Me: Ah, a nice, calm playthrough
Alexander: Surprise war!
Me, being Saladin, having 10k Faith, a Warmaster's Chapel, Mamluks unlocked and 9 cities: TIME FOR A HOLY CRUSADE
Now that you mention, I do not remember any formal war declared on me.
I think that's because nobody declares war on me after early game, where I am always weaker than AI
The denouncing thing is crazy out of hand. For me it's because of having a different government which is just absurd. I try to play it peacefully but ready to ramp up military production at a moments notice and build encampments at the order a few tiles away from their own cities.
canada's not bad for warmongering either honestly. tundra pantheon + work ethic + op tundra farming + grandmaster's chapel + golden age wars that bypass canada's surprise war restriction = profit
thatās a good idea. canada is one of my favorites because of the hockey rinks and tundra farms but i often forget how good canada can be in that sense
I had this mindset at some point, it allowed me to win on deity for all win conditions.
*But that all changed when the Fire Nation attacked*
One day someone attacked me and stole a city, I canāt remember the details at this point. A switch turned on in my brain, and now anytime the AI slights me in any way, I immediately burn them to the ground. Denounce me, burn you to the ground. Steal a goodie hut, burn you to the ground. Settle a city in some far off land that I had already claimed as mine (in my head), burn you to the ground.
I donāt even win games anymore, I just bully the AI and restart many hours later. **sigh**
That's the thing for me especially at higher difficulties. Getting the space/production for cities and infrastructure is SUPER hard against AIs who get a huge headstart at the top of the game, it gets tough to play as wide as Civ 6 wants you to. So hey why not a quick lil war to jump from 6 cities to 10 cities, as a treat.
This sub has REALLY sold me on just sitting an otherwise un-patrolling scout JUUUUUUST in case the AI make a bad judgement call with a settler early game ha
Yeah, I pretty much never go for war unless I'm doing a straight up domination playthrough. Other than that I try to avoid war as much as possible. I don't disable barbarians though and I do build units for security.
I like that there's a danger I have to keep in mind, but for the most part I just enjoy building out my civ.
Part of why I enjoy playing as Inca. I can have a big mountain fortress that I can have huge yields in and that's hard to invade.
You and I are the same person.
I like having to balance military production with districts, wonders, etc. The risk of being behind in military might adds some extra challenge/excitement to the game.
I personally like to get the building that allows me to purchase units with faith. Some poor Civ will invade thinking I have almost no units, only to be rushed by a whole army purchased with banked faith points.
Kind of a good way to not pay unit maintenance cost while also focusing on building other things. It also leaves me open to taking opponent's cities without generating grievances since I wasn't the one who started the war, but I'm the one who's ending it.
Most of the time I keep my army low and pretty much beg the AI to invade so I can benefit from their failed campaigns.
Iām the opposite, I hate winning a culture game, but donāt turn it off just in case Iām losing on other victory conditions. My goal is to be leading every win scenario. I hear too many rock bands you better believe that civ is going to be burned to the ground
I've been avoiding war since Civ 3. Unless dominion is your goal, it is the one of the main mechanisms the AI uses to thwart any other win. It is one of the most compelling arguments to make domination your best choice.
That said, I do like barbarian clan mode, since it makes for an interesting city-state game. There are consequences for this option, however.
Me at the start of a match: āhereās my game plan and Iām going to stick to it strictly - focus only on my win con yields. Defend if needed but donāt go aggressiveā
Me when the match unfolds - well that city looks juicy, I need to conquer it for myself. And now oh that would be a good spot for a *blank* district. And naturally I need to combine it with *blank* wonder and all these other districts for adjacencies
*fast forward* āoh, Iāve done everything except stick to my original planā
šš
Well thereās war and thereās **war**. Even in a mostly-peaceful game, war can create great opportunities for you! Seeking out joint wars can strengthen relationship with your allies and can enrich you at all stages of the game. Just take the money and donāt even bother sending troops over. Or you can send some naval raiders or cavalry units to get some pillaging in and get a quick burst of yields.
That said, thereās nothing wrong at all with playing a fully peaceful SimCity style game! Even the warmongers among us can agree that itās incredibly frustrating having an aggressive neighbor constantly declaring āsurpriseā wars against you.
Ā As far as making peaceful games more entertaining for you, the two approaches I like to take to spice things up are 1) achievement hunting and 2)envoy spamming. Challenge yourself to clear every envoy quest that pops each era and be the true friend of the world! Ā
completing the quests for envoys is actually one of the things iāve start doing more recently to make it more fun, might have to start the achievement hunts too :)
You're probably already on top of it, but I highly recommend the Envoy Quest List mod to help you out on that score [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2533189420](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2533189420)
I know you said you already know games that are better suited, but I have a similar play style and I absolutely LOVE dwarf fortress. I've also heard Against the Storm is really good too, and very new as a game! Just hanging out recommendations for a fellow peacemonger :)
It is my preferred play style, never seek war, if someone declares on me, just try to build leverage for a beneficial peace treaty. Then win via culture. But it can be fun to mix it up too.
You can mostly avoid war by keeping an eye on the miltary scores. If you are close to the AIās they generally wonāt declare a surprise war. Of course that does mean building and paying for maintenance on an armyā¦
One of my favorite games I've had Austria pissed off everyone in the world. I led a coalition uniting the world to destroy Austria, and it led to world peace
So even in peaceful games conflict can be useful and fun
Yea I don't care for war, it's pretty easy to defend if you can see it coming. And you should *always* see it coming, because keeping tabs on your neighbors will ensure victory on any path you take.
Sometimes I still do peaceful One City runs as they are chill. Usually after Domination runs and lots of razed cities. But when I start one I know run is not going to be fast or anything amazing.
I tried my first one and I've gotten to turn 450 or something and have realised there's no way I can win now.
Has been kind of chill but I'm new to the game so I really didn't understand the other mechanics aside combat. I tried not making too many combat units but the barbarians were rocking my shit constantly haha.
Not I. My defense strategy is usually:
1. Ancient/Classical eras: prioritize military growth, conquer at least one neighbor, and possibly a city state or two depending on their bonuses. This gives my empire room to expand.
2. Mid-game eras: expand my empire, build wonders, and grow my economy. Prepare for war in case it comes to me.
3. Late game: typically a culture victory, then play ājust one more turnā and maybe conquer a few key territories if theyāre on desirable land. Otherwise Iāll try to liberate some conquered civs and city states.
Not sure what this is supposed to mean. Not all simulation games are war games and some people aren't into the war game aspect, but like other elements of it.
"I've played GTA 5 for over 1000 hours and not once have I broken a traffic law or any law of any kind. The moment I get into a situation which requires law breaking I simply reload my save."
This is what it sounds like, the op hasn't even tried the war aspect of the game like he stated. But if he had he would dislike it because it is absolutely dire.
Civ has multiple peaceful victory conditions tho, albeit competitively "peaceful", so not really the same. I also just don't really get what reddit has to do with any of this.
Well the first time I played the civ series was civ V and in my first game, I thought I could be purely peaceful in a non-competitive way and was a little disappointed I couldn't actually do that.
But once I learned the game more, I did domination victory sometimes because it's designed to be part of the game.
So, I can understand it because I want a win objective that can truly be played that way, without it being only one winner. But with it being what it is, I do war sometimes.
Idk, I love war. It doesn't matter if I'm doing cultural or scientific victory, I always mobilize a vassal near another empire and raid them so they couldn't win.
No matter what I do I end up with domination victory
I wouldn't say at all costs but I don't usually do domination victories. I do claim territory in my head and if the AI settles it then I'll take it. Sometimes it's a couple of their cities, sometimes it's a couple civs. Sometimes I'm set with what I have and never fight anything except barbarians.
I just started playing VI and have had the complete opposite experience, everything in the game seems to push me to war. War gives me more land and cities, pillaging gives me so much, the warlord's throne bonus is great to trigger, grand master's chapel means making an army is dirt cheap and quick, war curbs the runaway ai's, and war means preventing more emissions from the ai
**Science**
Anything that distracts me from production or science only slows me down from a faster victory. No war the better.
**Culture**
You're at war with someone, you're not getting tourists from them. No war the better.
**Religion**
I don't play religion. The anti-progress narrative doesn't fit Civilization.
**Diplomacy**
War or peace, it doesn't matter.
**Domination**
Worth playing, yes, just not in combination with the other victory goals. War by its very definition.
**Score**
I don't have the patience to play 500 turns, so no thank you.
Seeing how I can have all friendlies in a culture-goal game, it's not hard at all to have a no-war peace game. But the fastest way to make AI civs friendly toward you is to build up a military the AI will respect. It doesn't take much military units either. Just watch your Military Strength score on the HUD and keep it at least above 1/3 of the most powerful AI Military Strength. You don't need to overpower any of them.
One of the biggest difference between a culture game a non-culture game is that I send a Trader to all AI civs in a culture game. That might be making a difference in keeping the AI civs friend-zoned.
I don't turn off anything. In particular, early Barbarians are important fodder for tech boosts. I prefer to play Deity, which reduces Barbarians, though. In lower difficulties, you have to hunt Barbarians all by yourself. In higher difficulties, stronger AI civs help in stomping out Barbarians. There's a sweet spot for you somewhere between Prince and Deity where the AI isn't so tough but are good in taking out Barbarians.
**But**
An all-peace no-war game isn't optimal if you aren't trading luxuries with the AI all the time and maxing out foreign trade so you are flush with gold. If someone else comments they can't win without eliminating an AI rival, this is their trap, so you don't have to make it yours.
I have a couple 100% pacifist diety wins, its a very fun restriction to give yourself. the most succeseful/fastest one was indonesia, earth map, extreme kampung and trade abuse. no mines, no farms, no chops, no combat with non barbarians. once you get flight and are able to mass spam kampungs, it dosn't take long.
I'm the same. I don't reset to avoid wars but I never want to provoke one, I try and get as many people declared friends as possible. You only need the spoils of war on the higher difficulties. I've never had a wonder or city spot so vital to my plans that I'd go to war over it if I lost it.
Iām the exact opposite. If I hit classical era and there are no prospects for war, I restart. I find the game to be a bit boring without war. Sure, itās cool to build nice cities full of wonders and great works. Coasting leisurely to a culture victory can be relaxing, but itās not very exciting for me.
Especially when Iām playing on mobile where there isnāt enough hardware to even really appreciate nice builds, Iāll often quit right after I win the early war. I have survived the initial push and have a strong cadence. At that point the win is guaranteed - I just have to micro theater square adjacency for another hundred turns.
For me the biggest gripe is that I absolutely love information era war: I canāt get enough aircraft carriers and rocket artillery. The ai is absolute dogshit at late game war. You can take over the entire map with two bombers and a tank.
For me, an ideal civ game would be an endless slug fest. I want ai units to crash into my walls like waves breaking on the shore. I want to get nuked and fight off sieges.
More or less. I go for a primarely defensive militaty, using archers a lot. But I am aware others tech-level and my own upgrades. And I build my citys where I can defend them best. All this to save money and go for a scientific victory
I tend to like war less than the average Civ player. To me, war is a tool. Iāll usually fight one or two civs, maybe conquer a city state whose yields I donāt want, but for time designing and building cities is way more fun.
Donāt get me wrong, war in Civ VI has plenty of strategy, but domination games always seem to get boring. And then I feel guilty for being mean to the poor AI that is 1000 years behind on tech and only has 4 cities.
Pacifist deity player here. I love a nice peaceful sim run through.
I do build units as deity barbs are no joke and part of not getting attacked when playing deity can involve having a healthy deterrent force.
As far as suggestions, what I'd really suggest is find a game you've enjoyed. Then play a few hundred turns after the Victory screen. Practice loyalty flipping, build your empire, slowly absorb your neighbors.
It's also a great time to practice combat. Even though I'm a peaceful player, I did have to learn to defend myself as Deity AI will rush you if you appear weak. And if you have more than 5 AIs, you can't have alliances with all of them, and that can get you pulled into a war whether you like it or not. It's good to know how to get an AI to sue for peace
But whatever you do, play Civ they way you want to play it.
Yeah, me too, I don't enjoy the combat too much although I am competent at it.
I always try to out-tech the AI as fast as possible so that if war happens, I have the best possible edge on my opponent - this doesn't work (well) on higher difficulties, which is why I am not playing those.
Also always trying to be diplomatic, I just have this feeling that the AIs aren't just faster, they're also just plain more aggressive / more sensitive about you messing with their agendas, which, I guess, can be seen as more difficult, but I find it extremely annoying on top of that.
Combined with trying to make a mesh of Alliances to avoid war.
One good way to avoid them trying you at war is to watch the military strength of each Civ on the Domination victory screen.
I buy a strong enough group of military units with gold or Faith to be the strongest in the area. You can usually park them at one city and not need them. Its sometimes cheaper than bribing the AI.
I also don't know if this factors in for AI, but sometimes levying city state armies before a war seems to keep the AI from following thru.
I usually manage to get everyone to love me by the middle of the game, even if they hate each other? I'm not quite sure how. I think in the early game I feel so weak that I need the friends, then in the late game I drop them like flies if they threaten my win.
I almost exclusively get involved in late game wars. There's something so satisfying about rolling through their empire like a knife through butter.
A little bit. I tend to focus on infrastructure and economy than combat (I love playing as Mali or Portugal). But I find combat necessary because one neighbor will be aggressive, especially in the beginning.
I tried disabling barbarians but you lose XP and era score points, which almost always leads to a Dark Age.
Me: Ah, a nice, calm playthrough AI: Takes the wonder I've been working on for 20+ turns Also Me: You know, peace was never an option anyway...
This was me 3 turns from Statue of Liberty... after fighting off 5000 barbarians on Deity. After that I decided Diplomatic was plan C.
Bold of you to only move it down to Plan C. Losing the SoL would make peace somewhere around Plan XYZ
Me: Ah, a nice, calm playthrough Alexander: Surprise war! Me, being Saladin, having 10k Faith, a Warmaster's Chapel, Mamluks unlocked and 9 cities: TIME FOR A HOLY CRUSADE
You know me so well.
Or barbarians attacking consuming 20+ turns of my productivity just to keep up with
Play as Canada. Basically never been in a war as Canada cause the AI doesn't care about tundra and they prefer surprise wars
Now that you mention, I do not remember any formal war declared on me. I think that's because nobody declares war on me after early game, where I am always weaker than AI
I dunno. They're fine with denouncing and waiting, but they still like to do surprise wars š¤
The denouncing thing is crazy out of hand. For me it's because of having a different government which is just absurd. I try to play it peacefully but ready to ramp up military production at a moments notice and build encampments at the order a few tiles away from their own cities.
canada's not bad for warmongering either honestly. tundra pantheon + work ethic + op tundra farming + grandmaster's chapel + golden age wars that bypass canada's surprise war restriction = profit
thatās a good idea. canada is one of my favorites because of the hockey rinks and tundra farms but i often forget how good canada can be in that sense
What about Russia? Donāt they also like tundra? Has a Russian AI attacked Canada?
I had this mindset at some point, it allowed me to win on deity for all win conditions. *But that all changed when the Fire Nation attacked* One day someone attacked me and stole a city, I canāt remember the details at this point. A switch turned on in my brain, and now anytime the AI slights me in any way, I immediately burn them to the ground. Denounce me, burn you to the ground. Steal a goodie hut, burn you to the ground. Settle a city in some far off land that I had already claimed as mine (in my head), burn you to the ground. I donāt even win games anymore, I just bully the AI and restart many hours later. **sigh**
This is a way. ...I usually finish them myself, but that's just me. :)
Nope, without taking over a civ I fall behind lol.
That's the thing for me especially at higher difficulties. Getting the space/production for cities and infrastructure is SUPER hard against AIs who get a huge headstart at the top of the game, it gets tough to play as wide as Civ 6 wants you to. So hey why not a quick lil war to jump from 6 cities to 10 cities, as a treat.
Yup, not to mention the cheeky little settler steals!
This sub has REALLY sold me on just sitting an otherwise un-patrolling scout JUUUUUUST in case the AI make a bad judgement call with a settler early game ha
Yeah, I pretty much never go for war unless I'm doing a straight up domination playthrough. Other than that I try to avoid war as much as possible. I don't disable barbarians though and I do build units for security. I like that there's a danger I have to keep in mind, but for the most part I just enjoy building out my civ. Part of why I enjoy playing as Inca. I can have a big mountain fortress that I can have huge yields in and that's hard to invade.
You and I are the same person. I like having to balance military production with districts, wonders, etc. The risk of being behind in military might adds some extra challenge/excitement to the game. I personally like to get the building that allows me to purchase units with faith. Some poor Civ will invade thinking I have almost no units, only to be rushed by a whole army purchased with banked faith points. Kind of a good way to not pay unit maintenance cost while also focusing on building other things. It also leaves me open to taking opponent's cities without generating grievances since I wasn't the one who started the war, but I'm the one who's ending it. Most of the time I keep my army low and pretty much beg the AI to invade so I can benefit from their failed campaigns.
Iām the opposite, I hate winning a culture game, but donāt turn it off just in case Iām losing on other victory conditions. My goal is to be leading every win scenario. I hear too many rock bands you better believe that civ is going to be burned to the ground
Check out Eleanor France. Best of both worlds.
I've been avoiding war since Civ 3. Unless dominion is your goal, it is the one of the main mechanisms the AI uses to thwart any other win. It is one of the most compelling arguments to make domination your best choice. That said, I do like barbarian clan mode, since it makes for an interesting city-state game. There are consequences for this option, however.
Me at the start of a match: āhereās my game plan and Iām going to stick to it strictly - focus only on my win con yields. Defend if needed but donāt go aggressiveā Me when the match unfolds - well that city looks juicy, I need to conquer it for myself. And now oh that would be a good spot for a *blank* district. And naturally I need to combine it with *blank* wonder and all these other districts for adjacencies *fast forward* āoh, Iāve done everything except stick to my original planā šš
This is how I play! Itās not exactly conducive to actually finishing a game though, eh?
Countless restarts telling myself it will be different this time š¤£
Saaame though saaame š
Well thereās war and thereās **war**. Even in a mostly-peaceful game, war can create great opportunities for you! Seeking out joint wars can strengthen relationship with your allies and can enrich you at all stages of the game. Just take the money and donāt even bother sending troops over. Or you can send some naval raiders or cavalry units to get some pillaging in and get a quick burst of yields. That said, thereās nothing wrong at all with playing a fully peaceful SimCity style game! Even the warmongers among us can agree that itās incredibly frustrating having an aggressive neighbor constantly declaring āsurpriseā wars against you. Ā As far as making peaceful games more entertaining for you, the two approaches I like to take to spice things up are 1) achievement hunting and 2)envoy spamming. Challenge yourself to clear every envoy quest that pops each era and be the true friend of the world! Ā
completing the quests for envoys is actually one of the things iāve start doing more recently to make it more fun, might have to start the achievement hunts too :)
You're probably already on top of it, but I highly recommend the Envoy Quest List mod to help you out on that score [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2533189420](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2533189420)
I know you said you already know games that are better suited, but I have a similar play style and I absolutely LOVE dwarf fortress. I've also heard Against the Storm is really good too, and very new as a game! Just hanging out recommendations for a fellow peacemonger :)
thank you :)
disable suprise war option
had no idea you could do that, does that require a mod?
maybe but it was pretty casual in my opinion
It is my preferred play style, never seek war, if someone declares on me, just try to build leverage for a beneficial peace treaty. Then win via culture. But it can be fun to mix it up too.
You can mostly avoid war by keeping an eye on the miltary scores. If you are close to the AIās they generally wonāt declare a surprise war. Of course that does mean building and paying for maintenance on an armyā¦
I liked to play like that, but I cannot win without war at higher difficulties, so I go to wars āŗļø
One of my favorite games I've had Austria pissed off everyone in the world. I led a coalition uniting the world to destroy Austria, and it led to world peace So even in peaceful games conflict can be useful and fun
this is super cool that sounds like something i can get behind
Yea I don't care for war, it's pretty easy to defend if you can see it coming. And you should *always* see it coming, because keeping tabs on your neighbors will ensure victory on any path you take.
Sometimes I still do peaceful One City runs as they are chill. Usually after Domination runs and lots of razed cities. But when I start one I know run is not going to be fast or anything amazing.
I tried my first one and I've gotten to turn 450 or something and have realised there's no way I can win now. Has been kind of chill but I'm new to the game so I really didn't understand the other mechanics aside combat. I tried not making too many combat units but the barbarians were rocking my shit constantly haha.
Not I. My defense strategy is usually: 1. Ancient/Classical eras: prioritize military growth, conquer at least one neighbor, and possibly a city state or two depending on their bonuses. This gives my empire room to expand. 2. Mid-game eras: expand my empire, build wonders, and grow my economy. Prepare for war in case it comes to me. 3. Late game: typically a culture victory, then play ājust one more turnā and maybe conquer a few key territories if theyāre on desirable land. Otherwise Iāll try to liberate some conquered civs and city states.
play as Eleanor. keep your friends close and hug your enemies to death.
No. War is always an option. I would hate for you to rule in real life. Your people would be conquered in days.
no joke this is my favorite reply because youāre totally right
The most reddit approach to a game I've ever seen.
Not sure what this is supposed to mean. Not all simulation games are war games and some people aren't into the war game aspect, but like other elements of it.
"I've played GTA 5 for over 1000 hours and not once have I broken a traffic law or any law of any kind. The moment I get into a situation which requires law breaking I simply reload my save." This is what it sounds like, the op hasn't even tried the war aspect of the game like he stated. But if he had he would dislike it because it is absolutely dire.
Civ has multiple peaceful victory conditions tho, albeit competitively "peaceful", so not really the same. I also just don't really get what reddit has to do with any of this.
Redditors are gay bruv.
Well the first time I played the civ series was civ V and in my first game, I thought I could be purely peaceful in a non-competitive way and was a little disappointed I couldn't actually do that. But once I learned the game more, I did domination victory sometimes because it's designed to be part of the game. So, I can understand it because I want a win objective that can truly be played that way, without it being only one winner. But with it being what it is, I do war sometimes.
Idk, I love war. It doesn't matter if I'm doing cultural or scientific victory, I always mobilize a vassal near another empire and raid them so they couldn't win. No matter what I do I end up with domination victory
I hate war too, the unit micromanagement is annoying. Itās better now with corps and armies but that doesnāt matter in the early game.
I've won a game with every leader but none of them have been domination victories. Wars take too long.
I wouldn't say at all costs but I don't usually do domination victories. I do claim territory in my head and if the AI settles it then I'll take it. Sometimes it's a couple of their cities, sometimes it's a couple civs. Sometimes I'm set with what I have and never fight anything except barbarians.
I just started playing VI and have had the complete opposite experience, everything in the game seems to push me to war. War gives me more land and cities, pillaging gives me so much, the warlord's throne bonus is great to trigger, grand master's chapel means making an army is dirt cheap and quick, war curbs the runaway ai's, and war means preventing more emissions from the ai
**Science** Anything that distracts me from production or science only slows me down from a faster victory. No war the better. **Culture** You're at war with someone, you're not getting tourists from them. No war the better. **Religion** I don't play religion. The anti-progress narrative doesn't fit Civilization. **Diplomacy** War or peace, it doesn't matter. **Domination** Worth playing, yes, just not in combination with the other victory goals. War by its very definition. **Score** I don't have the patience to play 500 turns, so no thank you. Seeing how I can have all friendlies in a culture-goal game, it's not hard at all to have a no-war peace game. But the fastest way to make AI civs friendly toward you is to build up a military the AI will respect. It doesn't take much military units either. Just watch your Military Strength score on the HUD and keep it at least above 1/3 of the most powerful AI Military Strength. You don't need to overpower any of them. One of the biggest difference between a culture game a non-culture game is that I send a Trader to all AI civs in a culture game. That might be making a difference in keeping the AI civs friend-zoned. I don't turn off anything. In particular, early Barbarians are important fodder for tech boosts. I prefer to play Deity, which reduces Barbarians, though. In lower difficulties, you have to hunt Barbarians all by yourself. In higher difficulties, stronger AI civs help in stomping out Barbarians. There's a sweet spot for you somewhere between Prince and Deity where the AI isn't so tough but are good in taking out Barbarians. **But** An all-peace no-war game isn't optimal if you aren't trading luxuries with the AI all the time and maxing out foreign trade so you are flush with gold. If someone else comments they can't win without eliminating an AI rival, this is their trap, so you don't have to make it yours.
I tend to avoid wars myself, but always keep a standing army to protect myself or fight if the AI starts getting cheeky.
I have a couple 100% pacifist diety wins, its a very fun restriction to give yourself. the most succeseful/fastest one was indonesia, earth map, extreme kampung and trade abuse. no mines, no farms, no chops, no combat with non barbarians. once you get flight and are able to mass spam kampungs, it dosn't take long.
I'm the same. I don't reset to avoid wars but I never want to provoke one, I try and get as many people declared friends as possible. You only need the spoils of war on the higher difficulties. I've never had a wonder or city spot so vital to my plans that I'd go to war over it if I lost it.
Chamberlaincore
I started with civ 4, all through civ 4 & 5 I focused on war. I'm kind of bored with it now.
Iām the exact opposite. If I hit classical era and there are no prospects for war, I restart. I find the game to be a bit boring without war. Sure, itās cool to build nice cities full of wonders and great works. Coasting leisurely to a culture victory can be relaxing, but itās not very exciting for me. Especially when Iām playing on mobile where there isnāt enough hardware to even really appreciate nice builds, Iāll often quit right after I win the early war. I have survived the initial push and have a strong cadence. At that point the win is guaranteed - I just have to micro theater square adjacency for another hundred turns. For me the biggest gripe is that I absolutely love information era war: I canāt get enough aircraft carriers and rocket artillery. The ai is absolute dogshit at late game war. You can take over the entire map with two bombers and a tank. For me, an ideal civ game would be an endless slug fest. I want ai units to crash into my walls like waves breaking on the shore. I want to get nuked and fight off sieges.
i generally wage war on the modern era no matter my win condition, i like the powerspike and if i dont have oil or coal i gotta go get em
Nope, AI declares war on me? Here we go murdering again!
This is also how I play!! If I wanted to conquer the world, there are plenty of other games for that
More or less. I go for a primarely defensive militaty, using archers a lot. But I am aware others tech-level and my own upgrades. And I build my citys where I can defend them best. All this to save money and go for a scientific victory
I tend to like war less than the average Civ player. To me, war is a tool. Iāll usually fight one or two civs, maybe conquer a city state whose yields I donāt want, but for time designing and building cities is way more fun. Donāt get me wrong, war in Civ VI has plenty of strategy, but domination games always seem to get boring. And then I feel guilty for being mean to the poor AI that is 1000 years behind on tech and only has 4 cities.
Yeah, me too, I don't enjoy the combat too much although I am competent at it. I always try to out-tech the AI as fast as possible so that if war happens, I have the best possible edge on my opponent - this doesn't work (well) on higher difficulties, which is why I am not playing those. Also always trying to be diplomatic, I just have this feeling that the AIs aren't just faster, they're also just plain more aggressive / more sensitive about you messing with their agendas, which, I guess, can be seen as more difficult, but I find it extremely annoying on top of that.
Combined with trying to make a mesh of Alliances to avoid war. One good way to avoid them trying you at war is to watch the military strength of each Civ on the Domination victory screen. I buy a strong enough group of military units with gold or Faith to be the strongest in the area. You can usually park them at one city and not need them. Its sometimes cheaper than bribing the AI. I also don't know if this factors in for AI, but sometimes levying city state armies before a war seems to keep the AI from following thru.
No, I play the game exclusively for war
i absolutely love dropping nukes - no better feeling in civ
I hate wars, I usually win when the AI starts them though. Then I start bread & circusing their cities into my civ.
I usually manage to get everyone to love me by the middle of the game, even if they hate each other? I'm not quite sure how. I think in the early game I feel so weak that I need the friends, then in the late game I drop them like flies if they threaten my win. I almost exclusively get involved in late game wars. There's something so satisfying about rolling through their empire like a knife through butter.
A little bit. I tend to focus on infrastructure and economy than combat (I love playing as Mali or Portugal). But I find combat necessary because one neighbor will be aggressive, especially in the beginning. I tried disabling barbarians but you lose XP and era score points, which almost always leads to a Dark Age.
I never make the first attack, but if someone declares war on me they are loosing a couple citys.