So "Neutral" is a tier one pragmatic ideology trait that prevents other civs from declaring war on you for 100 turns.
First let me say as a player I like taking this trait. It gives you a giant chunk of time when you can invest in infrastructure without worrying about building up your military. That said I think it is unhealthy for the game.
First, the very reason I love it is why it probably needs to go. To be able to focus on social building without any concern for military or even diplomacy really throws off the balance of the game. It makes things too easy and takes away any tension from trying to build up your early infrastructure. You can safely completely ignore a huge section of the game for a rather long time.
Second, playing against civs who have taken it is no fun. It feel like your available interactions are very limited and if there is a neutral civ blocking your access to the rest of the galaxy you have no real options for advancement except to turtle and wait.
Neutrality takes a huge portion of the game off the table with no available counter play by players or AI. It is really un-fun to play against, and honestly even playing with it isn't that great because it takes away that critical tension between building military and infrastructure that is usually so important to early-game 4x strategy.
I don't have a solution, but there has to be some other way to give the player some extra breathing room at the beginning of the game without totally removing the danger of foreign military power.
I just think this needs to be at level 3 or so in the tree. The fact it is level 1 right now just means it is far too easy to reach for anybody. It should renquire a substantial investment in pragmatic.
Also, it should probaby be "can't be attacked for the first 100 turns". Or similar.
With those 2 changes it would probably be very balanced and also not too annoying for the player.
As you can pass borders from everyone; where is the problem ?
I don't mind this one and usually I rush for malevolent then benevolent, pracmatic at the end
The issue is that you can play a completely military free strategy rushing benevolent to get an early tech, industry and colony lead. Then at an appropriate time, roughly 50 turns or slightly after, you simply make 1 pragmatic choice then buy yourself an extra 100 turns to massively extend that lead. It completely negates early rushing without any significant investment in the tree at all.
I also think the effect should be disabled late game. Ie, if you are pushing for a tech, culture or economic victory, roughly 100 turns out you can buy 1 tech and laugh at your opponents as they can do nothing to stop you. You could argue that is their fault for not declaring war early enough. But depending on map positioning that may be difficult.
finally, it's really frustrating when the Ai does it - especially mid and late game.
I mean. I don't mind it's existence. It is just so powerful that I feel like you should be forced to make an early game sacrifice to get it. Which right now just isn't the case
I agree completely. I was actually going to post something about this today, but you beat me to it
This needs removed from the game completely in my opinion. It is rediculous to be able to make yourself completely immune from any punitive action, for any number of turns. There are sooo many ways this can be (and has been) abused. Just as one example, have a nice big fleet of constructors, say neener neener nobody can attack me for 100 turns, as I plant culture starbases all over your territory and start flipping your planets. Oh you weren't prepared for a culture war, but you have a massive military and I don't have any military? Oh but you can't destroy my culture starbases I am planting right beside your worlds, just because I have this stupid ability that says you can't attack me, just because.
That's just one example of why this ability doesn't make sense. There are many others. I will use and abuse it, if it is in the game. However, I would prefer it was just completely removed from the game.
Theoretically pirates should not be affected by this ability, or at least i would hope so that way there is still some military involved.
also there was some talk of allowing your units to go pirate and be able to do dastardly things without having to declare war this might have just been player discussion but it might open up some options.
I like this feature. It give a player choices to play as the want. Maybe move it to Tier 2 but leave it in. The entire reason to be 'neutral' is that everyone will leave you alone.
I just think limiting it to early game will prevent 90% of the abuse which typically occurs mid to late game.
For example, culture pushes like that described would be quite hard to do in the first 100 turns - or at least nowhere near as effective. But at say, turn 100 or so, picking up 100 turns of midgame immunity could be really brutal.
It also needs to be an investment. For example, even if limited to the first 100 turns, if it is a tier 1 pickup in pragmatic it could be feasibly combined with the (currently broken) tier 3 benevolent colonisation tech for well... epic galaxy wide expansion with no risks.
Imagine rushing tier 3 colonisation, then grabbing tier 1 pragmatic... would give you at least 50+ turns of immunity? Pumping out colony ships with 0.5 pop with no need for defence...
It needs to be tuned so only a pragmatic player can get it and it only lasts for early game.
I dont like the idea of people being malevolent, benevolent and pragmatic all at the same time. This trait also seems OP.
I don't like this trait as it is. It's no fun to play against AI that are using it. And I can't figure out how it makes sense story wise...I mean, what's physically stopping my ships from shooting at their ships? It seems to be just an arbitrary block. And 100 turns is a very long time. There must be a way to rework this trait so it's fun. Maybe change it so that you CAN declare war on them if you want, but at a huge diplomatic penalty with the other races.
How about a compromise. I really think the no combat for 100 turns makes this entire line. Think of it as diplomatic reasons for not attacking. I think changing it from what it does is very bad and would ruin the flavor. Keep it but add restrictions or such. This one trait makes the neutral line what it is..neutral..no war.
If a player or another AI want to pursue the no war and let me get built up policy that should be allowed.
So what is the counter to having this trait? Maybe a reduction in trade income and tourism? A happiness penalty? Perhaps all other nations move down one tier in relations with you at the end of the 100 turns?
Just tossing ideas out there.
Larsenex
I broadly agree - it makes sense to have a neutral trait that prevents war. The problem right now is that because it is t1, it is way too easy for non neutral players to access. Furthermore, it can become abusive late game.
I like the idea of being able to declare war with some severe diplomatic penalty. Like say, being thrown out of the UP and all races of neutral and opposite ideology to you declare war. Or something similar
Maybe they can make it "No one can attack you until after turn 100" or "until they reach the Age of War".
Again for some Ideas and remember this no war thing will also apply to the minors and other races we are going to have. Lets split this feature into parts.
Tier 1 no one can attack you for 35 turns, Ai can and will declare war but are prohibited from Attacking you for this turn limit. If you enter the influence of any player/ai you are 'at war' with this neutrality will automatically be removed and you can be attacked. Note: having a player drop a starbase in your territory does not apply for this purpose.
Tier 4, 'The Diplomats', All wars with you cease and no UP faction can declare war on you for 60 turns. Non UP members, Pirates and Minors are not restricted by this feature.
Just tossing ideas here...
I think your idea sounds much more balanced.
The t1 option restricts most abuse. I would change it slightly to "For 35 turns, no UP member - including you - may send a military ship or constructor across your borders. Your borders may not culturally expand during this period".
The tier 4 sounds reasonably balanced.
I think the problem people have with this trait is that it's wildly different from all the other declare war options.
* benevolent has the one where races who declare war on you * maybe some others that affect how races view certain activities
* malevolence has no penalty for shared borders.
*neutral simply has "cant touch this!"
if your benevolent race is prickish enough nobody will care that attacking you gives them the same penalty every on else has.
if your malevolent race is abusing those shared borders, the completed Ai had better care about what you are doing (influence flipping or whatever).
larsenex has a good et of ideas
But even if you are neutral, that doesn't mean every other race is neutral towards you. This trait forces all races to be neutral towards you through an arbitrary game mechanic.
Agree that this trait needs a rework or needs to go. What a tedious game if just before you are about to have a military conquest victory you have to click end turn 100 times because the last civ picked this trait. uhhhhh annoying. The whole point of war is a break down in any law and regulation and resorting to the law of force. A stupid piece of paper didnt stop the British in 1775 nor would it matter to Japan in 1941. Why would it matter to enslaving Drengin hell beant on devestation? This trait not only doesn't make sense, it is a game breaker/
If you choose this trait, can the owner of the trait declare war, and if so, I assume the effects of the trait are negated at least for the targetted species? I.E., if I am 60 turns into having this trait, and I declare war on one species, is the trait essentially null and void for that one species now or does it prevent the player from making war as well for 100 turns?
I don't have a problem with it as is.
I usually don't use it in a smaller map game. In big map games I try to wait as long as possible since I usually don't get war in the first 100 turns anyway. I waited too long recently and the Drengin declared on me but were out of range, which is also kind of goofy. About 50 turns later they asked for peace without a shot being fired
If everyone (majority) wants it gone it should be gone, but I am not seeing enough posters in this thread to get it done unless Paul or Frogboy have already decided they don't like it. When 4-5 people are in favor of something it can sound like a popular position, but 4-5 will not make it a priority. There is a long thread on mixing ideology but there is still no consensus on how it should work.
I don't usually declare war in the game but I want the AI to come after me at some point. A long game without combat can be boring.
The trait should probably specify that members of the council can't declare war on you. The minors should not be included.
It is hard to judge some of these things when the game is nowhere near what it will be when released
@francofx
my problem with it is not that its annoying to me thwarted by it... My problem is the other way & I think its important to explain myself. ..
typingoncell.
specifically, with the Ai as it is, I've had no problemsnot being attacked through theeatlier mentioned malevolent/benevolenttraits, but I -always-make sure I'm one ne neutral shy of it & in 100 turns could turn around stress free to trivially research weapons techs (or trade for them), build a military, and thwart a warmonger 001 turns ater in my sleep... It's just too easy & too long, I dont have to pay anything, dont get reduced anything, it just puts any risk on hold until I'm able to trivially deal with it.
I get it. If something is causing me problems and messing with my enjoyment, I want it changed. but this issue has not caused any problems for me so far.
I am totally okay with changing it if that's what everyone wants to do.
As a player who likes to go wide, consolidate, and then embark on conquest of the galaxy, I love the trait just the way it is. It being a early/early-mid game trait is fine, as how many wars of conquest are there really in the early game? OK, maybe on smaller maps I can see how this can be a pain. But even on a crowded map, I think having that 100 turn buffer (which was two years of turns in GC II) isn't all that much. It lets factions with weaker militaries focus on other things.
Pushing this trait up the table might exacerbate some folks concerns because instead of not being able to declare war on a faction in the, let's say, turn 50 to turn 250 window (the exact 100 turns subject to when it was first taken), you instead get it smack into the wars of conquest in the mid -game. I would think it would be much more aggrivatibg running into it later in the game.
Can this trait be abused? Sure. On the other hand, I see it as being pretty darn useful for "peaceful builder" archtype (I've been told they exist ). Or anyone who happens to go for the more peaceful routes of winning.
And if this means I can't go kick the Yor in the head for a hundred turns? So be it. Either there will be plenty of other targets for me to set my sights on, OR I get a few dozen turns to make an appropriate welcome wagon for the Yor as I slam them like a ton of bricks as turn 101 passes.
Why not make it a trait that while you get, there's a UP vote where the other races get to say (obviously you can vote for the largest number if you've got enough diplomatic grunt) how many turns free from Drengin/other race harm you get. This ties it in more to your choices based on the Galactic Events and your relations with various players. Why should the Drengin, who hate you because you culture flipped Kora IV, wait for 100 turns before bitchslapping you?
This means
1: The trait can stay as early in the game as it currently is, tier 1
2: What you get is like a voucher, it's up to the UP vote what numbers written in the xx of "This Voucher Entitles The Bearer To xx Turns Of No Attack".
3: Occurs to me as I'm typing this that if the UP votes and you end up with 1 Turn Of No Attack, even as an easy Teir 1 trai to get you'll be wondering why the fuck you bothered?!? Queue rage quit. Once you have that trait which obviously is yours for life, you can - one you're diplomatically cool enough or can force it via economic/cultural power - periodically front the UP and ask that you get a vote on how many Turns War Free you're getting this year. Note: This vote by it's nature will make your diplomatic relations with every race take a hit, you are rubbing noses in dirt and you can only do it when your relations with the majority of UP races are good - ie 6 other races in the UP, you have to be on good relations with 4 of them.
4: This is true for all races (to stop the player from becoming too powerful), ie the Drengin have the same trait and want to force a UP vote because of my "Matey With The Majority" rule. This provides scope for major dipolomacy between the races before the vote with regards to who'll vote for what and what they'll get for that vote.
Should this trait be tradeable - either permanently or as a loan ie Drengin will get Neutrality from you for 500bc but must give it back in Turn 50. you restrict them by limiting the time they hold your Neutrality Voucher and therefore what they'll get from going to a UP vote for the Turns of No Attack number? And, once espionage is up and running, stealable.
And of course if you're the aggressor the Voucher becomes void.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
