Age of History 3 - Peace treaty ideas

[Łukasz Jakowski 13,389]

Here in this topic you can write your ideas for a peace treaty.

 

It might work like that:
The war leader must have 100% war points and can make any demands.

There will be a limit to how many provinces can be annexed in a peace treaty.
It will depend on the size of the civilization compared to the civilization it is fighting against

 

If a civilization's war exhaustion is high, the ticking war score will increase faster.

The ticking war score will only increase for the currently winning side of the war.

 

 

 

 

 

[IKayzerI 158]

Actually, the peace treaty in the image looks good, but in addition to what's shown in the image, we should also be able to request "gold." For example, 300 gold for a 15% peace score, or 100 gold for a 5% peace score. Additionally, we should be able to gain prestige based on our war score. Another thing I'd like to see is our aggressive expansion penalty, based on our demands.

[JoJ_A 10]

-"I think that for the peace treaty you could have the complete annexation of a nation even if you have a smaller territorial size, if the nation is much larger than yours"

-"Have a way for you to demand a limitation of the army of the defeated nation or nations".

[muhoaga 129]

31 minutes ago, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Burada bu konuya barış anlaşması için fikirlerinizi yazabilirsiniz.

 

Şöyle işleyebilir:
Savaş lideri %100 savaş puanına sahip olmalı ve her türlü talepte bulunabilmelidir.

Bir barış antlaşmasına ilhak edilebilecek il sayısı konusunda bir sınırlama olacak.
Savaştığı medeniyetle karşılaştırıldığında medeniyetin büyüklüğüne bağlı olacaktır.

 

Bir medeniyetin savaş yorgunluğu yüksekse, savaş puanı daha hızlı artacaktır.

Saatli savaş puanı yalnızca savaşın şu anda kazanan tarafı için artacaktır.

 

 

I hope that the entire population of a state whose religion is converted does not suddenly convert their religion.

[Magnum 57]

1. Pay an amount of money in a determined time. Obviously the amount should be proportional to war, economy of the other country and time.

The other country could refuse to pay the money, so you would need to send soldiers or declare another war.

[Mov 107]

1 hour ago, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Here in this topic you can write your ideas for a peace treaty.

 

It might work like that:
The war leader must have 100% war points and can make any demands.

There will be a limit to how many provinces can be annexed in a peace treaty.
It will depend on the size of the civilization compared to the civilization it is fighting against

 

If a civilization's war exhaustion is high, the ticking war score will increase faster.

The ticking war score will only increase for the currently winning side of the war.

 

 

Giving provinces to a country that hasn't participated in the war.

[IKayzerI 158]

1 hour ago, muhoaga said:

I hope that the entire population of a state whose religion is converted does not suddenly convert their religion.

Of course not, only state religion will change. Just like eu4 force religion casus belli, while reformation. While provences religion will stay same and you will try to convert to your state religion.

[Mov 107]

35 minutes ago, Magnum said:

1. Pay an amount of money in a determined time. Obviously the amount should be proportional to war, economy of the other country and time.

The other country could refuse to pay the money, so you would need to send soldiers or declare another war.

Refusing to pay would be very cool

[qxz 622]

Here are a few additions I would love to contribute:

Consider implementing not only payement reparations, but also resource rights in the enemy territory. The winner does not have to control the provinces after the war ended, but the resources in the specified province will belong to the winner not the loser.

Demilitarization of certain provinces whereby the loser will be disallowed to enter specified provinces with their armies. This could be broken but will lead to an escalation in the form of war perhaps.

Diplomatic Concessions could be made by exploring multiple options such as forming alliances, engaging in cultural migration (the losers core population moves to the winner's provinces), religious co-operation (improving the relations between hostile states with different religion), and non-aggression pacts.

A temporary occupation zone whereby the winner will occupy the lands of the loser temporary perhaps for strategic positioning for a future war or for direct resource production/tax gain, and ceding back the lands after automatically.

Technology transfer where the loser is required to share one or more technologies with the winner nations who does not have the technology unlocked.

Establishment of diplomatic relations, ensuring the two or multiple nations have neutral relations rather than hostile. This can provide a direct pathway to alliances. 

Mutual defence agreements, whereby the nation swears to defend the other in a case of war involving a third party or external aggression. This could be in the form of treasury donations or direct involvement.

A forceful change in law structure for example, slavery banned or revoking the ability to colonise.

Edited February 28, 2024 by qxz

[achour 2 15]

Here's an idea :

if you have a core in a province then the province costs less war score

 

[achour 2 15]

Idea : if a province is your core then the cost for it is lowered

+ Brush painting in peace treaty

( Please ? )

[Outlawexperience 338]

2 hours ago, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Here in this topic you can write your ideas for a peace treaty.

 

It might work like that:
The war leader must have 100% war points and can make any demands.

There will be a limit to how many provinces can be annexed in a peace treaty.
It will depend on the size of the civilization compared to the civilization it is fighting against

 

If a civilization's war exhaustion is high, the ticking war score will increase faster.

The ticking war score will only increase for the currently winning side of the war.

 

 

Here are my ideas for possible new demands in the peace deal:

-If the enemy Civilization is in an alliance, then there can be a demand to remove it from their alliance, but if the winner Civilization is in an alliance, then it could force the loser civilization to join their alliance

 

-Demilitarization, we can choose how much we demilitarize an enemy Civilization by either raising their military upkeep if they pass the limit of units they shouldn't pass, this should depend on the warscore: for example if you have a low warscore the limit isn't harsh but if is it high then the limit is very harsh

 

-War Reparations: The time and number of money to pay for war reparations should also depend on warscore you have: if you have a low warscore, then the enemy civilization must pay a quick and small amount of gold, if you have a high warscore then the enemy civilization will pay a huge amount of gold for a long time

 

Here are my ideas for peace deal demands, I hope you read them and possibly add them 🙏

Edited February 28, 2024 by Outlawexperience

[Warnnexx 166]

I think it would good, that if AI wins a war they can create new countries at your territory. For example if Germany looses the winners can create a new country Bavaria or Rhineland. And the country that lost can decline the proposal.

[Rodak Polak 597]

In Polish:

1. Dotyczące warscore'a:
   • NAJWAŻNIEJSZE żeby przegrywający nie mógł w żaden sposób dyktować warunków (mógłby jedynie wysyłać wiadomość, że chce dostać propozycję pokoju, a strona wygrywająca albo odrzuci ten apel albo wyśle propozycję pokoju narzucając swoje warunki)
   • jeśli warscore wynosi 100%: przegrany nie może ani proponować ani wpływać na rozmowy pokojowe, jedynie może zaakceptować narzucony mu pokój
   • jeśli warscore wynosi 1-99%: zaproponować pokój może tylko strona wygrywająca, przegrany nie ma możliwości ani proponowania ani negocjowania pokoju. Może albo może przyjąć albo odrzucić propozycje i walczyć dalej w nadziei, że odwróci losy wojny
   • jeśli warscore wynosi równo 0% to obie strony mogą proponować rozmowy pokojowe
2. Dotyczące aneksji:
   • anektować można wszystkie prowincje, a nie tylko te, które są okupowane tak jak to było w AoH2
   • aneksja powinna być możliwa tylko w następującej kolejności:
     • najpierw prowincje powstałe w wyniku kolonizacji,
     • później prowincje, które nie są prowincjami core przeciwnika
     • następnie można anektować prowincje , które są prowincjami core przeciwnika, ale wg odległości od naszej stolicy (najpierw te najbliższe)
     • na samym końcu można zaanektować stolicę przeciwnika
3. Najpotężniejszym państwom powinno dać się odebrać mniej prowincji (bycie wielką potęgą powinno dawać bonus - przykład: załóżmy, że Anglia (ma 100 punktów rankingowych) wygrała wojnę z Francja (100 punktów rankingowych), ale Francja NIE JEST wielką potęgą, więc Anglia zajmuję 1/4 Francji. W tej samej sytuacji (Anglia ma 100 punktów i Francja ma 100 punktów), ale Francja JEST wielką potęgą, więc Anglia może zająć mniej, bo 1/5).

[MarerjhAdditionalAccount 38]

I personally like gaining small parts of defeated civilization rather than annexing all it's provinces. I think in earlier dates there should be negative modifier to the amount of provinces that can be annexed (due to hard administration). Main problem in AoH2 was fast snowballing.

If you want to do annexing like in AoH2, then I think player should be able to take only 50% of the provinces of defeated civilization, and 100% if he is 1.5 times larger.

[muhoaga 129]

4 hours ago, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Burada bu konuya barış anlaşması için fikirlerinizi yazabilirsiniz.

 

Şöyle işleyebilir:
Savaş lideri %100 savaş puanına sahip olmalı ve her türlü talepte bulunabilmelidir.

Bir barış antlaşmasına ilhak edilebilecek il sayısı konusunda bir sınırlama olacak.
Savaştığı medeniyetle karşılaştırıldığında medeniyetin büyüklüğüne bağlı olacaktır.

 

Bir medeniyetin savaş yorgunluğu yüksekse, savaş puanı daha hızlı artacaktır.

Saatli savaş puanı yalnızca savaşın şu anda kazanan tarafı için artacaktır.

 

 

Minority rights should be protected. If a minority is not able to be liberated through peaceful means or if a religion that is not your own has already been established in a country through previous agreements, measures should be taken to protect their religious rights in order to minimize assimilation. If assimilation and conversion to another religion is completed by about 80% in 10 years, then the same should be achieved in 40 years. In fact, the essence of this is to ensure that there is always a counterbalance in peace agreements. Especially in modern history, this would be a very positive outcome.

[Wayne23lololh 1,645]

The peace deal could have some extra features :

 

1. Military occupation. The victorious country could occupy some bordering provinces for a determined time. The occupation will cost according to the occupation time.

 

2. Limitation of the army. The country must not exceed the army size, or it would break up the peace treaty. Like Germany ad in the treaty of Versailles.

 

3. Disband alliance. The possibility to disband an alliance and make some countries not able to join or even make a military alliance.

 

4. War reparation. The defeated country must give an amount of money to the victorious country, in one time or for each month for a determined time.

 

5. The dominant country in a victorious alliance led the peace conference. Like this, the weak country couldn’t refuse the peace deal. 

 

6. To make peace deals, these countries must do a ceasefire, next make the peace conference, and then release the peace treaty. This could take weeks.

[Rodak Polak 597]

There should also be an option: reduce the opponent's maximum manpower by -10%

[Rodak Polak 597]

I think the option "Goverment change" should be split into two options:

• change ideology
• change the ruler (the winning side chooses the weakest ruler among the available rulers, just as it is with advisors)

Both options should improve our relations with the enemy after changing it

[Minemaster552 23]

It might be a bit too op, but it would be really cool if peace deals could change the civilization (E.g.: You defeated Rome and take a lot of their provs, but keep Italia, so you also convert them to Italy (It is very stylistic/rp-focused, i know))

It would also be cool, even if added later, there was a option for player-controlled peace deals, where in a way you can do everything, including giving and taking provinces with your opponent's war score and setting your opponent's demands to you (again very rp-focused)

[Rodak Polak 597]

35 minutes ago, MarerjhAdditionalAccount said:

I personally like gaining small parts of defeated civilization rather than annexing all it's provinces. I think in earlier dates there should be negative modifier to the amount of provinces that can be annexed (due to hard administration). Main problem in AoH2 was fast snowballing.

If you want to do annexing like in AoH2, then I think player should be able to take only 50% of the provinces of defeated civilization, and 100% if he is 1.5 times larger.

I agree with you. In AoH2 After becoming the greatest power, the game actually lost its sense because everyone could be eaten without any problems in one peace treaty

Edited February 28, 2024 by Rodak Polak

[Rodak Polak 597]

There should also be this option:

• when you have 50% warscore or more and and another country attacked you during the war you should be able to make the white peace but on condition that your enemy, whom you have just defeating, will help you in a defensive war and declare war on the only country that attacked you from the back. If more than one country attacked you, you only can to choose one

This should be more accessible and easier to negotiate than demanding vassalization, because the defeated one still retains his independence

[Mov 107]

45 minutes ago, Wayne23lololh said:

The peace deal could have some extra features :

 

1. Military occupation. The victorious country could occupy some bordering provinces for a determined time. The occupation will cost according to the occupation time.

 

2. Limitation of the army. The country must not exceed the army size, or it would break up the peace treaty. Like Germany ad in the treaty of Versailles.

 

3. Disband alliance. The possibility to disband an alliance and make some countries not able to join or even make a military alliance.

 

4. War reparation. The defeated country must give an amount of money to the victorious country, in one time or for each month for a determined time.

 

5. The dominant country in a victorious alliance led the peace conference. Like this, the weak country couldn’t refuse the peace deal. 

 

6. To make peace deals, these countries must do a ceasefire, next make the peace conference, and then release the peace treaty. This could take weeks.

Province occupation would be very cool, with a more complex economy system It would be surely a great mechanic

[Денис Живков 753]

As usual, there should be a military rating. The military rating is influenced by things like revanchism. Revanchism is the desire of some people to take revenge and take back the provinces. It should also be an excuse for war.

  Wars should not be declared just like that. "I declare war on you because I just need your territories." Then many major powers will become even bigger, and then what's the point of playing for some small country (then it makes sense to add coalitions, but not those when countries rush to ask for your help, fighting against a super-powerful power). It is necessary that there be a casus belli. so that the players can understand where the threat is coming from. In addition, there are functions in rulers that allow you to wage new wars without tracking the windows of all countries. It will also be very interesting, but what if any country is fighting several wars at once. Then can two so-called warring countries be considered allies because they have one common enemy?

_______________________________

Должен быть варскор, как и обычно. На варскор влияют такие вещи как реваншизм. Реваншизм - некоторые желание взять реванш и вернуть провинции. Это должно быть и оправданием войны. 

Войны не должны идти просто так. Я тебе объявлю войну потому что просто хочу твоих территорий. Тогда многие большие державы будут становиться еще больше и тогда какой смысл играть за какую-либо маленькую страну (тогда имеет смысл добавить коалиции, но не такие которые кидают страны тебе, как спасательный круг, когда воюют против сильной державы). Нужно что бы были казус бели. что бы игроки могли понимать откуда ждать угрозы. Так же черты правителей есть которые могут позволять о новых войнах без мониторинга окна всех стран. Так же очень интересно будет, а что если какая-либо страна будет вести несколько войн сразу. Тогда можно ли считать две так скажем совоюющие страны союзниками, потому что у них один общий враг?

[GalacticCakes 171]

Ideas for peace demands:

- Army limitation or zero army (it can be broken but the relationship between the countries will decrease)

- Demand Law (revolution)

- Demand Reform (revolution)

- Promote a leader (revolution and Wars)

- Release new state (example: federal republic of Germany/socialist republic of Germany)

- leave the war (you leave your allies alone against the enemy, You can abandon the war as long as the enemy accepts it. When you leave the war, you will lose much of your good relations with your allies.)

If there are foreign winners, then:

They will not accept a unfair peace treaty.

The defeated nation could need to be divided between the winners