BRIBERY & ASSASSINATION

[Strategos]

Seen from the Throne of a god.....

Bribery and assassination have always gone hand-in-hand in any conflict...most assassins have not been Special Ops types (like Ninjas, Seals etc)but have been blatantly bribed to do the dirty deed through money, promises of status, power etc

Within an ancients/medieval context such as DOM 2 why can't leaders be bribed to assassinate, secretly spy for another side etc.

This would or should not necessarily apply to the pretender him/herself (that would defeat the objectof the game)but to all other leaders, mages etc

Another point.....what about bribing etc commanders to switch sides a la Romance of Three Kingdoms style....very realistic.

This would probably necessitate a loyalty scale for each commander, mage etc but in reality loyalty is exactly the business of leaders and the true barometer of their success (read dominion)

[Pocus]

Your questions can be of interest, but please refrain to post in capital letters.

Thanks.

[Wick]

I agree with everything you say except I believe I can answer the question.

Implementing a comprehensive system of for bribery or, more comprehensively, leader loyalty would not add to the core gameplay which is about wreaking havoc with armies and spells. It is not required since most (all?) of the things it would allow can already be done in other ways, and it would be a major undertaking to implement comprehensively, particulary as a general loyalty system which I think would be incredibly cool.

I also think that a diplomacy system is probably a prerequisite for this and Illwinter doesn't seem to be excited by that, despite it being widely requested and probably simpler. They also have many more ideas then time so I think it's safe to say that this idea is dead. For this game.

P.S. I've only addressed bribery since, as I assume you know, there are assassins already.

[Mortifer]

Strategoes you have nice ideas again, however bribery is a part of 'diplomacy' and as we know there is no diplomacy in Doms II. ((yet?? ))

[MStavros]

Bribery! Ahhhh! That would be sweeeeeeeeeet!

[Taqwus]

Um, no.

First of all, RoTK was not, is not, and likely never will be an accurate warfare simulator. It's model of "on-the-battlefield" bribery is truly outrageous.

Second, bribing commanders and troops just wasn't that historically common, outside of the Afghan civil war. Even there, it was mostly in strictly temporary deal-making between leaders who considered themselves sovereigns, not subordinates facing execution -- possibly by their own troops -- for treason. In wars between nations, it'd be just about unheard of IIRC.

Third, off-hand I can think of more assassins and would-be assassins that struck due to existing military conflict, differing ideology, or belief that their government otherwise was leading them down the wrong path than due to bribery.

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Taqwus:
Um, no.

First of all, RoTK was not, is not, and likely never will be an accurate warfare simulator. It's model of "on-the-battlefield" bribery is truly outrageous.

Aie! Bribery in RoTK was one of the worst game mechanics I've ever seen.

[Mortifer]

It was funny...Anyways bribery as a normal diplomatic option should be very good. [Not a battlefield bribery.]