Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
he still wants his cities back, though. you took them by force, after all.
you can remove the diplo penalty by returning the cities (the penalty is also removed if you only return 1 of the cities and keep the others).
alternatively, you can occupy the cities that you *don't*want and return them in the peace deal and demand other cities that you never occupied instead. if they agree, you get intact cities that didn't suffer during the war and you don't even get a warmonger penalty for taking them.
To me, "cede" means he gives up all claims on the city. He can't still want them back, if he ceded them to me. So I'll play the game under MY rules :)
I was perfectly happy to leave him alone and try a cultural victory but he declared a "surprise war" on me while I was killing barbarians, not even a "formal" war. He sneaked up on me and attacked. He doesn't get his cities back and is lucky I didn't kill him :)
I think one of the designers didn't have a clear understand of what "cede" means. I have the definitions of 3 different dictionaries on my side, one of them in print (like, on PAPER).
This is incorrect. As soon as the war ends, the occupied status ends, regardless if the cities are ceded. Try it yourself.
But then again, im not very well versed in the english language and maybe cede means something else then giving up on the thing you ceded and move on.
Either way, theres absolutly no use to cede, only use it has is to remove cede deals, and get more other resources, out come will be same, apart from you having more resources instead of a cede, which doesnt do anything.
It seems that after the latest patch this feature got completely bugged. It worked at first to the extent that unceded cities stayed 'occupied' after the peace deal. Now, it seems, they lose the 'occupied' status whether they were ceded or not. Probably this was somewhat bugged from the very beginning, as 'ceding' would imply renouncing any claim to that city. We'll see how this turns out after the next patch. Or the next next one... or even later :) So far, almost every new patch broke something new.
Anyways, for now the only escape from the AI thinking you occupy their cities is giving them just one city back in the peace deal. It might be in exchange of everything else they have and agree to give to you.
I literally tested it just before posting that to double-check.
Maybe before accusing others of lying (and misleading people) you could, y'know, do the homework.
Especially since I suggested you "try it yourself" if you didn't believe me. Which you clearly didn't do.
I think it's supposed to stay occupied until it's ceded. And I don't think the losing civ should give up all claims on it. They ought to stay angry. I do think that his allies should be way less angry about it though.
CEDE captured city = the civ gives up any and all claims on property, meaning there should not be denouncing for all eternity, or any alliances formed later in game.
IT SIMPLY IS A BORKED FEATURE, its not doing what its suposed to do, namely the conquered civ giving up any and all rights to the conquered territory, and their allies. It stays occupied for all eternity, ceded or not, and you get stuck no matter how well your diploamtic status is in an endless loop of denouncing, because occupying ... on ceded territory.
As to the general meaning of the word "cede", that's really of incidental importance. The AI considers something ceded following occupation to be still associated with the original owner. You get here from the owner, and some warmonger hate with other civs.
Get them to give you cities you don't occupy in the peace deal, and give the ones you occupy back. Then people don't care.
had another topic like it where i put belgium against france, to make things short, france invaded belgium, belgians wooped thier buts, and to put in civ6 terms, france cede. Belgium became, well. belgium, dont hear the french denouncing the belgians because they happen to win a major victory and claim territory.
In similar civ6 with shifitng of cities, the one doing the victories gets denounced up to modern era even if the shift took place in ancient era, regardless if there was a cede back then.
Point being, you are better of to scrap cede deals and get more raw resources, because cede DOES NOT WORK
I don't care if they change it so it has a high value (just below that of giving a city that wasn't captured) in the Victory calculations that govern a peace deal, but it should work in a more expected fashion and be part of the diplomatic toolbox for minimizing massive warmonger penalties that last centuries.
That isn't a feature. Making cities that aren't ceded useless is bad game design. So you are implying that the devs are so ♥♥♥♥ they were unable to realize how stupid their game was?
Cities that are captured during a war should act exactly like normal cities after the war regardless of whether they were arbitrarily ceded or not. The enemy who accepts peace extinguishes its claim on captured cities regardless of whether they were ceded or not because the act of accepting peace with the knowledge that the cities will not be returned means those cities ARE being ceded. The formal declaration of ceding a city would apply only to cities which HADN'T been captured.