I has seen a thread about сombat and I has decided to create about diplomacy. What do you think?
What new features would you like in diplomacy?
- Thread starter unmerged(144721)
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
One thing I would like (but I'm not sure how it could be implemented), would be a round table peace treaty option. this happened so frequently at the time, peace treaties involved many countries, not just the two fighting. It would be cool if this could be implemented, but I admit I don't really have an idea how it could be.
I'd also like if you could have the option of 'turn over cores of [Poland] as a peace option. so lets say you are playing as France. Russia released Poland some time ago. You win a war against Germany, and now you can force them to turn over their Polish majority provinces to Poland.
this would make things like forming Yugoslavia historically possible.
I'd also like if you could have the option of 'turn over cores of [Poland] as a peace option. so lets say you are playing as France. Russia released Poland some time ago. You win a war against Germany, and now you can force them to turn over their Polish majority provinces to Poland.
this would make things like forming Yugoslavia historically possible.
I'd like to be able to partition part of a nation to a third nation as per selection and not province controll
RedRalphWiggum
I too thought of this concept when it is possible to convoke the Congress. For example the Treaty of San Stefano after Russian-Turkish war has not been recognized to some powers, and they have organized the congress in which the Berlin contract has been made (they cut Bulgaria).
I too thought of this concept when it is possible to convoke the Congress. For example the Treaty of San Stefano after Russian-Turkish war has not been recognized to some powers, and they have organized the congress in which the Berlin contract has been made (they cut Bulgaria).
Exactly. That's what I was thinking of, that and the formation of Yugolslavia. I think the Belgian war of independence sort of fits it too.
Trading provinces in peace. Even if you win a war often they swapped land at times. It's like you give me this piece and X amount of money and I'll give you peace and this small piece of land here.
That was already in V1 and subject to large manipulations by human players. AI valued cores and neighboring provinces extremely so it would even trade some worthless colonial provinces in Africa by giving away valuable mines or silk/gold somewhere as long as it wasn't core. Or trading it 1 province for 3 or 4 non-core provinces.
Not sure how to fix that because I do think some type of land trades should be in game... mostly for nations which have cores of other nations and don't want to go to war to defend constantly and to even colonial borders. Perhaps AI will only accept trades for provinces with equal or higher populations as this usually indicates somewhat the value of the province. So then no more trading empty African provinces...except for other empty provinces- although could still trade populated Asian ones though it is a bit more difficult to manage doing that very often there.
And the Paris peace conferences post-WWI. And the Congress of Berlin. And the Congress of Vienna just before the game starts.
They were really important in the period being covered, but again I don't really see any viable way they could be implemented short of a "Game pause - Negotiations minigame starts" sort-of thing. Which wouldn't really gel with the rest of the gameplay...
Though, probably, it is possible to do without the Congresses, in this case the principle of game will be such:
At a full victory (for example, Russia occupied Turkey) borders at the treaty of peace will be taken into account as at the joint decision of the Congress. After any full victory against large power (when it is occupied completely) at the conclusion of the treaty of peace the won party (Russia) always takes into account the factor of foreign powers. Very much it is not pleasant to them, that near to them there is a potential threat. The Great Britain always conducted a politics of balance of powers in Europe: if someone became larger and stronger, it necessarily put there the nose. I suggest to recollect Franco-Prussian war. Germans perfectly were at war and could continue easily war till full occupation. However Bismarck understood, that it will be very aggressive also to many countries it it is not pleasant, also war needs many money. Hitler is absolutely other history, he was not going to finish the total war with signing the peace agreement (he hoped, that in the end is nobody it will sign
). Vicky is an epoch of diplomacy.
At a full victory (for example, Russia occupied Turkey) borders at the treaty of peace will be taken into account as at the joint decision of the Congress. After any full victory against large power (when it is occupied completely) at the conclusion of the treaty of peace the won party (Russia) always takes into account the factor of foreign powers. Very much it is not pleasant to them, that near to them there is a potential threat. The Great Britain always conducted a politics of balance of powers in Europe: if someone became larger and stronger, it necessarily put there the nose. I suggest to recollect Franco-Prussian war. Germans perfectly were at war and could continue easily war till full occupation. However Bismarck understood, that it will be very aggressive also to many countries it it is not pleasant, also war needs many money. Hitler is absolutely other history, he was not going to finish the total war with signing the peace agreement (he hoped, that in the end is nobody it will sign
). Vicky is an epoch of diplomacy.
No, that wasn't in V1. You're thinking in peace, when I said peace I meant through a peace treaty in war. The Mexican American war is a prime example. They ceded us the land we, we wound up paying them an indemity for it.
Maybe a mojority of the 8 great powers should have to vote yes or no on all peace treaties than involve mroe than 2 great powers?
I don't know if the AI could cope with that though.
I don't know if the AI could cope with that though.
I think Paradox should focus most of their efforts on expanding diplomacy features, as it will greatly benefit all their games and especially this one. Ultimately how much different will Victoria II be from Victoria I aside from inherent benefits in the new engine without at least one major new feature? In HOI3 they tried many new major features, if they are scaling that approach back, then diplomacy should be the focus.
The ultimate goal should be that regular peace mechanics can provide that which would need an event in Victoria I. After all, I see diplomacy as the end game. What is the point of building a great economy if not to build a great miltary? What is the point of the military if not enact your diplomatic agenda? Nothing is more frustrating than winning a major war and not being able to exact at least historical results.
I guess I am recommending that diplomacy is THE new feature, rather than any specific facet.
The ultimate goal should be that regular peace mechanics can provide that which would need an event in Victoria I. After all, I see diplomacy as the end game. What is the point of building a great economy if not to build a great miltary? What is the point of the military if not enact your diplomatic agenda? Nothing is more frustrating than winning a major war and not being able to exact at least historical results.
I guess I am recommending that diplomacy is THE new feature, rather than any specific facet.
Excellent post! I very much hope, it not late to discuss diplomacy still.
I think the "improve relation" option is too easy!
I mean after a war where you killed hundreds of thousands, you only have to spend around 10 diplomats and some cash to be best pals in the world with your former enemy.
Also it should be scaled so that a great power can't be in good standing with all other great powers.
So if France improves it relationship with Russia, it should have a negative effect on its Ottoman relationship.
So to make this easier i think Vic 2 should implement the "feels threatens by x,y,z." and "views x,y,z as natural enemies" system from EU3: In Nomine
I mean after a war where you killed hundreds of thousands, you only have to spend around 10 diplomats and some cash to be best pals in the world with your former enemy.
Also it should be scaled so that a great power can't be in good standing with all other great powers.
So if France improves it relationship with Russia, it should have a negative effect on its Ottoman relationship.
So to make this easier i think Vic 2 should implement the "feels threatens by x,y,z." and "views x,y,z as natural enemies" system from EU3: In Nomine
How about a slight reduction in BB by including other nations in the peace talks.
For improving relations, I'd like to see something like the spy stuff in HOI3 where you assign diplomats to a country and over time those diplomats raise relations between the countries rather than magically getting a random increase.
For improving relations, I'd like to see something like the spy stuff in HOI3 where you assign diplomats to a country and over time those diplomats raise relations between the countries rather than magically getting a random increase.
There should also be a default neutral position... only wars, encroachment in sphere of influence, and alliances or disputed cores should lower default position past neutral.
It always annoyed me in V1 that you had to spend full diplomacy merely maintaining relations with 1 neighbor... even with 2500 prestige there was no way to not let relations with some neighbors become hateful especially if you spend any diplomacy on colonies or anything besides improving relations.
It always annoyed me in V1 that you had to spend full diplomacy merely maintaining relations with 1 neighbor... even with 2500 prestige there was no way to not let relations with some neighbors become hateful especially if you spend any diplomacy on colonies or anything besides improving relations.
Ok- that would be different and might actually work although in the case of US-Mexico War the purchase price was basically dictated by the US and was dirt cheap... just under US $330 million in current dollars for a huge amount of territory. The later Gadsden Purchase was for almost the same sum but for 1/15 the amount of land. It could merely be claimed as a form of light war reparations or to salve the pride of the defeated side.
Are you advocating the ability to not only outright annex 3 territories(or more if cores or unciv) plus the purchase of additional territories at a discounted price in the peace treaty negotiations?
Some things I'd like to see most:
The ability to "liberate" a country like in EU and make them a satellite.
The ability to give land to said satellite in a peace negotiation. E.g. Germany destroys Russia in a war and liberates the Ukraine. In a second victorious war I should be able to force Russia to give provinces to the Ukraine.
I wish we could fund rebels in another country. Like, be able to give them 5 thousand men in order to bring their regiment up to strength.
Be able to just click on a province in the peace screen. If I'm demanding ten provinces in a war I hate having to keep searching for those ten every time I demand them.
I think alliances for revolting nations needs to be fixed. If the UK wanted to ally with the C.S.A. they would have jumped at the offer.
The ability to "liberate" a country like in EU and make them a satellite.
The ability to give land to said satellite in a peace negotiation. E.g. Germany destroys Russia in a war and liberates the Ukraine. In a second victorious war I should be able to force Russia to give provinces to the Ukraine.
I wish we could fund rebels in another country. Like, be able to give them 5 thousand men in order to bring their regiment up to strength.
Be able to just click on a province in the peace screen. If I'm demanding ten provinces in a war I hate having to keep searching for those ten every time I demand them.
I think alliances for revolting nations needs to be fixed. If the UK wanted to ally with the C.S.A. they would have jumped at the offer.
This is really important actually... all sorts of historical cases or close calls like UK and CSA. This would be even better if embargo or some type of trade boycott could be possible so there is an option short of war but even always going to open war is better than revolting nations being usually completely squashed. I remember playing as Italy I would have to intervene every time in Hungarian revolt to ensure the partition but at the cost of much prestige and BB for me. At least getting an Alliance with Hungarians and a Casus Belli that way should lower the prestige and BB effects of DoWing.