Diplomacy

[Kurassier]

Ok, here's my latest rant that very few of you will care about. But I feel we need to put out for discussion things we'd like to see, or we'll never see them. I now Pete has a lot on his plate, but here goes.

 

I'd like to see a better use of diplomacy. Forget about the current diplomacy, as it is misnamed, and truly is just orders for fleet commanders.

First, add an order to "Build an Embassy", ( of course a Sabeli Ecok embassy is also nicknamed, 'super StarBars') requires a diplomat on anothers HW or at least a colony of at least X population. No Conmat necessary, just an embassy built on the host world.

Second, the above would be a basis for political agreements. Note that both don't have to have embassy's built, just one. Then true 'agreements' can be made. No embassy would be needed for War or Non agression pacts, but would be for Trade Pacts, Alliances, or Total Alliances (or any other type of political agreements)

Trade pacts would be at varying levels, each one would allow a greater amount/types of items to be traded. It would also be nice, if it would be allowed to load directly onto a trading partner's ships, ie. LC 'pop group' 'empire number or 0/blank for own' 'fleet #' etc.

Alliance and Total Alliance would allow greater cooperation of colonies, fleets, ground troops, etc. Maybe a TA would even allow the 'gifting' or lend lease, if you will, of ships/fleets. Of course all of these agreements would be mutual agreements.

 

Any way, just my thoughts on implementing more of a true diplomacy element. I've thought of more 'details' but thought this might open some discussions.

Cheers.

[ShadowKitsune]

I wouldn't call it a rant as much as a simple request with a few examples thrown in. Rants usually involve the use of certain emoticons ( - for example) and phrases like "we've been waiting for [x] months for [object of ire] to be fixed/distributed/explained ...".

 

I do concur with you in wishing that Inter-Empire Diplomacy was a bit more involved and integrated into the game than simply hurling PAP Orders into the aether. This being different than sitting above an Imperial Fragment and issuing gobs of DIP Orders (or simpling invading) at the 3-8 Population PopGroup with a bunch of busted Installations and a nifty trinket or two.

 

I would like it if Pacts and Alliances worked more like another RTG Game (Victory!) where differing levels of Diplomatic Status allowed for varying levels of interaction and all positive relations required reciprocity (both sides have to send in "mirrored" orders at the same agreement level).

 

I would think that certain levels of interaction would require certain pre-requisites, such as:

 

1. All statuses other than Neutral would require that some contact has been made between the two empires. [Contact being simply the empire appeared on an Alien Sighting Report, at least once.]

 

2. All positive statuses above Non-Aggression Pact require a Diplomat Character be assigned as Ambassador to said Empire. One Diplomat per Empire. One Empire per Diplomat. [it would require a modification of the AC Order. It would also avoid the messiness of trying to build Embassies on Homeworlds. It also takes the Diplomat away as a Production multiplier in exchange for being an "organic" Embassy.]

 

3. All positive statuses would have to mutually agreed upon. [both sides must issue the same, appropriate order or the agreement doesn't exist. Empire A must issue a PAP Alliance Order to Empire B, who must issue a PAP Alliance Order back to Empire A.]

 

4. Positive statuses would have to be agreed upon in succession (i.e. Non-Aggression before Alliance before Total Alliance), or at a minimum, certain positive statuses are pre-requisites to better statuses.

 

Those are just examples off the cuff, I'm sure we can all improve upon them.

 

More later ...

 

-SK

[hobknob]

Here is wishing for an order that would give alist of all of my current diplomatic agreements.

 

After 3 years in the game and the odd computer meltdown I no longer have easy acces to every turn that has ever been run. It would be nice to be able to reassure ones allies that your mondo war fleet will at least try and not open fire upon them. AS it is the only way to be sure is to cancel any existing orders and then to reissue the PAP. This is truly a waste of valuable orders.

 

[WKE235]

Here is wishing for an order that would give alist of all of my current diplomatic agreements.

 

After 3 years in the game and the odd computer meltdown I no longer have easy acces to every turn that has ever been run.  It would be nice to be able to reassure ones allies that your mondo war fleet will at least try and not open fire upon them.  AS it is the only way to be sure is to cancel any existing orders and then to reissue the PAP.  This is truly a waste of valuable orders.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Like the PAP's matter. Even when allied two fleets will sometimes fire on each other. Sure the PAP's cut down on the chances of fire fights with friends. But, it's almost like the game ignores the PAP's from time to time (or skips that section of code by mistake). I've gotten tired of asking Pete to restore ship "X" that was destroyed by a friendly player as we both have "non-agression" agreements with each other. I only ask now if a character or some major ships were involved.

[Eldred]

Mmmm....we too had a non-aggression pact with another player (who apparently had us marked down as a total ally), yet we still managed to blow up his pathfinder as our ROE was set to Yankee

 

Annoyingly we have now spent the last 3 turns issuing PAP orders to try and set the status of the other empire to Total Ally, but the program stubbornly refuses to delete the non-aggression pact! Fortunately no more friendly fire incidents yet!

 

It would be nice to have an order to change all of your ROEs in one go - there is now way I am changing them all individually!

 

Here is wishing for an order that would give alist of all of my current diplomatic agreements.

 

After 3 years in the game and the odd computer meltdown I no longer have easy acces to every turn that has ever been run.  It would be nice to be able to reassure ones allies that your mondo war fleet will at least try and not open fire upon them.  AS it is the only way to be sure is to cancel any existing orders and then to reissue the PAP.  This is truly a waste of valuable orders.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Like the PAP's matter. Even when allied two fleets will sometimes fire on each other. Sure the PAP's cut down on the chances of fire fights with friends. But, it's almost like the game ignores the PAP's from time to time (or skips that section of code by mistake). I've gotten tired of asking Pete to restore ship "X" that was destroyed by a friendly player as we both have "non-agression" agreements with each other. I only ask now if a character or some major ships were involved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[ShadowKitsune]

I think the point was to make PAPs matter along with all of the other "in-game" Diplomacy related features, plus make some recommendations as to things we'd like to see be incorporated into said same.

 

[Yes, I realize that these will get placed on the nearly legendary, monolithic List of Enhancements, Upgrades and Repairs that Pete currently has for SN:ROTE and the likelihood that any of it will get done in the next 18 months is about as likely as my winning a $100 Million (USD) lottery, perhaps less. However, it is still fun to speculate and discuss what could be. ]

 

Things I would like to see be tied to Diplomatic Agreements ...

 

1. Combat Synergy

 

Not only do I agree that if you have a Non-Aggression Pact, Alliance or Total Alliance with another Empire, your Fleets shouldn't fire upon one another. I think that you should get a Combat Synergy Modifier based on your diplomatic relationship, where Non-Aggression Pact is the zero [0] point. If you have merely a Trade-Pact, you should get a slight decrease in your combined Fleet FC. If you have no Agreement, but are coincidentally at War with a common foe, your combined Fleet FC should take a larger decrease. On the flip side, an Alliance should grant your combined Fleet a bonus to FC, while a Total Alliance would grant a larger bonus.

 

The overall "logic" behind this would be Allies and Total Allies would have hammered out a Command-n-Control protocol for combined Fleet actions as part of their Alliance agreement. A Non-Aggression Pact wouldn't have said protocol inbedded in the Pact, but would have some minimal engagement guidelines should both Empires be in a shared combat zone. Trade Pacts would not include military agreements, per se, but they at least imply that the two Empires are not adversarial. No agreement would mean that the fight would turn into an absolute fur-ball and the two fleets may end up targetting the same "enemy" warships and thus wasting firepower.

 

The Total Ally Bonus may be that both Fleets can "share" the best Naval Officer present and have an aggregate FC - Fleet A FC + Fleet B FC. The Alliance Bonus could be that the fleets have a better than averaged FC, say Highest Fleet FC + 50% of the other Fleet AC. Non-Aggression Pact is to just view both Fleets as one big Fleet. Trade Pact would mean that you lose 25% of the other fleet's FC from your FC. No Agreement would mean that you just subtract the other fleet's FC from your FC. (With the caveat, that the FC can never be worse than 1, regardless of penalties.) These are just examples, obviously something more formulaic would be required so that massive, multi-empire battle scenario bonuses/penalties could be calculated.

 

2. Trade Limitations

 

Each level of Diplomatic Agreement would have Trade Limitations with Total Ally status granting virtually none. For example:

 

Non-Aggression Pact allows Raw Materials (Raw Resources, Iron, Crystals, etc.), Basic Manufactured Goods (Construction Materials, Electronics, Refined Crystals, etc.), Items with a "Poor", "Fair" or "Adequate" rating.

 

Trade Pact allows all Non-Aggression Pact goods plus Improved Manufactured Goods (Improved Pharmaceuticals, Improved Transaluminum, etc.), Items with a "Good" or "Superior" Rating.

 

Alliance allows all Trade Pact Goods plus Advanced Manufactured Goods (Advanced Fuel, Advanced Petroleum, etc.) and Items with an "Impressive" or "Excellent" rating.

 

Total Ally allows all Alliance Goods plus anything else that can be traded.

 

3. Shared Intelligence

 

Roughly speaking, Allies and Total Allies would get each other's Alien Fleet Sightings. Total Allies would get the results of each other's Espionage missions (when they get implemented).

 

That's all I have at the moment, thoughts?

 

-SK

[ali-t-akua]

Here are my thoughts.

 

1.There are some interesting ideas here. However, I dont agree that someone with a Non Aggression Pact should not be fired upon. Same with and Ally or Total Ally. I think the ROE should prevail (and work). Otherwise why have the different levels of agreement.

 

a. I have to think further on the modification to FC but I do agree that this would be an interesting enhancement (and might provide some justification for the different levels of agreement although I think the ability to have ROE settings work as advertised is a stronger justification.)

 

2. I am not clear on why there needs to be limitations on what can be traded.

 

3. I like this idea. I would think information sharing would be a clever enhancement.

[ShadowKitsune]

Thanks for the imput:

 

1. You are correct and I should have been more clear. One of the premises is that the ROE works in tandem with the PAP, correctly. If your Fleet's ROE was set to attack anything but Total Allies, it would attack the Fleets of Empires with whom you only had a Non-Aggression Pact.

 

2. I think it adds an additional incentive for higher level agreements. ROE is more of a deterrent than an incentive, IMO.

 

3. There is no absolutely wonderful reason for the Trade restrictions other than implied logic. The concept is that "better" stuff isn't something that you trade with less friendly Empires. This is probably a lousy example, but here goes: The USA will sell Grain to Iran, but not Computers. Why? Because they can't use the Grain to build nuclear weapons, but Computers could be used in such a capacity. On the other hand, the USA gladly sells computers and even nuclear materials to the United Kingdom. Why? Because we're Total Allies.

 

4. I thought Intelligence Sharing would be cool.