1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

[Vanilla] Warmongering penalties seems wrong

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Abaxial, Feb 9, 2018.

  1. Abaxial

    Abaxial Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2017
    Messages:
    148
    Gender:
    Male
    I have no problem with warmongering penalties when one declares war. That is warmongering. But it seems wrong to accumulate penalties when war is declared against you. In my current game I had four civs all declaring on me out of the blue at the same time, Lord knows why. Two of them were so far away they couldn't actually attack me, so I could easily hold off the other two. To bring them to the peace table I had to attack their cities. Once you capture a city, you only have two options, keep or raze, and both give you penalties. I reason it is perfectly fair to hold on to some enemy territory to punish the aggressors, but guess what - pretty soon all the civs in the game are serially denouncing me for being a warmonger.

    Since the penalties fade so slowly (if they do at all), once the situation reaches this state, it seems there is no further sanction. So I might as well attack all over the place, since any further penalty is meaningless. If the penalties are applied so severely, they cease to have any deterrent effect. Surely it would be better for the game if warmongering didn't saturate so easily?
     
  2. leandrombraz

    leandrombraz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    507
    You don't have to attack their cities to bring them to peace, only increase your strength and kill their units. Attacking the cities is your choice and will be seem as aggression. Alternatively you can conquer the cities then give it back on the peace deal or even trade for better cities, the penalty will be removed.
     
    pietro1990 and Tiger Genocide like this.
  3. liv

    liv Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,304
    yeah if you take cities you are a war monger and it does not matter who started it (I feel like this is true in real life as well)
    But RF does leave you with a possibility to get cities without penalties in flipping
    I was able to attack a free city and capture territory that way after two AI were at war and occupied cities flipped. Kind of a fun way to expand and still have a squeaky clean reputation.
     
  4. Stringer1313

    Stringer1313 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    674
    Israel took over the West Bank after they were declared war upon, and their continued occupation of the West Bank causes some to think of them as warmongers. They would argue they were entitled to the land b/c they were attacked first, and so on. Just saying that it's not a totally counterintuitive concept.

    FWIW, in my game I took over 2 cities after someone declared war on me, and my warmongering penalties were surprising light for some reason (like -9)

    Perhaps warmonger penalties from taking over your aggressor's cities should become greater if you're in an advanced age
     
  5. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    8,836
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    This is not evident to many people. There is a policy card for raiding for a reason. They even combined the 2 policy cards so you get bonuses for both pillaging improvements and districts. Pillage every single district in their Empire and they will feel it for a long time.

    But I can't deny the lure of conquering cities. It's not like I don't do it. I am a warmonger after all. I'm just saying there are alternatives.
     
    Eagle Pursuit likes this.
  6. bonafide11

    bonafide11 Worker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,088
    Location:
    STL
    Unfortunately you just have to accept that if you choose the path to become a warmonger, all other Civs are going to hate you for being a warmonger. I wish there was a way you could make alliances with other civs where they would overlook it (which was possible in Civ IV), but it doesn't seem possible.
     
  7. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,324
    Gender:
    Male
    It's because you have no CB to attack yet. Force peace asap , denounce, and come at them in 10 more turns. It's not like you'd be ready to war when they declare anyways.... if you were, well, maybe they were right!
     
  8. Gorbles

    Gorbles Load Balanced

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,790
    Location:
    UK
    This. Nobody is forcing you to take cities.
     
  9. EgonSpengler

    EgonSpengler Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    3,550
    Yeah, as everyone's already said, the warmonger penalties come from capturing cities. So don't do that. To get an AI to capitulate, you only need to spank them and wait 10 turns. Destroy their army, bust up some of their trade routes, burn some tiles, then take their money. You get gold for trashing farms, science for breaking Campuses, etc. Just cracking some heads can be pretty lucrative, you don't need to take a whole city.

    Also, liberating a city reverses a large amount of your warmonger penalty. If you're attacked, look for cities the attacking Civ has taken from others (that includes City-States).
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  10. leandrombraz

    leandrombraz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    507
    I think it would be fair though if the penalty for taking cities was reduced if you didn't declare the war, then increased for each city you conquer, like 50% discount for the first city, then 25% in the second and the third is normal penalty
     
    nzcamel and Stringer1313 like this.
  11. GoodSarmatian

    GoodSarmatian A mad God's dying dream

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2006
    Messages:
    8,786
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Horned City, The Abyss
    I think I found an exploit/bug.
    Alexander conquered Hong Kong and triggered the City State emergency. I accepted and was at war with him without a declaration. After I liberated Hong Kong I was still at war and took some more cities from him without any warmonger penalty.
     
    Tiger Genocide likes this.
  12. Tiger Genocide

    Tiger Genocide Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    131
    Gender:
    Male
    You know what? Taking cities then giving them back to the original owner during the peace deal might take off their loyalty on that city. Or does it? I need to try that next game.

    Think about it. That is an easy way to steal a neighbors city that you could not do in Vanilla. With less loyalty, you can put a governor nearby in your city, start a bread and circus, to drag it down even more. Sometimes the AI sends a governor and sometimes they do not. That is a excellent way to ninja a city if you want to play peaceful.

    If you play Mapuche they don't have to do this obviously. All they have to do is keep killing your units. It's all downhill from there.
     
  13. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,295
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Lol, they're close to the only country who that applies to!
     

Share This Page

Ebates: Get Paid to Shop