I’m not talking about adding EU4 stuff. I’m simply talking about changing it so that the expiration only occurs if you directly attack the party you’ve aligned with.
G
G
It's super strong and it will change diplomacy severely for Civs that like to play peaceful and want everyone else to play peaceful as well.I’m not talking about adding EU4 stuff. I’m simply talking about changing it so that the expiration only occurs if you directly attack the party you’ve aligned with.
G
It's super strong and it will change diplomacy severely for Civs that like to play peaceful and want everyone else to play peaceful as well.
I can attack anyone, you can attack anyone (we can't attack each other) and we're protecting each other from attacks. And at the same time it's not a DoF(!!!).
What other tools do peace loving Civs have? Global peace accords?
Well yeah of course you can attack each other, sorry about my wording. Although what's the point of a DP if you're just going to attack him anyways, other than to backstab?You can attack each other. Lower-ranked civs often request DP's. And it's easy to have the option of DPs even if you're peaceful, as long as you build a decent army. Now if you choose to go skimpy, then you're much less likely to benefit from this... and you'd be about as screwed in the current system, as well.
Well yeah of course you can attack each other, sorry about my wording. Although what's the point of a DP if you're just going to attack him anyways, other than to backstab?
Gaining time. You cannot trust the civ you signed DP with, but other civs might be more reluctant to attack you. That's better than nothing.Well yeah of course you can attack each other, sorry about my wording. Although what's the point of a DP if you're just going to attack him anyways, other than to backstab?
Well, if you are in a triangle of DP, attacking each other is a bad idea since it is a two against one, so it is possibly more efficient than a DoF.You can attack each other. Lower-ranked civs often request DP's. And it's easy to have the option of DPs even if you're peaceful, as long as you build a decent army. Now if you choose to go skimpy, then you're much less likely to benefit from this... and you'd be about as screwed in the current system, as well.
I think that's a good idea.I’m not talking about adding EU4 stuff. I’m simply talking about changing it so that the expiration only occurs if you directly attack the party you’ve aligned with.
G
Well, if you are in a triangle of DP, attacking each other is a bad idea since it is a two against one, so it is possibly more efficient than a DoF.
The AI backstab frequently. But they don't necessarily have it in mind when they sign a DP.
But don't we want DP to be different than DoF? The diplo game isn't that diverse, and right now the DoF and the new DP sound very similar.Gaining time. You cannot trust the civ you signed DP with, but other civs might be more reluctant to attack you. That's better than nothing.
But don't we want DP to be different than DoF? The diplo game isn't that diverse, and right now the DoF and the new DP sound very similar.
I like this idea.
Right now I really don't see any point in signing defense pacts with anyone unless they pay me because my partner will just declare war on someone and annul it THEN my enemies have their opening to declare war.
I'm going to add this, but as an option within the CBO.
G
Sounds good. Let us know how it goes with your testing, in terms of the unwanted complications some have theorized will occur.
One question I have is how this will work with vassalization and runaways, in terms of a vassal being a de facto DP already, on top of which a powerful civ is likely to have a DP or two as well. If you could comment on that as well, it'd be appreciated.