Suing for Peace Needs to be More Meaningful

from Stardock Forums
Perhaps a UP resolution, or maybe just the default in the game, but suing for peace needs to be more meaningful. It is entirely annoying to sue for (or be sued for) peace to have it broken on the next turn. What's the point of that? It essentially removes an entire aspect of the game--peace treaties and negotiations.

The most obvious way to make it meaningful is have a 24 month (or however long) period where you cannot break the peace you sued (they sued) for. It can only be broken by the _other_ party (the one that forked out the goods and services to get peace in the first place).

Cheers,
/ds
229 views 5 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
This is related to a bunch of other threads that have been going on.. the alliance peace cheese tactic among them.

Carielf has said that he's working on it, hopefully this will be addressed at the same time.
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
I think CariElf is a she. ;p

But I agree that how alliances make peace (or actually DON'T make peace, as it stands) needs fixing.
Siege of Centauri
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top
Ok. I see what you mean.

Yes. I think there should be more severe repurcusions for attacking an empire you just made peace with. Perhaps instead of a hard coded time limit, maybe your relations with ALL other empire should be PERMANENTLY damaged. After all, if you can't be trusted to keep a peace treaty, even your allies may start to wonder if you can be trusted to keep ANY treaty...
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
SHE is working on it.

:P