We need to stop this "All or Nothing" War

[jdavis86]

So, I don't think there should be much debate about this. Peace mechanics should work better and certain non annexation peace treaties should be possible, even between faction leaders.

As it was in HOI3, the non annexation peace treaties are railroaded into the game. Which is sort of a sign of bad mechanics, if peace treaties can never result in the desired outcome on their own.

If we click the non historical focus button, we should be allowed non historical treaties and outcomes.

There are historical examples, anyway. Hence the railroaded ones in the game. (Vichy France, Balkans, Winter War).

And there was Brest-Litovsk, from another certainly total war. (Could you imagine the game trying to fashion a Versailles? Sheesh.)

I'm sure this will get worked out eventually. Seems like the AI just has to be willing.

I played a Poland game where the Germans got distracted, USSR invaded me in 39, and I basically conquered Russia with my 70 infantry divisions. The AI should be interested in a white peace at some point. Conquering Russia with infantry, no tanks, and a no air force in 1940 doesn't give me a better gaming experience, despite the end result .

 

[War_lord]

Having to spend 2 years rolling through Africa playing whack-a-Commonwealth-nation is dumb, if I've taken London and Paris, and neither the Soviets nor the Americans are in the war, the Allies should be willing to negotiate.

 

[CharlieFox]

Having to spend 2 years rolling through Africa playing whack-a-Commonwealth-nation is dumb, if I've taken London and Paris, and neither the Soviets nor the Americans are in the war, the Allies should be willing to negotiate.

In theory factions should surrender once there are no majors left in the fight. The issue seems to be that some of the commonwealth nations become majors...

 

[Mol]

In my Italian campaign the war lasted 19 years before I was able to end it. I was tired, but really wanted to learn and see how it all ended. Coming up with ways to invade UK and USA was the best, but after their surrender... I don't think Australia really wanted to become an atomic wasteland, an early peace deal would have satisfied me.

Here are some more ideas for peace deal rules:
1. Peace conference organized by what I can do, not to whom
This is not an option right now, is it?
I'd personally prefer to first choose an action (Take Land, Puppet, Liberate) and then choose from a list of countries, regions or states, instead of browsing through countries and checking what my options are with each of them. The list for each option could be pretty long and enable different choices (like puppet East Germany, West Germany, or just all of Germany if I have the points)

2. More peace deal options
It seems to me that what I can do during a conference is take land, puppet or liberate. Are there any more options?
How about:
- reparations (I control some of your civilian or military factories for a couple of years)
- demilitarized zones (like Rheinland in 1936; could disappear after time or when target country is attacked etc.)
- army size limit (you're allowed to exist, but your army has to be small)
- post-war occupation zones (historically what happaned to Germany; I keep my army here to ensure you and your neighbours behave; the zones could be released later as independents, given back to a country or annexed for Political Power)
- give land to (forcing someone to give their states to another country)
- forced military access, non-aggression pacts, etc.

3. Cost of a deal
I think land far away from mine should be more expensive to take in a deal than states really close.
From cheapest to most expensive: taking the war goal/core - taking land I have a border with - taking control of someone's colony - taking land from a self-governed country far away. Puppeting should be cheaper.
I'd prefer to see a Cold War world of alliances and political interdependance than four or five overextended blobs that would most probably quickly collapse in real world.

4. Early peace deal again
How much you get in a 'conditional surrender' deal could be tied to the war progress bar (75% in favour of my faction? Let me use 75% of the points I've earned so far to take stuff - the enemy's surrender is not unconditional and I probably have to give up on something, still taking a lot). Thuis would motivate me to fight on if I wanted to take more.
A losing side could try to end the war by giving concessions and sacrificing their already defeated allies.

 

[SUPERtwinky]

Having to spend 2 years rolling through Africa playing whack-a-Commonwealth-nation is dumb, if I've taken London and Paris, and neither the Soviets nor the Americans are in the war, the Allies should be willing to negotiate.

I disagree completely
What incentives do Canada and Australia have to surrender? Especially Canada. The Germans can't cross the ocean to get at them, why would they voluntarily give up the war when the Germans had no way to invade them. Why not keep fighting on and hope the Americans decide to intervene?

 

[KalypsoKirin]

I disagree completely
What incentives do Canada and Australia have to surrender? Especially Canada. The Germans can't cross the ocean to get at them, why would they voluntarily give up the war when the Germans had no way to invade them. Why not keep fighting on and hope the Americans decide to intervene?

*cough*
Try to avoid necroing old threads...
This thread is probably going to be locked, now.

 

[Secret Master]

Thread necromancy is generally not allowed around here. If the thread has not been active for more than a month, let it rest in peace.

Thread closed.