protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

I set up a game where I controlled two players. As the lesser of the two players, I offered the greater player a protectorate treaty. The lesser player ended up being the "dominate" in the treaty. Is that right? I thought the stronger of the two empires was always the dominate when a protectorate or subjugation was offered, not matter which empire offers. Is this the case?

Re: protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

By offering the treaty, you are demanding that they subjugate to you.

Nothing else matters, except who sent the offer.

Perhaps it would be nice to have a new option so you can ask to be put under a protectorate (as opposed to being wiped out)

Re: protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

Does the AI ever offer/demand protectorate or subjugation treaties?

------------------
Assume you have a 1kg squirrel
E=mc^2
E=1kg(3x10^8m/s)^2=9x10^16J
which, if I'm not mistaken, is equivilent to roughly a 50 megaton nuclear bomb.
Fear the squirrel.

Re: protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

I've never seen the computer offer such a treaty and they only seem to accept it if I could defeat them that turn anyhow so its not much good for me to offer one either most of the time.

Re: protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

I think it would make sense for neutral empires to be more prone to accept protectorate/subjugation treaties.

------------------
Assume you have a 1kg squirrel
E=mc^2
E=1kg(3x10^8m/s)^2=9x10^16J
which, if I'm not mistaken, is equivilent to roughly a 50 megaton nuclear bomb.
Fear the squirrel.

Re: protectorate/subjugation treaties
 

I agree. I hope that the whole diplomacy system gets an overhaul in one of the future patches. So far, it is much too mechanistic. Reactions only depend on accumulated anger levels, not on situational factors ("other wars" being the only exception). I can subjugate an empire on the other side of the galaxy if I only saw it once. Should I not have a warfleet on its border (or offer a tremendous bribe) before the emperor accepts servitude ?


Situational factors, like weak defenses, current threats, relations with third parties (how can you be my ally and the ally of my ennemy ?), actions in the younger past, should influence diplomatic responses. Some amount of randomness (maybe depending on the counterparty's character) should also be part of the mechanism.


Furthermore, the AIs should actively offer non-aggression/non-intercourse/subjugation/protectorate treaties. They never seem to do this.


Content-wise, protactorates and subjugation treaties should give the dominant party further advantages, like the right to use refuel depots, etc.

[This message has been edited by jowe01 (edited 06 March 2001).]