Diplomacy

[Duncan McFail]

I know this has come up many times before, but I thought I'd give my 2 cents. I believe a system for diplomacy would be great. Currently we have clans making backroom deals with each other which is pretty cool on it's own, but often times they're limited by lack of control over the rest of the nation. It turns into herding cats for Britain to make a peace agreement with Spain because 20% of the nation doesn't want to be told what to do or doesn't know. It would be nice to have some in game mechanics to force a nation into following agreements it made with other nations. The voice of the nation would have to be heard and I think this would be pretty solid.

 

-Disregarding all historical hierarchy of the time and thinking more along the lines of fair and equal game balance I propose a vote for each nation for a council of nine. This vote would take place 1 time per real time month.

 

-Before that maybe a vote for representatives to be in the voting pool. Perhaps a diplomacy tab using same mechanics as the player search function. Players could set their chosen representative around 1 week prior to voting. Put a minimum of 10 or so representative votes to get a player into the main voting pool so it's a short list of people to vote for.

 

-The 9 representatives elected get to vote on the alignment status with other nations. This would include at war, neutral, or allied. It would also include offers to the other nations as far as port use, taxation on goods if port use is allowed, and status with other nations. These offers would have to be agreed upon by the other nations with counter offers until a deal is struck.

 

-Allied nations would be considered same as actual nation for purposes of attacking them including being able to join their port battles, but instead of becoming a pirate for attacking them they would become part of a rebellion. They are then attackable by their own nation, but not vice versa without becoming pirate. When enough of a nation's population becomes rebel they can force an unscheduled vote to toss out unpopular decision makers. This would also include attacking npc's of that nation. At war status is anything goes and neutral just has it's port's protected until the council ninja switches their status without their knowledge.

 

-Council members must be active. All diplomatic votes would have 48-72 hours to be voted on before making a mark against the one that didn't vote. 2 marks and the next runner up is moved into that position.

 

-Pirates would not be included as they shouldn't be a nation. Nor would nations be able to make official deals with them as they wouldn't be able to be held accountable. Hopefully pirates won't be part of the conquest aspect and be limited to raiding. But that is for another thread.

 

Pros

-more structure in nation diplomacy

-simplified goal settings for all with clearly defined policies

-improved economy with more ports to trade with

-being able to help your allies in port battles

-being able to change the power of a weak nation through alliance

 

Cons

-a lot of coding

-not being able to do what you feel like(maybe the pirate life would suit you better)

-a ton of nation spam before elections

-nation division

-pirates not involved(They shouldn't and this is a pirate saying this)

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I'm sorry for the wall of text. Mainly just bored since PvP2 has been down most of the night.

[Hugoka]

I think your on the right track Duncan !!!

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I represent myself and only trust half a dozen others to represent myself. Not nine, not 20%, not 51%.

 

48 - 72 hours.... hmmm.... some of us might play once a week. Better to rethink the time frame.

 

Pirates... well, it is a non aligned nation which promotes more individualism than not. If they are subtracted from the system... it is an insult to the players. Pirates can effectively work as "allies" with nations and sell themselves as mercenaries.

 

Open world...sand box... the Limits must thought very well to compromise fun for all as a whole.

[Potemkin]

I think this would be fun as hell, but in the long run national civil wars (which will inevitably happen) will create flaming, pissed of ppl on an epic scale, not to mention form irreparable rifts between player groups of the same nation. This would end up bolstering the ranks of the pirates sooner than later. On that note, im down to test it and watch the Caribbean burn.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Potemkin

[Duncan McFail]

I represent myself and only trust half a dozen others to represent myself. Not nine, not 20%, not 51%.

Sounds like a pirate attitude not a member of a nation. Nations should have rules and structure. Just like in the time period we play in if Britain makes a cease fire agreement with Spain a captain that decided to break that cease fire would be in serious trouble. 

 

48 - 72 hours.... hmmm.... some of us might play once a week. Better to rethink the time frame.

To be a member of the council you'd have to be an active player. This means no one would vote in someone who only plays once a week. No one is going to want to wait a week to initiate or change policies.

 

Pirates... well, it is a non aligned nation which promotes more individualism than not. If they are subtracted from the system... it is an insult to the players. Pirates can effectively work as "allies" with nations and sell themselves as mercenaries.

Currently pirates are the same as any other nation with extra penalties. Pirates weren't a nation and shouldn't be in this game. They shouldn't be part of the global conquest. They should just be able to raid ports, but not conquer them. And pirates acting as mercenaries seems pretty legit.

 

I think this would be fun as hell, but in the long run national civil wars (which will inevitably happen) will create flaming, pissed of ppl on an epic scale, not to mention form irreparable rifts between player groups of the same nation. This would end up bolstering the ranks of the pirates sooner than later. On that note, im down to test it and watch the Caribbean burn.

It would end up creating rifts and in-nation fighting, but that seems to happen already. Usually just ends up with a group swapping factions as is. But if a nation ends up in constant civil war then something would need to change with this idea.

 

 

Thanks for the input.