The world of Civilization VI is a complex tapestry of diplomacy, warfare, and strategic maneuvering. While the game offers a robust system for alliances, trade, and even betrayal, many players have pondered a more direct approach to influencing their AI counterparts. What if you could move beyond polite requests and veiled threats? What if you could truly intimidate the AI, leveraging your power to demand tribute and bend them to your will? This guide delves into the hypothetical, yet strategically rich, concept of demanding tribute from the AI through sheer intimidation, a feature many in the community believe would add a new layer of depth to the game’s diplomatic landscape.
Analysis on forums shows that the current system of “demands” often feels binary and lacks the nuance of true power politics. You can ask for a gift from a friendly civilization or make a demand of a neutral or hostile one, but the outcomes are often predictable and the system lacks a true feeling of coercion. This guide explores what a more dynamic intimidation-based system could look like, drawing on community discussions and analysis of existing AI behavior to create a framework for this compelling “what if” scenario.
The Mechanics of Intimidation: A Framework for Demanding Tribute
A robust intimidation system would need to be more than just a simple “demand tribute” button. According to the player community, a truly engaging system would be a dynamic interplay of several factors, creating a risk-and-reward mechanic that would make diplomacy more thrilling.
The Intimidation Score: Quantifying Fear
At the heart of this hypothetical system would be an “Intimidation Score,” a value that fluctuates based on your actions and your relative power compared to the target civilization. This score would be the primary factor in determining the success of your tribute demands. Many professional gamers suggest that this score should be influenced by a variety of factors, including:
- Military Strength: This is the most obvious and impactful factor. A vastly superior military, both in terms of numbers and technology, would be the cornerstone of any intimidation attempt. The AI would need to see a clear and present danger to even consider capitulating.
- Proximity of Forces: It’s one thing to have a large army, but it’s another to have it breathing down your neighbor’s neck. Positioning your units near an AI’s borders would significantly increase your Intimidation Score with that civilization. A popular strategy is to move a strike force just outside their territory before making a demand, signaling your readiness to act.
- Economic Power: A strong economy would also play a role. A civilization with a high GPT (Gold Per Turn) and a large treasury is more capable of sustaining a war, a fact that wouldn’t be lost on the AI.
- Diplomatic Reputation: Your history of interactions with the AI would also be a key component. A civilization with a reputation for unprovoked aggression and a willingness to follow through on threats would naturally have a higher Intimidation Score.
- Grievances: The existing Grievance system could be seamlessly integrated. An AI with a high number of grievances against you would be less likely to be intimidated, as they already have a “casus belli” to declare war. Conversely, an AI with few grievances might be more inclined to give in to your demands to avoid a conflict.
The Tribute Demand: A Sliding Scale of Success
Instead of a simple “yes” or “no” outcome, the success of a tribute demand could be a sliding scale. The higher your Intimidation Score, the more you could demand and the higher the probability of success. For example:
- Low Intimidation Score: You might be able to demand a small, one-time payment of gold or a single luxury resource. The AI might accept, but there’s a high chance they’ll refuse and publicly denounce you.
- Medium Intimidation Score: You could demand a more substantial tribute, such as a percentage of their GPT for a set number of turns, or multiple luxury and strategic resources. The AI would be more likely to accept, but they would also start to view you as a serious threat.
- High Intimidation Score: At this level, you could make significant demands. You might be able to demand a city, a great work, or even force them to break an alliance with another civilization. The AI would be highly likely to accept, but doing so would also generate a significant amount of fear and resentment, potentially leading to a coalition against you.
The Sword is the Strongest Diplomat: The Role of Military Power
In any intimidation-based system, military might would be the ultimate arbiter. Analysis on forums shows that players want a system where their investment in a powerful military pays dividends beyond simply conquering cities.
Projecting Power: More Than Just Numbers
A successful intimidation strategy would require more than just a high military score. It would be about the strategic projection of power. This means:
- Technological Superiority: Having units that are a full era ahead of your opponent’s would be a massive intimidation factor. An AI with warriors is not going to be impressed by your spearmen, but they will certainly take notice of your tanks.
- Strategic Unit Composition: A well-balanced army with a mix of melee, ranged, and siege units would be more intimidating than a homogenous force. This shows that you are prepared for a variety of combat scenarios.
- Naval Power: For coastal civilizations, a powerful navy would be a key component of intimidation. A fleet of battleships parked off an AI’s coast would be a potent symbol of your power.
- Air Power: In the later eras, air power would become a dominant factor. A squadron of bombers within range of an AI’s cities would be a constant and terrifying threat.
The Art of the Threat: Positioning and Posturing
Many professional gamers suggest that the key to a successful intimidation strategy would be the art of the threat. This means using your military not just to fight, but to create a sense of impending doom.
- Border Garrisons: Maintaining a strong military presence on your borders with a target civilization would be a constant source of pressure. The AI would have to factor your military into all of its decisions, from city placement to unit production.
- “Military Exercises”: Periodically moving your troops along an AI’s borders, without actually declaring war, would be a powerful way to increase your Intimidation Score. This would be a high-risk, high-reward strategy, as it could also provoke a preemptive strike from the AI.
- Targeted Unit Placement: Placing specific units in strategic locations would send a clear message. A siege tower near a city with weak walls, or a privateer on a key trade route, would be a direct and unambiguous threat.
The Double-Edged Sword: Diplomacy and Grievances
While military power would be the foundation of intimidation, diplomacy and the Grievance system would provide the nuance and the potential for blowback.
The Calculus of Grievances
A popular strategy is to use intimidation as a way to gain an advantage without generating the high number of grievances associated with a surprise war. Demanding tribute would still generate some grievances, but it would be significantly less than conquering a city. This would create a new strategic calculus for players to consider.
- Intimidation as a “Casus Belli”: If an AI consistently refuses your tribute demands, this could generate a “casus belli” for you to declare a “War of Intimidation.” This would be a formal war with reduced grievances, similar to the existing “War of Retribution.”
- The Diplomatic Fallout: Successfully intimidating an AI would not happen in a vacuum. Other civilizations would take notice. Your diplomatic standing with other AIs would likely decrease, and they might start to form defensive pacts against you.
The AI’s Perspective: Fear and Resentment
An intimidation-based system would also need to have a significant impact on the AI’s behavior. An AI that has been successfully intimidated would not simply forget the experience.
- Increased Military Production: An intimidated AI would likely shift its production towards military units and defensive buildings. They would be determined to never be in such a vulnerable position again.
- Seeking Alliances: An intimidated AI would actively seek out alliances with other civilizations, hoping to create a coalition to counter your power.
- Long-Term Grudges: An AI that has been forced to pay tribute would hold a long-term grudge against you. They would be more likely to denounce you, vote against you in the World Congress, and join in any wars declared against you.
Strategies for a Successful Shakedown
Assuming such a system were in place, how would you go about successfully intimidating the AI? According to the player community, a successful intimidation strategy would be a multi-faceted approach that combines military power, diplomatic maneuvering, and a keen understanding of the AI’s personality.
The Early Game Extortionist
In the early game, you could use a small, technologically advanced military to intimidate your less advanced neighbors. A popular strategy is to rush archery and build a force of archers. This would give you a significant military advantage in the ancient and classical eras, allowing you to demand tribute from your neighbors and fuel your early expansion.
The Mid-Game Mercenary
In the mid-game, you could use your economic and military power to act as a “mercenary” for other civilizations. You could offer to “protect” a weaker civilization from a more aggressive neighbor in exchange for a steady stream of tribute. This would be a way to generate income and diplomatic favor while also keeping your potential rivals in check.
The Late-Game Hegemon
In the late game, a civilization with a dominant military and a global reach could use intimidation to enforce its will on the entire world. You could demand that other civilizations adopt your ideology, break off their alliances, or even cede cities to you. This would be the ultimate expression of power, but it would also be a surefire way to make yourself the world’s number one enemy.
The Perils of Power: The Risks of an Intimidation Strategy
Of course, a strategy of intimidation would not be without its risks. The AI would not be a passive victim. They would react to your threats, and a miscalculation on your part could have disastrous consequences.
The Backlash of the Bullied
An AI that you have been consistently intimidating might decide that the cost of submission is too high. They might declare a surprise war, hoping to catch you off guard. They might also form a coalition with other civilizations, leading to a multi-front war that you are not prepared for.
The Diplomatic Pariah
A civilization that relies on intimidation to achieve its goals would quickly find itself a diplomatic pariah. Other civilizations would be less likely to trade with you, enter into alliances with you, or vote for you in the World Congress. You would be a global outcast, and you would have to be prepared to stand alone against the world.
The Pyrrhic Victory
You might be successful in intimidating an AI and extracting a large amount of tribute from them. But what if the cost of doing so is a permanent state of war and a global coalition against you? You might win the battle, but you could lose the war.
Conclusion: A New Era of Diplomatic Depth
The ability to demand tribute from the AI through intimidation is a feature that many Civilization VI players have been clamoring for. It would add a new layer of strategic depth to the game, making diplomacy more dynamic, more engaging, and more reflective of the complexities of real-world power politics. While such a system would need to be carefully balanced to avoid being overpowered, the potential for new and exciting gameplay experiences is undeniable. From the early game extortionist to the late-game hegemon, the possibilities are as vast and as varied as the civilizations themselves. A system of intimidation would force players to think about their military not just as a tool for conquest, but as a tool for diplomacy, a way to project power and influence the world without firing a single shot. It would be a game of high-stakes poker, where the currency is not just gold and resources, but fear and respect. And in the world of Civilization, that is a game that many players would be eager to play.