Surrender option

[Doughnuts]

i like the thought but they should not be sent to beige, the nation who attacked them shouldn't be able to attack again within 72 hours, but others should be able to do so, as you will find during wars people will abuse it to get beige to hide banks or to restock.

last war i saw someone who was besieged about 15 or 16 days long by his own alliance then was sent the bank from said alliance so it could not be taken,  so this would be abused 

[J Kell]

Forcing a nation that's winning to accept surrender is bad, but making a form in which someone can present terms for a surrender to see if the other side will accept is good!

Edited November 24, 2018 by Balish
Scarface called me out

[Sir Scarfalot]

7 hours ago, Balish said:

Forcing a nation to accept surrender is bad, but making a form in which someone can present terms for a surrender to see if the other side will accept is good!

Forcing a nation to be defeated is good though. Otherwise you can either keep down an opponent forever, or they can just stubbornly refuse to be defeated forever; either way it's not really fun.

[Zei-Sakura Alsainn]

Honestly, just do another thing Nationsgame did. 

Allow each person in the war to offer peace to the other with certain terms. As in, specific amounts of money and resources. It'd also make extortion that raiders do a little easier, and they could still pull a fast one on the unaware by telling them to offer the payment through trade not the peace window. 

Have people get a notification when its offered that details the contents of the offer, and then accepting or not accepting is the same as accepting peace right now. You don't like the offer, decline and make your own, etc. 

If you're going to make it possible to force a surrender acceptance though, make it attached to a timer at least. Like, 3 days. If shit goes south you'll be pinned in one, and there's 2 more days, plenty of time for the people hitting you to do damage without beiging you, and also enough time for you try and coordinate with allies so you can use a double buy. 
Furthermore, make it so that beige time from surrendering does not stack. You can surrender 8 wars at once, you will only get beige for the first one that goes through, though.

Congratulations, you can now smack somebody around without it taking most of a week, you can get smacked around without being doomed for most of a week, AND you even time your surrender with a double buy, so that you can time another buy, or even another double buy when you're about to exit you're 2.1 days of beige time. 

This enables the side on the backfoot a fighting chance, makes it more fun, if less pragmatic for the victors, but still leaves the victors with a deserved advantage for beating back their opponents. Once you knock somebody clean out and they surrender, if you spring on them as they leave surrender beige, they will have at absolute most, 4 days buy. Enough to be dangerous with proper coordination, but not enough to make you repeat a full teardown of a max-milled nation.

It may sound like that would help whales, but this wouldn't have even saved Grumpy if it were a thing during this war. Most of the people i, at 19 cities, have been updeclaring, would've... honestly not bothered. Alot of them stopped fighting back much because it was wasting resources, and even with this system, it would've just been them clawing for a little extra damage while we padded ours. And if it did save Grumpy, that would be because of the incompetence of their enemies, and the game should not protect incompetence just because it benefits a whale. IQ's effective updeclare range isn't really changed by this, it's what, 22 cities i think someone said right now? If you could spear them down when they were maxed, this would just give you more tanks to pad stats on.

 

Now, to wait for somebody to tell me i didn't cover an issue they have with what is a frankly a pretty damn good compromise. 

 

[J Kell]

4 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Forcing a nation to be defeated is good though. Otherwise you can either keep down an opponent forever, or they can just stubbornly refuse to be defeated forever; either way it's not really fun.

Well clearly... I wasn't implying that a forced defeat after a number of victories should be erased.  I was just simply stating that the losing nation shouldn't be able to force a surrender.
I'll edit my original post so confusion can be halted.

[Sir Scarfalot]

9 hours ago, Balish said:

Well clearly... I wasn't implying that a forced defeat after a number of victories should be erased.  I was just simply stating that the losing nation shouldn't be able to force a surrender.
I'll edit my original post so confusion can be halted.

Gotcha, I agree then.

[Sir Scarfalot]

13 hours ago, Akuryo said:

Honestly, just do another thing Nationsgame did. 

Allow each person in the war to offer peace to the other with certain terms. As in, specific amounts of money and resources. It'd also make extortion that raiders do a little easier, and they could still pull a fast one on the unaware by telling them to offer the payment through trade not the peace window. 

Have people get a notification when its offered that details the contents of the offer, and then accepting or not accepting is the same as accepting peace right now. You don't like the offer, decline and make your own, etc. 

If you're going to make it possible to force a surrender acceptance though, make it attached to a timer at least. Like, 3 days. If shit goes south you'll be pinned in one, and there's 2 more days, plenty of time for the people hitting you to do damage without beiging you, and also enough time for you try and coordinate with allies so you can use a double buy. 
Furthermore, make it so that beige time from surrendering does not stack. You can surrender 8 wars at once, you will only get beige for the first one that goes through, though.

Congratulations, you can now smack somebody around without it taking most of a week, you can get smacked around without being doomed for most of a week, AND you even time your surrender with a double buy, so that you can time another buy, or even another double buy when you're about to exit you're 2.1 days of beige time. 

This enables the side on the backfoot a fighting chance, makes it more fun, if less pragmatic for the victors, but still leaves the victors with a deserved advantage for beating back their opponents. Once you knock somebody clean out and they surrender, if you spring on them as they leave surrender beige, they will have at absolute most, 4 days buy. Enough to be dangerous with proper coordination, but not enough to make you repeat a full teardown of a max-milled nation.

It may sound like that would help whales, but this wouldn't have even saved Grumpy if it were a thing during this war. Most of the people i, at 19 cities, have been updeclaring, would've... honestly not bothered. Alot of them stopped fighting back much because it was wasting resources, and even with this system, it would've just been them clawing for a little extra damage while we padded ours. And if it did save Grumpy, that would be because of the incompetence of their enemies, and the game should not protect incompetence just because it benefits a whale. IQ's effective updeclare range isn't really changed by this, it's what, 22 cities i think someone said right now? If you could spear them down when they were maxed, this would just give you more tanks to pad stats on.

 

Now, to wait for somebody to tell me i didn't cover an issue they have with what is a frankly a pretty damn good compromise. 

 

This... almost sounds reasonable, my only issue with it is that it could be better and perhaps more simply accomplished by the following:

1. Beige happens when war expires, based on resistance
2. Beige lasts for 60 turns (stay with me here)
3. Beige does not stack. Instead, it merely refreshes to 60 turns if the beige nation gets beiged again.

That way, once someone's knocked out, they have at most 5 days buy, so they won't have full airforce at the end of their beige. Furthermore, even if the opponent is careful with their attacks, by declaring a war and blockading exactly one turn before the nation gets beiged, then the nation will be pinned for all but a single turn. Thus they're mostly pinned, but not inescapably so.

Your way would work tho, I'm not saying it wouldn't.

[Zei-Sakura Alsainn]

43 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

This... almost sounds reasonable, my only issue with it is that it could be better and perhaps more simply accomplished by the following:

1. Beige happens when war expires, based on resistance
2. Beige lasts for 60 turns (stay with me here)
3. Beige does not stack. Instead, it merely refreshes to 60 turns if the beige nation gets beiged again.

That way, once someone's knocked out, they have at most 5 days buy, so they won't have full airforce at the end of their beige. Furthermore, even if the opponent is careful with their attacks, by declaring a war and blockading exactly one turn before the nation gets beiged, then the nation will be pinned for all but a single turn. Thus they're mostly pinned, but not inescapably so.

Your way would work tho, I'm not saying it wouldn't.

The difference is mine eliminates sitting on people for 5 days. Which is itself complained about because in being such an effective strategy it's hopelessly boring. 

And, no, with yours, they would not have at most 5 days build. This assumes that all their wars expire at the same time. If this is not the case, a stagger of as little as a single turn at the right time of day could give them a full military build of 6 days, with only 1 extra turn of beige. This aside from the fact that 5 days is a max build of everything but planes anyway, and very nearly a complete reset to before the war started. This aside from the fact that in various instances one may be able to buy as the wars, or the first war expires, and be maxed 3-4 days into their beige time. 

The point of mine is to specifically avoid any possibility of you being maxed unless you were never zeroed to begin with. It's also to make wars be fought faster and hopefully more intensely. With yours they get sat on for 5 days, then spend 5 more doing nothing but building to nearly or possibly max military. With mine, even if you upped it to 3 days, making coming out with 5 days build possible but 4 much easier to achieve, you would spend 3 days getting sat on, and then 3 doing nothing, at maximum 6 days, versus 10, of nothing. 

It is more complex, yes, but that's alot to do with it adding new mechanics, which i'd view as another positive to it.

 

[Micchan]

Every lost MAP (MAPs you should get but you don't because you are already at 12 MAPs) are tansformed into 1 resistance lost, so if I have 12 MAPs and I do nothing for 5 turns I lose 5 res

If you are fortified this doesn't work and you don't lose res

You sort of surrender to your enemy hoping to reach beige, if you try to fight back it's harder to be beiged

What do you think?

Pirates likes this idea 

[Chief Wiggum]

9 hours ago, Micchan said:

Pirates like this idea 

[Radoje]

I agree with Auctor and Sir Scarfalot on this topic.

Besides, it would be abused to hell in the end and the actual change is pointless and would require unnecessary changes that wouldn't benefit being rebalanced anyways.