To much war-war not enough jaw-jaw in GC2.

from GalCiv2 Forums
The alliance system in GC2 is broke in my view.The designer brags about different ways of winning the game but with the current system present, it is impossible, unless there are only 2 empires in the game.War and extermination is the only way (ala the MOO series) at the moment.

As soon as the alliance research enters the game, it's eternal wars until the end of the game.You try to get peace with an empire,he declares war the next turn because of the confused intertwined alliance system,dam annoying.The only way to peace is if you bribe your way with every dam Empire(AND MINER) in the game at once.I never have that much cash or tech.And the A.I will never have the skill to get out of war either.

The Alliance system desperately needs changing, imo, if we want culture wars to stand a chance ala civ4..Other games with more subtle alliance systems allow only one alliance per game between empires and a separate peace deal with an enemy brakes the alliance.The E.U series from Paradox has the best multiple alliance system in any game.They have an alliance leader, the only player who can invite other nations into the grand alliance, when he makes a peace deal with an enemy, all the junior alliance members are at peace.Or lesser members of the alliance can make seperate white peace deals,stopping the declare war next turn nonsence from happening.

I hope this is looked at.I hope GC2 is more than just a war game.Even Civ4 has this war madness corrected.
16,267 views 14 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
I'll agree that making peace with an alliance needs to work better in GC (not to mention if you're a member of an alliance as well), but I don't think the situation is as bad as you make it sound.

I've won cultural victories (can't do that if you're at war with anyone), technological victories, and alliance victories (with 6 AI major races still in the game!).
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
I play with all 10 races on a large map with many miner races.The treaty bar has a sea of red lines on it.You can't see the miners treaty bar but that would be the same.The A.I just can't get out of war even when their economys are dead, because of the alliance system.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
I play with 9 races plus myself as well. It's true that once an AI alliance starts fighting another AI alliance, they'll never make it out of war until at least one of the alliances breaks up (usually by one player surrendering). I still spend most of my game time out of war.
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top
Hmm. Have not had this problem. Playing Large w/ 9 + minor I find it farly easy to get the culture win. Alliance is a bit more difficult than in GC I but not all together impossible. I play a slow out the gate strat that allows the AI to get all the planets they want as long as I have 4 to 5. I let them spend the time and effort developing them while I reasearch up through Cult Dom. Then flip them when they already have a booming economy.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yeah, i can spend the game out of war also, by never entering an alliance.The A.I doesn't have this luxury and it is being killed because of it, so we (the human) get a massive advantage.

The A.I guys from CIV4 knew this,and have got the balance right.That is why they only allowed one alliance each empire,not multi alliances.An Alliance is ment to be a benefit, not an avoidance.The most sound strategy for human players is to avoid it in GC2.Sounds broke to me.

I would like to see a defensive pact option for GC2 too.
Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top
So just set it up so you can negotiate both a seperate peace and an alliance peace.

Basicly like in hearts of iron 2 -- also for seperate peace there should be a permanet flag so the alliance war doesnt drag them in again.

But I agree I do see it as being a little broken.
Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top
it really does suck fighting an alliance. when you sign a peace treaty it needs to be with the entire alliance not just one race. also there needs to be something that keeps playes (both AI and human) from peace treaty, delcare war, peace treaty. declare war. maybe even a meter that determines the length of the peace before your allowed to anahilate the pathetic race we all love to do this to.
Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top
I support the introduction of a real "Peace Treaty" diplomatic concept.
Basically, instead of merely asking for "Peace" you ask for a "Peace Treaty", that is a clearly defined period of time during no war can take place. Of course this Treaty can be broken but there should be penalties : First, it should be harder to get Senate approval to declare war. Second, if war is declared in violation of a Peace Treaty, the agressing race should suffer penalties (the harshness could depend on factors like ethical alignment for instance) : Morale, Diplomacy, Relationships, Influence, Status in UP, etc.
Reply #9 from Stardock Forums Top
Maybe there should be more than one type of alliance? perhaps logistics, tech and financial support w/o the mandaory jump in and support option would work almost as well as the threat of drawing in others? certainly the AI could be tuned to apply negative points to the liklyhood of engaging in war if some potential target had an alliance based on logistics support - a bit like US-Israel
Reply #10 from Stardock Forums Top
I agree with Kort, a Peace Treaty that's a Peace Treaty instead of a cease fire would be good, if it's not too late to add.
Reply #11 from Stardock Forums Top
Peace Treaty of some sort would be good. But I like Steevodeevo's idea of expanding alliances to include other forms of aid other than the jump in and fight way more. Putting both ideas into the game would even be better.
Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top

I don't know if we can fit peace treaties in at this stage.

However, we are changing alliances to behave as mutual defense treaties. 

Reply #13 from Stardock Forums Top
Frogboy, care to explain the difference? I've got a few ideas as to what the differences could be, but I was wondering what your target is.

For the base of my examples, let's consider races A, B, and C, where A and B have a treaty and B and C have a treaty. Given the current state of alliances, a war between myself and A, even if there's no combat going on, will trigger both alliances, which is how we wind up with entire galaxies at war. I've had war declared on me, then been at war with 4 more races the next turn due to a chain of alliances.

So, would mutual defense treaties be:
1) treaties that only trigger if combat occurs. So, if A attacks one of my ships, the treaty with B is triggered, but the one between B and C won't trigger until there's combat between B and myself.

2) treaties that only trigger if *I* attack. I can sit and defend all day long, but until I make an aggressive move, the treaty between A and B doesn't trigger, and likewise, the treaty between B and C doesn't trigger until I make an offensive move against B.

3) as treaties that trigger depending on who declared war on who. If A declares war on me, then it's not defensive, so the treaty wouldn't trigger.

Option 1 is the least abusable, but also the most likely to get us back into big wars because of chains of treaties. It would still be much better than current alliances.

Option 2 would be my choice, though it most suits my play style, so that may be a factor of why I like it. It can be abused by carefully making sure that you're only attacking player A until player A is no longer a factor. You'll be getting hit by two races at a time, but you can work your way all the way up the chain without bringing the entire chain into the war.

Option 3 is also abusable, as for me, at least, I don't have problems coercing the AI to declare war on me. At least not the first time. After I build up a military big enough to swat the first AI, I might have problems getting the second one to declare war.
Reply #14 from Stardock Forums Top
i'd just be happy with some algorithm that A only accepts a peace treaty if ally B will accept a peace treaty - or - if A accepts a peace treaty it automatically breaks alliance with B.

as a player you can then just break your own alliances to avoid war.