Confederations
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Elgea
Forum Description: For everything related to the Elgea Continent
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=3103
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 08:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Confederations
Posted By: Aurordan
Subject: Confederations
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 03:46
| What do you consider to be the obligations of confederation with another alliance? Loosely continued from me shouting at Global Chat. |
Replies:
Posted By: invictusa
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 03:50
| you cant pick more than 1? |
Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 03:56
 Yes, you just have to vote twice.
|
Posted By: dunnoob
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 05:30
Oops, sorry, count one "other" as "economic"+"unconditional defense"+"conditional attack"
 |
Aurordan wrote:Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 05:44
|
I am curious about what pathfinding will do for Confeds and NAPs. Confederation, to me means "we are now partners." Mutual defense is the overriding principle. Support with resources and if required troops or what have you. I also think freedom of movement within and through the respective member alliances territory is defacto for now and should be included as part of a Confederation when pathfinding does happen. There is one other thing that I think would be of use for a Confederation as well, and that's extradition. In the event of a crime, the suspect is "virtually" extradited for "trial" by the alliance of the alleged victim. These things give a Confederation some punch. Without them, it's just a NAP. ------------- |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 05:52
|
I have a pretty thorough definition of what I consider appropriate requirements upon a confederate--if you really cared about the specifics you could review them at http://arcanum-illyria.com/wiki/Elgea:Harmless/Treaties" rel="nofollow - http://arcanum-illyria.com/wiki/Elgea:Harmless/Treaties . There's no grounds for declaring any clear standard. The word itself simply means forming a league, standing together. It's not even defined by the word itself whether that stand be in all things or only in context of a singular common issue, or how that mutual support be demonstrated. That said, however, I believe the standard Harmless uses (as linked above) is a good example of what confederates typically and reasonably want from each other. Its sort of a scale...the more one party wants from the other, the better the first party's justification needs to be for demanding it. But the theoretical limit on what one party would ask of the other is limited only by how dire or extreme the causal circumstances can be. The greater the need and/or the greater the innocence, the greater the confederate obligations. If you really wanted to boil it down to a simple caption though, "unconditional defense plus conditional attack" serves well. ------------- "Apparently, quoting me is a 'thing' now." - HonoredMule |
Posted By: Albatross
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 12:48
|
It's whatever you agree. Relevant to a Suggestions thread: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/topic2595_post32313.html#32313" rel="nofollow - http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/topic2595_post32313.html#32313 It's not really relevant to try to codify it, unless you had automatic game mechanics that acted on details of diplomatic stance, e.g. (1) if an alliance neutral to you attacks a confed alliance, do they then become enemies? or (2) Can an 'at war' alliance have their troops travel through your sovereign land, or (3) Can you trade with a player you are 'at war' with even though you're not taking part in the war? |
Posted By: Cerridwyn
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2012 at 03:18
|
I think it is up to the people who devise the treaty/agreement. It should be whatever they want it to be, nothing more, nothing less.
-------------  Cerridwyn ~-~ Cerdwyn 
|