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

[John Reumerman]

That would be fun to, though I think with a federation there shouldn't be a time limit. Will the alliance there should, but then something like every 2 months or so.

> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 22:46:42 +0200> From: tom at lemuria.org> To: discuss at news.battlemaster.org> Subject: Re: [Discuss] Brainstorming: Limiting Large Alliances (Take 42)> > Timothy Collett schrieb:> > We need to make diplomatic relations more than just single numbers in > > the database.> >> > Peace treaties, alliances, and federations all need to be game- > > recognized agreements, with definable conditions and limits. Wars > > > > 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?> > > > > -- > Unsubscribing and other list options:> http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> > > -- > Unsubscribing and other list options:> http://news.battlemaster.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-moderated
_________________________________________________________________
Probeer Live.nl 
Probeer Live.nl: zoekmachine van de makers van MSN! 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071010/dd5de7cd/attachment.htm