Warning when near another Civ's borders is a horrible mechanic

[jjkrause84]

Is it just me or is this one of the worst mechanics to be being carried over from Civ 5? I've never once found it 'fun' in the slightest, much less historical.

Wouldn't it be better to instead have the computer start shifting units up to that border if it looks like you're going to attack? It'd be both less gamey and also far more effective for the computer.

 

[rastak]

Is it just me or is this one of the worst mechanics to be being carried over from Civ 5? I've never once found it 'fun' in the slightest, much less historical.

Wouldn't it be better to instead have the computer start shifting units up to that border if it looks like you're going to attack? It'd be both less gamey and also far more effective for the computer.

I like it. Forces you to either reveal yourself as a scumbag or admit you've massed on their borders to kill them.

 

[Mort_Q]

AFAIK, it's part of the diplomacy system. They need a response from you.

 

[leandrombraz]

The only think I don't like is that it's too sensitive sometimes and trigger way too easily. Aside from that I think it's a nice mechanic, even better now that we have a third option, just ignore the AI.

 

[homan1983]

I like it. Forces you to either reveal yourself as a scumbag or admit you've massed on their borders to kill them.

Except it doesn't. And that's the biggest flaw in it. If you declare war during the dialogue then it's considered a sneak attack: AND they get to play their turn first when war is declared.

Now you can simply ignore it and then declare war anyway. And you get a lesser war penalty, and you get to be the first to move your units.

This is why in every single case when ed beach triggered this warning, he simply ignored it and then attacked when he wanted to anyway.

So you have a situation where rather than having tradeoffs: "ok if I make this choice I get this advantage but this disadvantage and vice versa", what happens is all the advantages are on one option and none on the other.

 

[rastak]

Except it doesn't. And that's the biggest flaw in it. If you declare war during the dialogue then it's considered a sneak attack: AND they get to play their turn first when war is declared.

Now you can simply ignore it and then declare war anyway. And you get a lesser war penalty, and you get to be the first to move your units.

This is why in every single case when ed beach triggered this warning, he simply ignored it and then attacked when he wanted to anyway.

So you have a situation where rather than having tradeoffs: "ok if I make this choice I get this advantage but this disadvantage and vice versa", what happens is all the advantages are on one option and none on the other.

I thought we were discussing the Civ 5 implementation. I agree the ignore thing makes no sense.

 

[Matthew.]

The only think I don't like is that it's too sensitive sometimes and trigger way too easily. Aside from that I think it's a nice mechanic, even better now that we have a third option, just ignore the AI.

Yeah this. Especially when your borders are touching. If you move any of your troops over to protect your own borders, you trigger the message. Yeah, yeah, the usual response to this is "well it shouldn't matter if you don't plan on ever going to war", but just another mechanic to reinforce Civ's all-or-nothing attitude towards war. You either completely ignore it 100%, or if you opt for war then game mechanics draw you into a cycle of warmongering for the rest of the game.

I ended up playing Civ 5 as a war game most of the time simply because it allows you to ignore these arbitrary systems which serve to annoy rather than entertain. If the AI is going to get butthurt over every little thing and end up going to war anyway, you may as well go into the game from turn 1 with the mentality of war.

 

[skyclad]

Options should be

A) Merely passing through: as today
B) Mind your own business: gives AI casus belli vs you.

If he doesn't like your troops he can go ahead and fight you, but shouldn't force YOU to declare war on him.

 

[Mort_Q]

At worse it's a role-play option. If you can do a just war, perhaps there are benefits to not ignoring?

 

[Dearmad]

Disagree with OP. It's a good mechanism, imo. The OPs suggestion isn't a game mechanism but more a beg for a better AI response. If the AI cannot cope, then a mechanism must do and this one is fine, IMO.

 

[criZp]

Except it doesn't. And that's the biggest flaw in it. If you declare war during the dialogue then it's considered a sneak attack: AND they get to play their turn first when war is declared.

Now you can simply ignore it and then declare war anyway. And you get a lesser war penalty, and you get to be the first to move your units.

This is why in every single case when ed beach triggered this warning, he simply ignored it and then attacked when he wanted to anyway.

So you have a situation where rather than having tradeoffs: "ok if I make this choice I get this advantage but this disadvantage and vice versa", what happens is all the advantages are on one option and none on the other.

Don't you get extra diplo denalty for ignoring their question? Pretty wierd how all the other leaders get to hear your response somehow.

The whole thing with AI getting to attack first is dumb.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[Josephias]

Options should be

A) Merely passing through: as today
B) Mind your own business: gives AI casus belli vs you.

If he doesn't like your troops he can go ahead and fight you, but shouldn't force YOU to declare war on him.

Either this or the "surprise attack" warmongering penalty is the same by doing the surprise attack both in this screen or outright trough base diplo menu. Even more if ignoring a diplo request gives an additional diplo malus (maybe not a warmongering one, but a "unreliable" one that makes all other civs more suspicious towards you -and therefore more difficult to close alliances or gain friendships)

 

[Abraxis]

I think they need to provide the player some incentive for being honorable and declaring their intention openly as a response.

 

[gunnergoz]

I'm just happy its written into the game. Once modding starts in earnest, it can be tweaked any which way players choose.

 

[MistyRonin]

Is it just me or is this one of the worst mechanics to be being carried over from Civ 5? I've never once found it 'fun' in the slightest, much less historical.

I could list a good amount of historical instances when that has happened. Up to nowadays traditional bullying (for instance when Russia organises huge military exercises in other countries borders or flies bombers next to other countries air spaces and these countries issue condemnation statements, same does NATO BTW).

Traditionally it is considered offensive to mass armies or create big military displays next to other countries borders. And powerful nations used it to force agreements or as a heads up.

The fact that the AI warns you that they see your intentions is quite realistic IMHO. I'm pretty sure many "Barbaric" nations also told the Roman Empire speakers that they were not scared about having a legion camp next to their villages and that would fight back instead of yielding.

I also happen to find it really fun, that way I have to prepare wars in a more discreet way.

 

[Manifold]

Options should be

A) Merely passing through: as today
B) Mind your own business: gives AI casus belli vs you.

If he doesn't like your troops he can go ahead and fight you, but shouldn't force YOU to declare war on him.

That´s a good idea

I can´t see a reason not to use the "ignore" function when I started the deployment of troops.

 

[leandrombraz]

Except it doesn't. And that's the biggest flaw in it. If you declare war during the dialogue then it's considered a sneak attack: AND they get to play their turn first when war is declared.

Now you can simply ignore it and then declare war anyway. And you get a lesser war penalty, and you get to be the first to move your units.

This is why in every single case when ed beach triggered this warning, he simply ignored it and then attacked when he wanted to anyway.

So you have a situation where rather than having tradeoffs: "ok if I make this choice I get this advantage but this disadvantage and vice versa", what happens is all the advantages are on one option and none on the other.

You have a point. The only advantage to declare war on the spot is that you don't get the penalty for ignoring the AI. Might be a good option in early game, when warmonger penalty still don't exist, but only if you care about future relationship with that Civ.

Still, the option to ignore seems necessary because of Casus Belli, though it turned a direct DoW into an option that need to be there just for the sake of being an option, but nobody will actually use it unless they are roleplaying or just don't care.

 

[Ryika]

Options should be

A) Merely passing through: as today
B) Mind your own business: gives AI casus belli vs you.

If he doesn't like your troops he can go ahead and fight you, but shouldn't force YOU to declare war on him.

That achieves absolutely nothing. If you use option b then you already WANT to declare war on him, otherwise you would choose option A. So all the system would do is give the AI a choice to either not do anything against you or to play into your hands.

The only tiny, tiny benefit the AI gets is that it can start a first strike against you without getting a diplomatic penalty, but that doesn't really hinder you as a player in any way.

Overall I think as annoying as that mechanic is I can't think of a better system to allow the AI to react to you massing troops near their borders without having to automatically assume that you're going to declare war soon.

Maybe an additional warning ala "Hey, I see a lot of troops there. Back up now, or next turn the choice will trigger." may be a good middle ground, but even that one extra turn may already allow the player to get too much of a positional advantage.

 

[Ivan Hunger]

I never found the border warning difficult to avoid. Just put your units one tile away from their borders instead of all up on them. They'll never suspect a thing.