Age of History 3 - Peace treaty ideas

[Денис Живков 753]

On 3/1/2024 at 12:19 AM, Yahya said:

It definitely make the game stand out of all paradox games because none of them have it 

And the problem with all of those games is that it gets boring after you become powerful (you can conquer anyone)

It will be challenging that the bigger you get the harder for you to expand. And not just for you but if in ai get too powerful all small states around it start allying with each other and with you or simply asking neighbouring powers to guarantee  Thier independence 

And that will also put a use to (guarantee independence) future 

Or if you create an alliance Other will try to counter it by allaying 

Which will create some big world wars in the late game

And it wouldn't require creating new futures just good use the existing ones 

And the bigger and stronger a faction gets the more area this mechanic covers like kinda what happened with the french, mongols and ottomans

I think you are a genius, but I published this idea shortly before you

[Денис Живков 753]

On 3/1/2024 at 12:19 AM, Yahya said:

It definitely make the game stand out of all paradox games because none of them have it 

And the problem with all of those games is that it gets boring after you become powerful (you can conquer anyone)

It will be challenging that the bigger you get the harder for you to expand. And not just for you but if in ai get too powerful all small states around it start allying with each other and with you or simply asking neighbouring powers to guarantee  Thier independence 

And that will also put a use to (guarantee independence) future 

Or if you create an alliance Other will try to counter it by allaying 

Which will create some big world wars in the late game

And it wouldn't require creating new futures just good use the existing ones 

And the bigger and stronger a faction gets the more area this mechanic covers like kinda what happened with the french, mongols and ottomans

I think you are a genius, but I published this idea shortly before you

http://www.ageofcivilizationsgame.com/topic/239175-many-community-ideas/?do=findComment&comment=372461

 

[Matvey 252]

If various organizations are implemented in the game, then the possibility of military joining them is needed. Let's say the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire forces you to join the Empire. Or a communist/socialist country, when changing its ideology under a peace treaty, can include the losing country in the Comintern. Likewise with the Shogunate, Caliphate and so on.

[Rodak Polak 597]

8 hours ago, yeetboi said:

Countries should be able to annex all territories no matter how small/big they are. Please do not make it like before, the game needs change and it needs lots of it. Additionally, I suggest the addition of demilitarized zones which can be specified in a peace treaty. All armies in demilitarized zones are automatically disbanded and troops cannot be recruited in them, which are then removed if the country is at war. Also please make countries automatically capitulate/agree to have peace treaty if 75-80% of all core provinces are occupied. This will make battles far less tedious and more realistic.

Capitulation system is pointless since we have ticking warscore. And we should be able to annex less than in AoH2. Unless you want your gameplays to last 30 minutes and maybe you want annex whole Russian empire by Free City of Kraków 😕

[yeetboi 16]

4 hours ago, Rodak Polak said:

Capitulation system is pointless since we have ticking warscore. And we should be able to annex less than in AoH2. Unless you want your gameplays to last 30 minutes and maybe you want annex whole Russian empire by Free City of Kraków 😕

??? Why is capitulation useless? You want to manually capture every single province like in AOH2? That is also not realistic as no country would last that long. You can have capitulation to make a country surrender and then rely on war score to annex/take territories in the peace treaty, which is what most games do, why do you want it to be worse than before? There is no reason why should be able to annex less, given the game has 2-3x as many provinces as before. That is a terribly artificial way to raise the game time and just makes the game far more tedious capturing double or triple the provinces and not even being able to take them all in a peace treaty, meaning you have to not only capture many more provinces, you would have to do it again if the game decides your civ is too small, this is a horrible mechanic. And why do you all keep giving these extreme examples? Do you think that would ever happen in normal gameplay for a country with one or two provinces to overpower another with thousands? If the game AI is balanced properly and the combat system is properly scaled to favor larger/more developed countries that will never happen unless you cheat, if someone actually managed to do what you said without cheating they deserve to annex all of Russia. Plus if you have allies in the war ofc you cannot annex everything as allies are considered. Also you fail to understand why I made those suggestions, as a modder of the game and someone that used to play a lot of mods, the fact that you couldnt annex all the provinces as a smaller country broke a lot of scripted scenarios in AOH2. For example you could almost never make a working civil war scenario especially if it is a multisided one, just because one side had a few more provinces the other factions in the civil war could never fully end it as the bigger faction/faction with just a few more provinces could not fully be annexed and you had to script tons of events to account for that.

[agah 17]

to turn the colony into a vassal or puppet. Taking certain production resources of the country or taking the income it earns. Demobilizing or limiting its army. Obtaining military access permission. Unilateral defense pact (that is, when there is an attack on us, it joins the war). Changing the state religion.

[Wayne23lololh 1,645]

I think that religion converting could be disable in modern time (2020's).

[Diego 121]

35 minutes ago, Wayne23lololh said:

I think that religion converting could be disable in modern time (2020's).

or atheism could be used as a religion instead idk

[Rodak Polak 597]

13 hours ago, yeetboi said:

??? Why is capitulation useless? You want to manually capture every single province like in AOH2? That is also not realistic as no country would last that long. You can have capitulation to make a country surrender and then rely on war score to annex/take territories in the peace treaty, which is what most games do, why do you want it to be worse than before? There is no reason why should be able to annex less, given the game has 2-3x as many provinces as before. That is a terribly artificial way to raise the game time and just makes the game far more tedious capturing double or triple the provinces and not even being able to take them all in a peace treaty, meaning you have to not only capture many more provinces, you would have to do it again if the game decides your civ is too small, this is a horrible mechanic. And why do you all keep giving these extreme examples? Do you think that would ever happen in normal gameplay for a country with one or two provinces to overpower another with thousands? If the game AI is balanced properly and the combat system is properly scaled to favor larger/more developed countries that will never happen unless you cheat, if someone actually managed to do what you said without cheating they deserve to annex all of Russia. Plus if you have allies in the war ofc you cannot annex everything as allies are considered. Also you fail to understand why I made those suggestions, as a modder of the game and someone that used to play a lot of mods, the fact that you couldnt annex all the provinces as a smaller country broke a lot of scripted scenarios in AOH2. For example you could almost never make a working civil war scenario especially if it is a multisided one, just because one side had a few more provinces the other factions in the civil war could never fully end it as the bigger faction/faction with just a few more provinces could not fully be annexed and you had to script tons of events to account for that.

Now warscore is gained by battles, province occupation and ticking warscore. This means that the war can be won without even entering enemy territory. So far it looks as if every war could be won in a minute

[yeetboi 16]

50 minutes ago, Rodak Polak said:

Now warscore is gained by battles, province occupation and ticking warscore. This means that the war can be won without even entering enemy territory. So far it looks as if every war could be won in a minute

I see what you mean more clearly now but I believe capitulation is still needed, because if you are in a situation where the enemy army is spreading all over your country and occupying territories faster than you can raise armies while they themselves have only a few core provinces left that can still be quite annoying even with ticking warscore as it does not guarantee automatic total capitulation in a short enough amount of time especially with the enemy occupying a bunch of your provinces quickly behind your lines as they do a lot in AOH2 which would probably reduce the ticking warscore effectiveness as well. I am also concerned with how fast the ticking warscore ticks, because if it is too slow it is not enough to replace capitulation, and will only work if it is really fast but that might break balance so in the end capitulation is probably the safest bet. Also I agree with the war can be won in a minute thing, but I think the biggest issue is the time scaling and not the combat system, it seems at max time speed a year is only 4 or 5 seconds, and it makes wars way too fast and easy, and I think that is the problem. In games like HOI4 with more realism the max time tick speed is only 1 day/sec, whereas that is the SLOWEST speed for this game, which goes to show how unbalanced the time ticking is. I believe the maximum time tick should be capped to level 2 or 3, or else the game is way too easy, allowing you to simulate mass conquest campaigns and battles in 2 to 3 minutes at the fastest speed, with research and army raising all happening in a few seconds.

[SauseMaster 7]

Maybe in the technology tree, the player can unlock technology increase the demands they can make in peace treaties. Here are some examples. "Increased Territorial Concessions" which would allow the player to annex more land bordering their civilization for less war score. "Unite Ethnic Lands" would allow the player to annex lands that have the same culture as their civilization for much less war score. "Annex Religious Groups" would allow the player to annex lands with the same religion as their civilization for less war score. "Demilitarized Zone" would allow your civ to create a zone where the losers troops cannot enter. "Restrict Army" would allow you to put a limit on the losers troops count or troop type. "Occupied Zone" would allow you to place your own civ's troops in the losers civ's lands (maybe only in a certain zone). There would also be technologies that are upgrades to the before stated techs, such as "United Ethnic Lands II" which would do the same thing but better.

Another thing I thought of, in other to unlock "Unite Ethnic Lands" you would need to unlock "Nationalism", in order to unlock "Annex Religious Groups" you need to unlock "Religious Crusading", etc etc.

[SauseMaster 7]

6 hours ago, Diego said:

or atheism could be used as a religion instead idk

It would be called Secularism probably i think you should be able to convert it but would cause unrest (like with every religion)

[Outlawexperience 338]

On 2/29/2024 at 8:55 PM, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Video about the peace treaties

 

 

Hello Lukasz, the peace treaty looks great 👍, it is good and has good demands and mechanics, I have two suggestions that could make it better in big alliance wars:

-add "remove to alliance" demand, the war leader will choose a loser civilization and remove it from their alliance

-if the winner Civilization that puppets another one is in an alliance, then the puppeted civilization automatically joins that alliance, if they declare independence, they can either choose to stay in the alliance (lord won't need to invade it) or leave the alliance (lord will invade it)

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Outlawexperience said:

Hello Lukasz, the peace treaty looks great 👍, it is good and has good demands and mechanics, I have two suggestions that could make it better in big alliance wars:

-add "remove to alliance" demand, the war leader will choose a loser civilization and remove it from their alliance

-if the winner Civilization that puppets another one is in an alliance, then the puppeted civilization automatically joins that alliance, if they declare independence, they can either choose to stay in the alliance (lord won't need to invade it) or leave the alliance (lord will invade it)

No, should be disband alliance button (demand) for all loser nations. Why only one country? be more profitable to fully destroy countries cooperation.

Second suggestion is good, no pretension I have

 

[Wayne23lololh 1,645]

The option to create vassals and to use the same flag as the suzerain,and also works for colonies. This would fix the problem with the lack of flags for alternate colonies, like Italian Algeria or French Brazil.

[MamZupęMlecznąNaObiad 12]

There could be an option to force a nation you are attacking to embrace "religious intolerance". So for example the nation you're invading is muslim, and you are also muslim, but the nation has embraced some tolerative policies towards other faiths. By demanding "religious intolerance" the nation will be forced to make it's policy towards other religions stricter. It would be a nice option for roleplaying as some theocracies/religious zealots.

[BasaraMestre 49]

On 28/02/2024 at 19:35, Łukasz Jakowski said:

Ocupar província

Warscore da batalha

Marcando o Warscore

 

Your Deadbeat Mercenary

[FlaWer 4]

1. Release territory:

Like in AOC2 where you can "Release a vassal", which would be the same. Not much but I like roleplaying. And also another way to weakening the nation lost as they've lost the benefits of their territory as such. With the benefit of it being less cost on victory points and remove the hustle of having to free the country yourself by annexing the land.

[martiprro 2]

I don't know if this has much to do with peace treaties, but I propose an idea of adding a mechanic of transferring provinces between vassals (to fix borders that are not very nice to see for example).

[Tdrr 27]

I think ideology should influence the peace deals as well. For instance, democratic nations should be more likely to create sister republics as opposed to directly annexing the entirety of a nation. Meanwhile, authoritarian and fascist nations will be more likely to directly annex all territory in a peace deal.

[Outlawexperience 338]

On 3/3/2024 at 4:55 PM, yeetboi said:

I see what you mean more clearly now but I believe capitulation is still needed, because if you are in a situation where the enemy army is spreading all over your country and occupying territories faster than you can raise armies while they themselves have only a few core provinces left that can still be quite annoying even with ticking warscore as it does not guarantee automatic total capitulation in a short enough amount of time especially with the enemy occupying a bunch of your provinces quickly behind your lines as they do a lot in AOH2 which would probably reduce the ticking warscore effectiveness as well. I am also concerned with how fast the ticking warscore ticks, because if it is too slow it is not enough to replace capitulation, and will only work if it is really fast but that might break balance so in the end capitulation is probably the safest bet. Also I agree with the war can be won in a minute thing, but I think the biggest issue is the time scaling and not the combat system, it seems at max time speed a year is only 4 or 5 seconds, and it makes wars way too fast and easy, and I think that is the problem. In games like HOI4 with more realism the max time tick speed is only 1 day/sec, whereas that is the SLOWEST speed for this game, which goes to show how unbalanced the time ticking is. I believe the maximum time tick should be capped to level 2 or 3, or else the game is way too easy, allowing you to simulate mass conquest campaigns and battles in 2 to 3 minutes at the fastest speed, with research and army raising all happening in a few seconds.

You forgot that ticking warscore will be based on how much provinces you control, ai will try to take them back before you get any of that ticking warscore

[Tdrr 27]

Communist Nations should be more likely to chose the "demand change of government" option (simulating the desire of most communist nations to spread communism)

[Wayne23lololh 1,645]

1. In creating a civilisation for the vassal, the default flag is the country's flag.

2. Add military occupation

3. Remove colonial laws for country who have it.

4. Liberate a civilisation

5. Separate a country : the same civilisation, but with different ideology

6. Limit the opponent's army to X men.

[Rodak Polak 597]

6 hours ago, Wayne23lololh said:

3. Remove colonial laws for country who have it.

I like it very much. For x years (like it was with France when First Colonial Empire colapsed and the started Second Colonial Empire after 100 years; or something like that, I don't know French history very well)

[Nisnac 1]

Maybe when you ad slavery  peace treaty Idea: you can then force the country to ban slavery and then not be able to change this law for 50 years