantly, all civs should see things differently and each make its own decision.

If you truly are a warmonger and go around destroying CSs and other civs for no reason, then you are a warmonger. The problem is with this diplomacy is that every little thing you do, whether it is reasonable or not, still makes you end up a warmonger. At least in many cases. Sure, you can try to play like a priest, but even then you can run into trouble. I just find it boring to have to play completely peaceful. If someone attacks me, I feel they should get what they deserve. I should not have to slack off, because the other AIs cannot take what they dish out. And they dish out plenty. Attacking two on one for most of the game. I wish I could find another AI that was trustworthy enough to DoW at the same exact time I do. It would be fun to be a bully and get away with it like they do. That would be great. ATM without something to exchange, good luck with that. At least i haven't been so luck in my games.

I don't need to get into the reasons why. Everyone has played and they know what can happen in the game. If you haven't, play and find out why diplomacy needs work. Maybe many of you don't agree and that is fine. I just feel it could be better.

As for what you said about CSs smallfish, I agree wholeheartedly. CSs should be more shrewd and find some big player to back them up. They simply don't have the power to do it themselves. Even if they work with other CSs, they rarely if ever can support each other effectively.

 

[RedFuneral]

I wanted to point a few things out I was thinking of...

First, I have to laugh at the bullying part. They have made the warmonger penalty sit on my mind so much that I figured bullying a CS would just become one large headache. They add something new like that and pyschologically, I don't bother to attempt it. I'm afraid they'll brand me into an international outlaw. That would be just my luck.

This is why diplomacy needs to improve. Rules are too one sided and therer is no room for reason and logic, which are needed to not only make decisions, but so the other AIs understand more clearly why...you may have made those decisions. Then it can act accordingly, based on how it sees things. Furthermore and most importantly, all civs should see things differently and each make its own decision.

If you truly are a warmonger and go around destroying CSs and other civs for no reason, then you are a warmonger. The problem is with this diplomacy is that every little thing you do, whether it is reasonable or not, still makes you end up a warmonger. At least in many cases. Sure, you can try to play like a priest, but even then you can run into trouble. I just find it boring to have to play completely peaceful. If someone attacks me, I feel they should get what they deserve. I should not have to slack off, because the other AIs cannot take what they dish out. And they dish out plenty. Attacking two on one for most of the game. I wish I could find another AI that was trustworthy enough to DoW at the same exact time I do. It would be fun to be a bully and get away with it like they do. That would be great. ATM without something to exchange, good luck with that. At least i haven't been so luck in my games.

I don't need to get into the reasons why. Everyone has played and they know what can happen in the game. If you haven't, play and find out why diplomacy needs work. Maybe many of you don't agree and that is fine. I just feel it could be better.

As for what you said about CSs smallfish, I agree wholeheartedly. CSs should be more shrewd and find some big player to back them up. They simply don't have the power to do it themselves. Even if they work with other CSs, they rarely if ever can support each other effectively.

I agree that the AI and diplomacy needs some work, especially with the city states but sometimes I do find myself surprised in how the AI reacts. In my current game I've actually got a group of 3 AIs that I'm friends with(and who are all friends with one another, along with a few other civs I haven't met yet.) The AI is capable of teamwork in that circumstance. When someone out of the group starts turning into a run-away and I denounce them within 5 turns 10 different civs have joined in and denounced them as well. Within 30 turns they're at war with the whole alliance.

Also, when I'm having a problem in my part of the world I'm able to go to one of the closer AI's and ask 'shall we go to war against...' and have them agree(first time I've seen that happen). They don't send their whole army usually but do keep the AI in question distracted well enough that I'm able to take a few cities. At one point an AI I frequently DOWed gave me a city without me even having to move a single unit. He was fighting a 5 front war(when you get weak enough even the CSs start attacking you. )

I'm wondering how long I'm going to be able to keep the circle of friendly AIs going TBH. I have no illusions of it lasting the Industrial Era(currently in Renaissance, had it since late-Ancient). And when it does give out the world is going full on chaos. There can only be one. I've also noticed that 2 AIs have made a similar group on the other side of the world. They both have border disputes with Austria and frequently attack Austria together.

Still I wish it could go further. The diplomacy is very one sided with DoF. I wish you could make requests of the other civs like they do to you. Hopefully that's one of the things they're going to address with the next expansion.

 

[smallfish]

Once, when first starting out on Emperor, I got disgusted with my 3rd or 4th bad start in a row. Instead of settling I just took my starting units and started walking west. I walked across a huge, flat desert for about 7 turns before encountering Washington in the middle of the desert (he seemed to have found the only oasis and river). I then settled my capital on his border, began researching Archery immediately, and started spamming out warriors. Once Archery was finished, I declared war. Using the nearby hills and my capital's bombardment, I destroyed all of Washington's units and then proceeded to capture his capital.

Then, because I had forgotton to uncheck OCC from a previous game, it burned to the ground. Needless to say the other nearby AIs were not best pleased with me.

*shrugs*

I'm not really American, so not sure where the jab is going to connect on that bit eh.

But I have dug out some ole screenshots, and I do love this game that aforementioned Cross-Straits Shooting War happened. So have some of 'em here

Spoiler :

Wehrmacht Intervention:

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

And this isn't complete without some Civilization meme...

Spoiler :

 

[SouljahAtWar]

I'm more like, "you think I'm the warmongering menace to the world? Whatcha gonna do about it? I'm #1 in military! Come at me, bro! Bring it on!"

 

[tetley]

I never declare war on CS's, preferring to try and get their ally civ to drag them into it. Once we are at war, I usually won't take out the CS city, but I will most definitely take out all his units and maybe take a few pot shots on the city. Besides the cheap & safe experience, it's easier to get tribute out of him after you make peace. And if he's going to remain the other guy's ally anyway, might as well plunder him. After I war with a civ and marginalize him, I actually like beating up & bullying his CS allies first before peace, if I can.

 

[compwiz1202]

I guess no one like Babylon. I was beating on them one game and neither Korea nor Byzantium seemed to care at all. I guess Korea was secretly cheering since their scientific rival was being smacked around.

The only warmonger penalty I don't like is for going on the offensive when you were DoWed if the enemy won't offer neutral peace or better. You shouldn't be forced to pay anything for peace if you didn't start the war. And if you don't go for peace you lose your Swords into Plowshares. And lots of times, they attack a few times then never approach you again, but yet they want your entire net worth for peace.

 

[Matthew.]

My most recent game: Siam completely surrounded by all city-states. Rome takes out two of my city-states (yes, mine, even if I had not allied them ) Round of denouncements on Rome, including myself. I get a message from all the leaders saying "Ya we totally agree! Rome is a big jerk face!" Shortly there after, I declare war and liberate both city-states. Sign peace treaty immediately after, all of Rome's original cities intact.

I become war-monger to the world to all civs but two. Right....

 

[crazymarco]

I guess declearing war on CS hurts. But not only that reason will deemed warmonger.

My current game played as Siam and I try to ally wilth all CS. I never declear war on any CS. But for the sake of my territories, I decleared war on England a few times. And I am named with "warmonger". Not sure what is the equation for being a warmonger. But seems repeatedly declearing war on one CIV is one.

Maybe if other CIV in war wants peace for you, if you rejected, you are warmonger also. LOL