[Discuss] Brainstorming: Limiting Large Alliances (Take 42)

[LilWolf]

Tom Vogt kirjoitti:
>   
> Very tricky, probably not code-able.
>
> However, I like one idea:
>
>
> How about we simply time-limit all positive diplomatic stances? A 
> cease-fire has a length of time. A peace treaty has a run-time.
>
> Of course, you can extend the times. But it can be more and more 
> expensive, and it gives you plausible deniability if you want to go to 
> war ("sorry, I forgot about the cease-fire, I didn't mean it to run out, 
> those troops were sent to aid you, it was all a big misunderstanding...").
>
> More importantly, it might edge people towards actively re-thinking 
> their alliances instead of simply accepting them as they are. Especially 
> new rulers might ask a tricky "why?" when the time to 
> re-negotiate/extend comes up.
>
>
> Comments?
>   


So we'll have unofficial alliances that you might not be able to plan 
around because the diplomacy page doesn't show them, but when you start 
a war, it suddenly pops up because the rulers were saving gold. No thanks.


-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss