Fair diplomacy?

Sebastiaan · Post by **Sebastiaan** » Sep 11 2005

Alright, I want to play more with diplomacy , however, where is the line between smart diplomacy and cheating?

Because there are many exploits which can be considered cheating. For example, one side treadies, like giving money, always have the same benifical benefit to your relation, no matter the amount. You can simply give a few dolars to the rivaling nation (like a candy man) and become they best friends, or spend bilions in a single grand gesture, bwcome broke and hardy improve your relation ship.

So the question is, how to play they diplomatic game without cheating?

Sebastiaan · Post by **Sebastiaan** » Sep 12 2005

anyone?

BigStone · Post by **BigStone** » Sep 12 2005

I wait for update #3

But you're right that diplomacy in this game is ...lets say it a bit
diplomatic... not fully implemented.

One thing (beside the money offers) that i find most annoying is when
you have an alliance you can easely direct all your troops into a region
and then say... SURPRISE....

Cheers

Sebastiaan · Post by **Sebastiaan** » Sep 14 2005

Well, thats called treason and should be possible but punisched diplomaticly by droping your tready and word marked rating to 0, that way other nation will no longer trust you and you get instantly kicked

Post by **Balthagor** » Sep 14 2005

Those are the usual effects of backstabbing an ally. The WM and you're ppl do not take kindly to you declaring war on an ally.

BigStone · Post by **BigStone** » Sep 15 2005

Don't know if possible .. but maybe somesort of a lock on the war button
as long you have troops in that region...

Cheers

Post by **Balthagor** » Sep 15 2005

Why? People can declare war with troops stationed in that territory. Legend and I are working on reviewing what affects MAR/DAR/Civ/Dip/Belli and stuff like that, one that I've been looking at is concentrations of enemy forces in locations. I think that we will do better saying that keeping large forces in allied territory without a common neighbouring enemy can affect that regions Civilian approval and DAR so that the ally will push for you to take your forces home or start threatening to disolve the alliance.

BigStone · Post by **BigStone** » Sep 15 2005

Balthagor wrote: I think that we will do better saying that keeping large forces in allied territory without a common neighbouring enemy can affect that regions Civilian approval and DAR so that the ally will push for you to take your forces home or start threatening to disolve the alliance.

That sounds indeed a lot better....

Cheers

Sebastiaan · Post by **Sebastiaan** » Sep 15 2005

Balthagor wrote:Why? People can declare war with troops stationed in that territory. Legend and I are working on reviewing what affects MAR/DAR/Civ/Dip/Belli and stuff like that, one that I've been looking at is concentrations of enemy forces in locations. I think that we will do better saying that keeping large forces in allied territory without a common neighbouring enemy can affect that regions Civilian approval and DAR so that the ally will push for you to take your forces home or start threatening to disolve the alliance.

That sound like a very realistic diplomatic improvement. In the real world America has militairy bases in saudi arabia, which had a major negative effect on the local DAR of saudi arabia. In fact most terrorist from 9/11 came from amerias greatest ally, saudi arabia, So even if you are allied to a region and you a best budies with their goverment (badar bush), the civilian people can still whish you dead.

bergsjaeger · Post by **bergsjaeger** » Sep 15 2005

well it wasn't exactly the civilians from Saudi Arabi wanting Us ppl dead but just the terrorist that signed up under bin Laden wanting US ppl dead.

Sebastiaan · Post by **Sebastiaan** » Sep 16 2005

Well, why do you think bin laden hates the americns so much. It is because america has (infadel) militairy bases located in his (holy) country and has corrupted his family (,the rules of saudi arabia) into western lifestyles

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Sep 16 2005

Sebastiaan wrote:Well, why do you think bin laden hates the americns so much.

You mean he needs a reason besides being a brain damaged psychopath pretending to be religious ?

BigStone · Post by **BigStone** » Sep 16 2005

tkobo wrote:You mean he needs a reason besides being a brain damaged psychopath pretending to be religious ?

Haha... this is something i completly 100% agree with Tkobo...

But please guy's lets stick to the topic please...

Cheers

Post by **Balthagor** » Sep 16 2005

Yes, I think we all agree with the model I presented - why, if or where it matches real life doesn't matter that much.

bergsjaeger · Post by **bergsjaeger** » Sep 16 2005

seems i struck a nerve somewhere.

oh well.