quote:
Originally posted by Nyx:
Some of these issues oversimplify the situation. Let's say that you demand your ally make peace with a third race and they agree to do so. What if the third race is unwilling to end the war? Should your ally be forced to surrender if that is the only peace the third party is willing to accept?
Or what about this scenario: Most of us move first in single player games. What if you demand the Krill make peace with the Abbidon, and in their turn they do so. Then the Abbidon go and declare war again on the Krill. When it comes around to your turn you'd think the Krill agreed to your terms and then never acted on them.
Enforced diplomacy can have all kinds of negative side effects too. Like when one player chooses a permanent effect in return for a temporary one. For example, give me some technology and I'll give you a peace treaty. Then right after I receive your technology I declare war on you again. Is this any better a situation? Do you honestly think the AI can handle this level of diplomacy?
Well they shouldnt of put the depth of diplomacy in the game in the first place should they. The only problem im getting in diplomacy is when im allied to race a, race a
got a trade treaty with race b, who i am at war with ,i ask race a to stop trade treaty with race b they agree, nothing happens.
Re: Diplomacy woes...again...1.19
Threaded Mode