Criminal extradition treaties, free trade etc

Bateman1982 · Post by **Bateman1982** » Jan 25 2006

Is there any effect of getting some of the minor treaties with other nations?

i.e does criminal extradition treaty have any effect?

also does the "Free flow of labor force" treaty have any effect on your economy.

I'm not really clear on the effects of these 2, or of the free trade treaty

red · Post by **red** » Jan 25 2006

Every treaty which you have signed with other regions improves your ratings a bit. That's all that I see.

Il Duce · Post by **Il Duce** » Jan 25 2006

Free flow of labor force is intended to permit additional labor resources without actually adding to your population [guest worker programs, like that]... It is not clear how effective this treaty is, and it is basically impossible to measure it. It would certainly be influenced by a number of other factors [relative pop sizes of the signatories, unemployment of each regions, and probably adjacency of the signatories - how would guest workers get from taiwan to mongolia?].

Free trade very specifically excludes trades with partners from import and export tariffs. Also difficult to measure, from both an accounting and diplomatic standpoint.

My personal take on the 'lesser' treaties goes like this - first I try to get an embassy treaty. Sometimes that's enough. After that, the 'lesser' treaties are useful to secure diprelate, and in some cases, civrelate at higher increments. This is not always straightforward - it's hard to say what the effects of free flow of labor would have on civrelate [in both directions], and it also isn't clear if this affects DAR and Cultural approval. Very intriguing to ponder, particularly in light of the present American struggle with its border issues [Aliens - ya can't live with 'em and ya can't live without 'em].

Extradition is also another binding treaty that is nice to have as 'just a stroke.' I imagine that it might have had more subtle implications if the espionage/covert ops feature were implemented [as it would provide transits to and thru other regions with 'cover stories.] Certainly it would be meaningful if insurgency were also an option. Of course, you could always exchange captured spies too.

I like to be in control of my diplomatic relationships, which sometimes requires restraint - these lesser treaties are a way to interact without acquiring an actual alliance difficult to break and possibly undesirable in the future].

Also note that successful diplo exchanges bump up your regional integrity rating [a generally overlooked stat], and also improve your standing with the WM [although that is fluid]. So the lesser treaties give you a shot to do some good without necessarily having a specific treaty effect.

Seydlitz · Post by **Seydlitz** » Jan 25 2006

Il Duce wrote:Free trade very specifically excludes trades with partners from import and export tariffs. Also difficult to measure, from both an accounting and diplomatic standpoint.

I don't think this is actually the case. I've had free trade clauses with every country on the map and still had a large tariff income. Plus, even though I didn't import anything, I was making a killing on import tariffs...

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Jan 25 2006

Im pretty sure Free trade works, and im pretty sure it does just what Il Duce said.

Ive done this trade will all regions in a scenario and seen the taxes(import,export) go to zero.

Now of course i cant say it works as it should in every case.Its possible theres a bug,but if so, its one i havent seen and if it exists it should get found and mentioned.So it can be fixed.

To OP, some of the treaties do nothing but allow you to increase your diplomatic ratings (as red said),but otherwise just add "flavor".Criminal extradition is one of these last i heard.

BigStone · Post by **BigStone** » Jan 26 2006

Well maybe Seydlitz has a one way free trade treaty with a ally....

Seydlitz · Post by **Seydlitz** » Jan 26 2006

I checked again last night on the world map (so that trade with the WM didn't interfere), signed free trade treaties with everyone, and still was making almost $300B a year on tariffs. Are people actually getting tariff-free trades? It would be interesting if someone else would check as well.

Il Duce · Post by **Il Duce** » Jan 26 2006

...My comment was only a rephrase of the manual's discussion.
As I mentioned, it is hard to measure.
"Tariff" income may also include other miscellaneous sums, who knows?

The best way to check would be to save a benchmark position without any treaties, but with relations set to agree on treaties on the next day, set trades to specific levels, and let it run for a month, noting tariff income and trade amounts for each day [a lot of notes]. [to keep accounts equal, you might even go so far as to gift the intended treaty recipients with the same amount of cash in both the treaty and non-treaty cases - a placebo effect if you will.]

Then, restore the benchmark, establish the treaties, and replay with the same trade settings, again noting the trade and tariff amounts for each day.

I assume that ALL ministerial activity is locked out, as you can never tell what those guys are up to in the background.

Notice that I am not volunteering to do this - I am generally more interested in the diplo effects of treaties as a way of influencing the sequence of hostilities on the map. There is no metric on how any specific treaty influences dip/civrealte and integrity. These develop over time.

As long as my region stays liquid, I really don't care how much the accounting might leak. All things being equal, I expect that there is a balance of error that makes it a zero-sum affair.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Jan 26 2006

K, ive thought about this some more and i think there was a wierd slow drop off, not an instant zero.It slowly lowered to zero over a period of time.

I'll run a test tonight.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Jan 26 2006

K, i started the test.

Its dropping daily by a small amount each day.It looks like it will take about 2 years to reach zero.

The drop so far is very uniform.

Il Duce · Post by **Il Duce** » Jan 26 2006

Fascinating.

Seydlitz · Post by **Seydlitz** » Jan 26 2006

Alright. I didn't look for any changes over time, but that seems quite reasonable, since one would expect the tariffs to not disappear overnight. Thanks for taking the time to prove me wrong

.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Jan 26 2006

Well, i havent really proven anything yet, lets wait til the test ends and see if indeed it goes to zero.

Im very curious as to the amount of time this takes. 2 years for my games doesnt seem like a lot.
BUT many scenarios end or are mostly over in 2 years.And most players dont play as long a game as i do.
Which kind makes the effect of the treaty moot in those cases.

I quess i am not really sold that it should take so long to go into full effect.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Jan 26 2006

The reduction is slowing now, at the current rate its more like 3+ years to reach zero now.

At that rate ill have to let the game run while i sleep tonight to get it to zero.

And thats if it doesnt slow down any more.

If this is the way its supposed to work,imo Id say it needs to be looked at for possible change.

Il Duce · Post by **Il Duce** » Jan 26 2006

Unexpected, but then, not unexpected....
Delayed and incremental effects are not unusual in SR2010.