Why the warmonger penalty is unrealistic...

[CivAddict2013]

Okay, to start off this isn't a rant, simply something I've noticed. In this game, as well as in vanilla; if you attack somebody, you'll be hated for the rest of the game. For instance, I captured the Aztecs and Indonesia before 1200 AD, but for the whole rest of the game; every civ hates me and declares war on me.

I just think it's unrealistic. In WW2 Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. But do Americans still in this day hate the Japanese for it? No. In Colonial times, Britain ruled over the United States and lost to the United States. Do you still think Americans hold a grudge against Brits? No.

So why in this game, should the AI declare war on you for something you did thousands of years ago; if in real life, it only takes about 50 or so years for forgiveness? Doesn't make sense to me. It's only really a problem though, because sometimes it can get hectic trying to fight off every Civ and city state at once.

So do you guys agree or disagree? Should the player be penalized for something they did thousands of years ago or not?

 

[HerrDoktor]

Inb4 "It's a game, it's not supposed to be realistic".

If you think in terms of "realism", all Civ leaders are immortal (also the units, until they die in combat). So they remember and hold grudges forever. It' like asking people from WW2 generation to not hold grudges against Pearl Harbor.

Just kidding, it has nothing to do with realism, all gameplay. But is it a sound gameplay choice? I don't think so. It makes completely unwise eliminating your closest neighbor, the standard path for every type of victory before BNW. Civs made for early war are rendered useless.

 

[Talcove]

What HerrDoktor said, plus your examples are completely unalike! You're comparing completely massacring and occupying two entire civilizations/countries to Japan bombing one American city! Genocide and one strategic bombing are two different things.

 

[arand86]

What HerrDoktor said, plus your examples are completely unalike! You're comparing completely massacring and occupying two entire civilizations/countries to Japan bombing one American city! Genocide and one strategic bombing are two different things.

I think you completely missed HerrDoktor's point.



Back in vanilla and G&K, warmongering at least for myself became too easy. I would go for science or culture or something like that, but at some point leading up to it I would grow impatient and just smack all the other civs in the game up with some military. The penalty, however unrealistic, was meant to keep player warmongering in check.


However, as BNW comes along, I really think they should dial it back a bit. It's now really hard to wage wars without having everyone hate you eternally. Little too little fighting now for my taste.

 

[SemperFi2382]

I'm not sure what the big deal is. My last game I had 4 other civs on my continent, which I had wiped out 2 before the end of the Medieval Era. The remaining civs weren't too keen, but nothing crippling.

After meeting the other civs on the other continent, none were aware of my warmongering. About 2/3 of the way through the game, the warmonger penalty dropped off the 2 civs that knew what I did. I went on for a diplomatic victory, although I could have won with a Science Victory.

In another game, after wiping out a civ, I went and liberated another civilization (a former ally) from annihilation, which removed my previous warmonger penalty.

Honestly, with BNW managing the warmonger penalty is much easier. There's a lot of factors to consider, and its usually either an early war (before you meet everyone), only taking cities when it's a minor penalty (the game tells you how big of a hit you'll take), and/or liberating to lower your warmonger penalty (which the game tells you how much of a liberation bonus you get).

I've seen that hated civs will give less penalties for taking their cities, so fighting a common foe isn't nearly as bad as killing everyone's best friend.

 

[Osama Bin Davis]

While I don't like the mechanic itself it is required.

The thing that annoys me the most is you can kill off a civ before anyone else has met them and they all hate you. That is the unrealistic part.

 

[GhostSalsa]

I came here upset about my current came so I might as well rant on this thread even though the time thing is not my main dispute.

The current convoluted penalty calculations are moronic in the extreme. In my current game I wanted to go wide even though it's Immortal standard size map (why do i do this to myself) so I forward-settled a nice choke point which turned out to be right next to Japan - ok so 150 turns of war ensued, obviously. No big surprises here.

Stalemate until artillery since Japan has Great Wall. Captured capital finally (Colossus and Mausoleum yes please), sadly I lost it once due to his lake navy, then captured again, doubling the penalty lol lol lol ldodldlc. Captured his dangerous second city.

Here's the problem:

Japan had never settled any more cities (he had lots of other space to). My two captures left him with one. So after me dealing with an aggressor for 150 turns and finally ending the war, I have "clearly see the threat" or "early concern" warmonger modifiers with every other civ, even though they have conquered similar amounts, simply because the hostile neighbor that invaded me doesn't know how to expand? I can't sell or trade luxes now.

Here's the other problem. Russia DOW'd and took a crucial city-state buffering my and her territories - I had already liberated it before capturing Japan (could not wait) so I get no credit for it.

Here's the other other problem. If I had waited 30 more turns until everyone had ideology up, it would all be irrelevant because my same-ideology friends won't care no matter what. In other words if I had relented and played the game exactly like every other game goes instead of trying something different. Of course I really should have just gone tall in the first place.

This is all nonsense crazy-sauce dog trash. This game is not salvageable because I'm out of happiness and can't conquer Russia before she comes back with Bombers.

I don't need to throw away games after 8 hours. I don't need to be punished like this every time I do something different (read: don't turtle). I can set the stupid age of the earth in settings but aparantly the devs don't think I'm adult enough to just turn the stupid warmonger penalty down and let me react to your crazy AI personalities the way they deserve.

 

[bbbt]

It's a game, not a history simulator. It's not realistic to have a scout wandering around for two thousands years either.

The warmonger penalty, if anything, should theoretically, make the AI more "human like" in it's play (whether it does or not, I can't tell you).

 

[HerrDoktor]

I came here upset about my current came so I might as well rant on this thread even though the time thing is not my main dispute.

The current convoluted penalty calculations are moronic in the extreme. In my current game I wanted to go wide even though it's Immortal standard size map (why do i do this to myself) so I forward-settled a nice choke point which turned out to be right next to Japan - ok so 150 turns of war ensued, obviously. No big surprises here.

Stalemate until artillery since Japan has Great Wall. Captured capital finally (Colossus and Mausoleum yes please), sadly I lost it once due to his lake navy, then captured again, doubling the penalty lol lol lol ldodldlc. Captured his dangerous second city.

Here's the problem:

Japan had never settled any more cities (he had lots of other space to). My two captures left him with one. So after me dealing with an aggressor for 150 turns and finally ending the war, I have "clearly see the threat" or "early concern" warmonger modifiers with every other civ, even though they have conquered similar amounts, simply because the hostile neighbor that invaded me doesn't know how to expand? I can't sell or trade luxes now.

Here's the other problem. Russia DOW'd and took a crucial city-state buffering my and her territories - I had already liberated it before capturing Japan (could not wait) so I get no credit for it.

Here's the other other problem. If I had waited 30 more turns until everyone had ideology up, it would all be irrelevant because my same-ideology friends won't care no matter what. In other words if I had relented and played the game exactly like every other game goes instead of trying something different. Of course I really should have just gone tall in the first place.

This is all nonsense crazy-sauce dog trash. This game is not salvageable because I'm out of happiness and can't conquer Russia before she comes back with Bombers.

I don't need to throw away games after 8 hours. I don't need to be punished like this every time I do something different (read: don't turtle). I can set the stupid age of the earth in settings but aparantly the devs don't think I'm adult enough to just turn the stupid warmonger penalty down and let me react to your crazy AI personalities the way they deserve.

+1

Do you guys know a good mod for warmonger penalty? I don't want everyone to be all cushy if you are going for domination, but you have the right to kill at least one opponent before being labelled Public Enemy #1.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

Soviet Union puppets eastern Europe, gets big warmonger penalty with west

 

[Browd]

Yep, and because the US and UK had DOFs with the USSR, the USSR initially only suffered 50% warmonger penalties in their war with a common enemy. But even half warmonger penalties add up.

 

[Dylan96B]

ITT: people that refuse to adapt to new style of diplomatic warmongering, but are quick to get all Kanye West when they lose a game.

First off, if you're going to warmonger then you're going to need to create a few bad guys. Get good up and running early, and pay for wars to create animosity between the AIs. Denounce properly and form friendships, single out warmongers and pay allies to war with you, so you get less of a penalty for capping a city. Wait for friendships to decay, win.

Secondly, I like to call it "sharing the spoils of war". AIs love nothing more the free gpt and free luxuries. When I warmonger I pick a target with a lot of things to gift away. I do 1 round of gifts, to civs I want as allies, leaving out future targets. Civs will stay neutral, friendly if you've diplo'd well and by the next round of gifts they'll be sending DoFs. Single out and divide.

Thirdly, if you're stealing a worker at the beginning of the game, the AIs will remember that DoW. Be careful of you're own diplomatic standing.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Okay, to start off this isn't a rant, simply something I've noticed. In this game, as well as in vanilla; if you attack somebody, you'll be hated for the rest of the game. For instance, I captured the Aztecs and Indonesia before 1200 AD, but for the whole rest of the game; every civ hates me and declares war on me.

I just think it's unrealistic. In WW2 Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. But do Americans still in this day hate the Japanese for it? No. In Colonial times, Britain ruled over the United States and lost to the United States. Do you still think Americans hold a grudge against Brits? No.

So why in this game, should the AI declare war on you for something you did thousands of years ago; if in real life, it only takes about 50 or so years for forgiveness? Doesn't make sense to me. It's only really a problem though, because sometimes it can get hectic trying to fight off every Civ and city state at once.

So do you guys agree or disagree? Should the player be penalized for something they did thousands of years ago or not?

What if your AI neighbor Montezuma attacks you and takes a bunch of your stuff on turn 35? Will you decide that it happened a long time ago, and be nice with them a few turns later? If you discover another continent, containing the mighty Roman civilization that's made up of cities with names like "Washington" and "Istanbul," would you be wary, or would you decide it was fine? That what you want to the other civs to do for you. Fair is fair. I mean, not trusting Rome based on that would not be realistic whatsoever.

Heck, personally I wouldn't trust Monty based on things that didn't even happen in the current game.

It would be too easy to game the system if the AI just forgot so quickly. Somehow I doubt that this is actually a concern about realism.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

Of course not, the op is just bad at diplo despite the fact the guide in my sig was written for him so that he would stop posting this exact same thread every week.

 

[Moriarte]

Soviet perspective:

Soviet Union puppets liberates eastern Europe, gets big warmonger penalty with west

Either way: game is realistic!

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Well, to be fair to the OP I'm sure part of it (if you want to think about it this way) is that with the Japanese attacks of 70 years ago, the leaders responsible for that are long since dead and buried. If we had RL leaders that lived to be thousands of years old I'm sure they would not be as quick to forgive and forget.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

I've always thought of the leaderhead as an abstract diplo device, and the player representing the collective will of his empire.

 

[GhostSalsa]

ITT: people that refuse to adapt to new style of diplomatic warmongering, but are quick to get all Kanye West when they lose a game.

I do adapt - I have adapted - I'm bored because all my Immortal games are starting to suffer from extreme déjà vu. I've played a lot of games where I did all the enemy-selecting just right and got to conquer and conquer while being friends with everyone -

It's boring because I'm conquering other people's enemies. Because diplomacy only has one meaning (massage alliances and judge timing - be a conniving spider) out of 1000 possible ones -

What if I want to just carry out a grudge with my neighbor and not throw away the game?

What if I want to just be a little petty and simplistic and not throw away the game?

What if I want to conquer with my Winged Hussars which by the way I've tanked my tech progress now to open metallurgy before they obsolete - you know get some use out of these Unique Units that I essentially paid for with I bought the expansion - instead of waiting until post-ideology to conquer like always - and not throw away the game?

The warmonger penalty lets you only play one way. Sit around passively and play nice and then swoop in on the bad guy just before the other civ's units take their city - then get ideology and do whatever you want with bombers.

I want to play other ways.

 

[happyturtle]

I've always thought of the leaderhead as an abstract diplo device, and the player representing the collective will of his empire.

Yeah, the leaderhead is Uncle Sam or "Liberty Leading the People", not an actual immortal leader.

I do think the warmonger penalty is dialed up a bit too far.

+1

Do you guys know a good mod for warmonger penalty? I don't want everyone to be all cushy if you are going for domination, but you have the right to kill at least one opponent before being labelled Public Enemy #1.

This please!

 

[Barghaest]

Okay, to start off this isn't a rant, simply something I've noticed. In this game, as well as in vanilla; if you attack somebody, you'll be hated for the rest of the game. For instance, I captured the Aztecs and Indonesia before 1200 AD, but for the whole rest of the game; every civ hates me and declares war on me.

Simply attacking someone doesn't get you hated for the entire game. Eliminating Civs might if that's all you do is capture cities and keep going until that civilization is extinct. If you liberate a few cities, it mitigates these penalties (tremendously if reviving a Civ/CS).

If you have a history of exterminating entire civilizations, then yes everyone will hate you until you've performed enough actions to show you have changed your ways (doing nothing while biding your time does not qualify).

In BNW the warmongering penalties DO decay (and sometimes go away entirely if they weren't to extreme) but it's hardly noticeable unless you are playing Marathon (or an extended era mod).

As for complaining about realism.... you exterminated two cultures and what have you done since? Anything to boost relations with other empires? Refused to capture cities of people who attacked you? If you answered "no" to the last two questions, I'd say it's quite realistic since in RL people wouldn't forget (or forgive) the actions of an empire that has shown no real change in behavior and seems unrepentant for their actions.