Adv2: Sareln's Report

[Athmos]

Yes, it's possible that an early war is the one right move now, but in this particular game let's not forget that the map was even more cramped than usual, with both a second continent that stayed partially unsettled (the north and west of it) for a long time and an additional AI on a small map.
In my (limited) experience, there is usually have more space to expand peacefully, and just fending of the AI initial attack does not always have to degenerate into outright conquest.

[Kylearan]

I don't know if I like the early wars as much as they're put on you by civ 6. It feels that with the increasing settler costs and how warmongering penalties are set up that rushing a neighbor is the one right move for quick expansion. I like that you have to build military early on, but it just seems like the pendulum has swung too far too the war side in this game.

I fully agree. Early wars have always been a strong strategy in Civ games, and most of the time I avoided that because it somehow felt wrong, exploitative. But it's even worse in Civ 6: No real punishment for getting many cities quickly; you seem to be able to capture builders/settlers in the process; pillaging boosts you even more; it's so easy at the moment that it's faster than REXing; later-era wars are penalized more and are harder to do; ...etc. etc.

I think it would be good to try to establish some house rules for future events to make it a real choice, either by creating a general rule or by incorporating it into the scoring.

[unaghy]

My two cents regarding early AI aggression & warmonger penalty.

I personally like it - it gives purpose of AI having additional starting units and puts player in difficult decision in terms of builder/settler vs defense, denying quick expansion in favor of security/survival.
I would say, lets give player more room in beginning of the game on lower difficulties and push them harder on higher ones.

In one immortal game I got rushed on turn 8 by 4 warriors, while I had only one warrior and first slinger still in production. Of course I was defeated, but I reloaded game from T1 and while playing different variations of defense I found the way how to defend against it. First of all, I had to position my warrior in the way that AI wont get my capital under siege to allow city to regain health between turns and get time to finish slinger. Then killing AI units one by one by carefully selecting to prevent siege. Hold them off until second slinger was completed and then cleaned them. Since then my build order is almost always slinger, slinger, builder, slinger, slinger, builder/settler.

In opposite situation, that player is doing early aggression, AI should emphasize more ranged units (prioritize archery tech) and defensive terrain.

I´ve got more problems with warmonger penalty and seems I´m not alone. First of all, penalty is too high. More than minus 20 leads to end of meaningfull diplomacy in my games. To counter penalty with positive diplomatic actions, which are in range 3-12 points, then low penalty should be 3, moderate penalty 6, normal 9, high 12, then 15, 18 and 21 for highest.
There should be also differentiation between each occasions - if AI declares war to player, penalty should be only half. If player joins the war with AI, no penalty for joint AI, half penalty for other AI and normal penalty for AI war was declared against, etc.