P2K Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 When someone wins a war they could limit the nation to certain things but only to a point. You could limit their military maximums or stuff like that. Maybe even make this go as far as to when an alliance beats another alliance they can make the peace treaty so the whole alliance could only build so much of something. for a certain amount of time. But every alliance that worked together to beat the losing alliance/alliances would have to agree on everything in the treaty. They would only have so much time to decide on what after the war is completely over. This way they can't just screw the alliances by just waiting & waiting. Now this could have many many different ways to go about it. We would have to do much talking and thinking about this and figure out what exactly could be limited and to how much. I mean you can't make an alliance not be able to have any military at all. Also when a world war has started every alliance on each side would somehow declare on witch side they are on in game. This way when it comes treaty time the exact alliances are known. Maybe could make it so only the alliance/alliances who were the aggressor could be the ones to have the treaty that would limit them. The alliances that are defending can not have a limit treaty put on them because they are only defending them self. Because they were not the aggressor they didn't really do anything wrong so why should they be punished if beaten. If you could just start a war and beat an alliance then be able to limit them all the powerful alliances would do this to the less powerful. I think this should only apply to alliance wars or maybe even just world wars. Now how many alliances would it take to be considered a world war? I have no idea but another thought to think about. Again all of this is just an Idea and there is multiple points to this that can be changed maybe even not put into effect at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Not sure if that will work though, the members can always leave the alliance, build up the military they desire, then re join.And also it give the victor too much leverage and advantage. So I think is not a good proposal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P2K Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 Okay so if they leave the alliance the treaty would still apply to them for the same amount of time. Or the alliance that defeated them would just destroy them for trying to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P2K Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 And also it give the victor too much leverage and advantage. So I think is not a good proposal Like I said this would have to have much thought and you could only limit certain things. Also those certain things could only be limited so much. Like I also said this could be something that only works when we have a world war not just a little alliance war. It could be put so that there has to be a minimum number of nations involved either in total or on each side before this could be used. Maybe it could be optional. There could be a vote on it from both sides before during or after the war. Maybe a vote on it from the rest of Orbis none of the nations involved could vote on it. I like this We could have a Orbis wide vote on world wars that would decide whether the winning alliance/alliances could put a treaty if the aggressive alliance/alliances loses. again only the aggressive side of the war would have a treaty that limits anything put on them. This would keep the powerful alliances from taking advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Just let the alliances settle it. If an alliance wants to beat the shit out of someone and tell them they can't build missiles or something then it's their job to enforce it. Don't let the game do it for them. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Also, please use carriage returns. Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aisha Greyjoy Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 I think any game-enforced mechanisms will be subject to abuse. I think the rule of the jungle (i.e. community norms) are the way to settle this. Quote Duke of House Greyjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caillou Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 If the game forced negotiations like this then the political side would be much more boring, also politics aren't always clear in terms of defender and aggressor. One of the most recent wars was named "The War of Debatable Aggression" because no one wanted to claim being the aggressor. I'm sorry but I am strongly opposed to this idea. Quote [17:17:58] <&Ashland> I will give you hops if you say this phrase: [17:18:13] <&Ashland> "Man, I really wish Rose had allied BoC a couple months ago when we had the chance instead of picking Vanguard." [17:20:16] Man, I really wish Rose had allied BoC a couple months ago when we had the chance instead of picking Vanguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Specter Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 this is just a bad idea, anything involving politics occurs on the owf, irc or embassies that are hosted on alliances off site forums. We dont need a game mechanic for this. Quote Amidst the eternal waves of time From a ripple of change shall the storm rise Out of the abyss peer the eyes of a demon Behold the razgriz, its wings of black sheath The demon soars through dark skies Fear and death trail its shadow beneath Until men united weild a hallowed sabre In final reckoning, the beast is slain As the demon sleeps, man turns on man His own blood and madness soon cover the earth From the depths of despair awaken the razgriz Its raven wings ablaze in majestic light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmad Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 I don't like this idea, there is already a kind of spoils of war in place for that. But I do have a suggestion that is somewhat similar...people should be able to demand something in a peace offer. (money or some resource) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Specter Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 I don't like this idea, there is already a kind of spoils of war in place for that. But I do have a suggestion that is somewhat similar...people should be able to demand something in a peace offer. (money or some resource) This already happens as well, they are called reps or in some cases demands, and this also occurs on irc and on alliances off site forums through embassies. Quote Amidst the eternal waves of time From a ripple of change shall the storm rise Out of the abyss peer the eyes of a demon Behold the razgriz, its wings of black sheath The demon soars through dark skies Fear and death trail its shadow beneath Until men united weild a hallowed sabre In final reckoning, the beast is slain As the demon sleeps, man turns on man His own blood and madness soon cover the earth From the depths of despair awaken the razgriz Its raven wings ablaze in majestic light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P2K Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 All very good points. I might have went to far with this one. but I personally like the idea of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.