Peace conference: I can't stand when I get involved in a war, get some allies and after 5 - 10 turns not be able to do a thing due to riots: Now I have 2 choices - lose tremendous productivity and try to keep the population happy or make peace and have everyone hate me for it for all time . (Or I could just make no alliances at all, and let my opponent enlist the help of all other global powers against me ). Rather we could have a peace conference. One civ who is sick of the war (getting beat, can't handle the war riots, 3rd party that wants to resume trade or is sick of seeing friends tear each other apart) sends a request for a peace conference @ the beginning of his/her turn (this could be the human player or an AI civ). Warring parties decide to attend or not (though not attending could hurt your reputation). Next an arbiter is selected (if a third party called the conference it is him, other wise the one with best reputation). Next everyone throws 2 types of things into the "pot" ("on the table"), what they are willing to give and what they want to get (your advisor could be present to say you are asking for too much/giving too little or that you could get more/give less). These "bids" are invisible to all but the arbiter. The arbiter takes this table and attempts to fill the gimmies with the concessions. When he comes up short, he can ask certain parties to ease their demands and/or other parties to contribute more. Doing so will make the arbiter less liked by the party getting less/giving more, while giving in to an arbiter's request will increase your reputation (though starting out asking for too much and giving too little will hurt your reputation). This attempt deal, request some give more/get less goes on until someone "walks out" or a workable deal is hit upon. If at some time a player doesn't like the way it is going, s/he "walks out" and takes a reputation hit. If a settlement is agreed upon, the arbiter's score and/or reputation is boosted (though he may have made some enemies in the conference by asking too much / giving too little to certain parties). To prevent abuse (starting a war, and requesting a peace conference right away hoping others will decline it, hurting your enemies reputation even more by requesting a conference to an enemy that just attacked you - he already took a rep hit, and he probably doesn't want peace right away) a few measures could be placed in: 1) you must ask for a conference at the beginning of your turn (you can't do any attacks) 2) a war must be X (5?) turns old before a conference can be requested by a warring party and Y (2 or 3?) turns old for a 3rd party request. 3) relative military strength is only a small part in determining what a civ is willing to give/get, technology level and original borders compared to current borders are much more heavily weighed 4) The AI is usually willing to give back captured cities and wants back his/her cities (all in exchange for something: gold, resources, luxuries, etc) and expects the human player to do the same (if you are involved in a war of conquest, peace conference is probably not what you want) 5) when a MPP draws someone into the war, it is assumed that an alliance is formed between these partners 6) if a combatant has 2 allies not at war with each other, all 3 are considered allies to each other 7) peace conferences must include all allies as defined in (5) and (6). For example: imagine 7 civs: Romans, Zulus, Germans, Egyptians, Americans, British and Indians. Zulus have MPP with Romans and Germans Americans have MPP with British and Indians Americans attack the Zulus (claim Zulus keep crossing into their territory), MPPs make it Zulus, Romans and Germans vs Americans, British and Indians After 2 or 3 turns, the Egyptians (who may want to resume trade on a normal planet) can call for a conference (though this could anger the warring factions, especially the side that is winning) After 5 turns anyone could request a peace conference. This way what began as a minor border dispute doesn't have to last 20 turns and devastate the world (if the warring parties don't want it to). this idea is rather complicated, and still has some issues, so I'd like to know what you think.