Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - More Diplomatic options between alliances
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedMore Diplomatic options between alliances
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Mara Zira View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Location: Arkansas, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 223 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 21:03
Originally posted by intor intor wrote:


  • Shared Intelligence Treaty - Basically gives you access to each other's Diplo visibility and/or prevents diplomatic units from being able to carry out aggressive actions against anyone with whom you have this treaty. Once it's possible for us to station diplomatic units, could also mean that diplomatic units from anyone with whom you have this treaty, currently present in your cities, would help defend you.

Good ideas, but I especially like what this one implies. It'd be great if everyone in the same alliance, or even in confederated alliances, could share diplomatic visibility fields. Or at least that you could "use" an alliance mate's diplomatic visibility range on cities where their range overlapped yours. Same with your own cities where their ranges overlap, so you'd see the incoming diplomat in the targeted city just as soon as it passed by your outermost "linked" city. Then there would be a huge advantage to being in an alliance, and for the alliance members to be relatively close together, and to keep your own cities in hubs...

Any idea how long before we can at least declare Mutual Defense Pacts? It'd be nice if we got it now instead of when the whle automatic-pull-in system is in place.... Big smile


Edited by Mara Zira - 10 Oct 2011 at 21:05
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 19:37
Also, intor - absolutely.  When those aspects are ready to go there will be a system for managing these interactions.  Good thinking!

Edited by GM Stormcrow - 10 Oct 2011 at 19:37
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 19:35
Hi Mara,

That's a great suggestion and is on the to-do list already.

We'll be releasing a variety of new alliance diplomacy options, running from:

War -> Truce -> Neutrality -> NAP -> MDP (Mutual Defence Pact) -> Confederation

It's anticipated that these statuses will *automatically* draw alliances into war if the criteria are met.

Examples of what a Mutual Defence Pact would mean:

Example 1
Alliance A and Alliance B have a mutual defence pact.
Alliance C declares war on Alliance B, and this will automatically declare from Alliance C to Alliance A as well (who are coming to the aid of Alliance B).

Example 2
Alliance A and Alliance B have a mutual defence pact.
Alliance B declares war on Alliance C... and that's it.  Because the act of aggression was from Alliance B, Alliance A is not drawn into the conflict, as the pact between Alliance A and Alliance B is defensive in nature.

Confederations will draw all partner alliances into a unified action (and we do understand that this will mean people will be much choosier about their confederation partners).

It is envisaged that in the circumstance where an alliance has conflicting pacts, they will not automatically declare anything.

Truce would be an intermediate status from War - a cease-fire of sorts that could be broken (details TBC).

Any other ideas for diplomatic relations, though, would be welcome.

Regards,

SC
Back to Top
intor View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 82 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 19:30
I have a few, though they will only make sense once several other features have been implemented.

  • Free Trade Treaty - Allows both alliances to use each others roads without paying tolls. Could also allow the use of each others ports. Though this assumes that we will be able to order a caravan to move to a location and wait there for further orders, without them immediately returning home, as is the case now. This would allow you to move goods between caravans outside cities, and could let you move goods between caravans and transport ships in foreign cities.
  • Open Borders Agreement - Allows unhindered movement of units through each other's territory (sovereignty squares). This assumes that non-allied units would suffer attrition/stat penalties while moving through your sovereignty squares.
  • Shared Intelligence Treaty - Basically gives you access to each other's Diplo visibility and/or prevents diplomatic units from being able to carry out aggressive actions against anyone with whom you have this treaty. Once it's possible for us to station diplomatic units, could also mean that diplomatic units from anyone with whom you have this treaty, currently present in your cities, would help defend you.

EDIT: Forgot to add that not all diplomatic options should be only between alliances. Some should also be available between individual players, e.g. 2 players from different alliances could have a Free Trade Treaty between them, even if the alliances they belong to don't have any diplomatic agreements.


Edited by intor - 10 Oct 2011 at 19:35
Back to Top
Mara Zira View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Location: Arkansas, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 223 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 18:29
I think the current options for diplomatic relationships between alliances are war, peace, NAP, and Confederation. Could we have some other options that would make the relationships between alliances more varied and clear?

I'd like "Mutual Defense Treaty" added to the options. It would be for alliances who will help their treaty partners defend their cities against sieges and attacks, but they are not bound to join in the treaty partner's offense or wars.

And maybe change NAP to Non-Aggression Pact so newbies know what it means without having to ask.

Anyone have other ideas of treaties or relationships to add? Beyond Mutual Loathing as one short of War. Wink


Edited by Mara Zira - 10 Oct 2011 at 18:30
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.