New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering

geoschmo · #1 July 1st, 2002, 02:41 AM

We had a long drawn out discussion on this forum a while back about whether surrendering to an ally or not is realistic. Basically it depends on your point of view. The important question isn't really whether or not it's realistic, but whether it affects game play too drastically.

One suggestion that came from that discussion I would definetly support is a hard code change to allow you to refuse the surrendeer of a race. The biggest problem with enforcing the house rules against this is that the empire receiving the surrender is often an innocent victim and yet get's tainted by the actions of the surrendering player. By allowing them to refuse to accept the surrender of another empire this problem would go away.

Geoschmo

StarJack · #2 July 1st, 2002, 06:03 AM

One suggestion that came from that discussion I would definetly support is a hard code change to allow you to refuse the surrendeer of a race.

A Very Good idea!

ZeroAdunn · #3 July 1st, 2002, 08:24 AM

Surrending to an ally is realistic. Just don't think of it as surrending but realising that you cannot defend nor support your people properly but realising that another can.

dogscoff · #4 July 1st, 2002, 09:37 AM

Surrendering could be balanced by making it less of an immediate benefit. For example, newlay acquired ships could be unavailable to receive fresh orders for a turn or two. New tech levels could be dripped through to the receiving empire over the course of several turns. This would give other empires the chance to seize some of the surrendered booty before the receiver had a chance to consolidate it.

Oh, and I heartily agree with the option to refuse a surrender.

Baron Munchausen · #5 July 1st, 2002, 06:49 PM

You know, with almost every other diplomatic option you do need both parties to accept. Treaties, other than declaring war, trades, gifts, even tribute has to be formally accepted. I don't see why MM can't let you choose to 'accept currender' or refuse it.

[ July 01, 2002, 18:00: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

mottlee · #6 July 1st, 2002, 07:34 PM

How about in a fight having the "Enmy" if beaten give up! rather than distroy the whole fleet

Repo Man · #7 July 1st, 2002, 08:40 PM

While not really addressing the topic directly on point, the concept of surrendering could be greatly expanded in SEIV. It might take some serious recoding, but I can wish.

The best gaming model for a surrender that I have ever seen is from Empires in Arms. It�s a non computer game for the most part, unless Aide De Campe is being used as a supplement.

A surrendering power would offer a surrender.

The winning power would then counter offer with either a conditional or unconditional surrender. A conditional surrender had to be accepted by the loser, while an unconditional surrender could be rejected.

For the terms of a surrender, there were two tables, one more severe than the other. An conditional surrender allowed two choices from the lesser table, while an unconditional surrender allowed three choices from either table.

Following a surrender, there was a mandatory peace imposed.

The in game effect was to allow for multiple wars, wars of revenge, and carefully designed peace treaties which added a lot of flavor to the game. Such a feature could help eliminate the 1000 years wars between brotherly empires, a part of SEIV which makes me pull my hair out.