Diplomacy: Unconditional surrender

[baboune]

Hi,

Just wondering what it does.... I was playing a game and had to stop the Maath from attacking me. I "surrendered unconditionaly", next turn they accepted my offer and I was at peace....

It looked like nothing else happened.

Is this another strange AI diplomacy behavior? Or is somethng supposed to happen? Or I am missing something?

[Sarnat]

I think it's you give him 10% of your income or something. Kinda silly because traditionally unconditional surrender has meant that you give up and the enemy conquers your territory etc.

[baboune]

Well, not much of an asnwer so far.

45 persons read the post one reply.

After unconditional surrender, there is an enforced peace between me and the maath empire. Does anyone know how long that last?

The diplomacy is completely broken and they are not even going to fix it.

[Patton1942]

Originally posted by baboune
Well, not much of an asnwer so far.

45 persons read the post one reply.

After unconditional surrender, there is an enforced peace between me and the maath empire. Does anyone know how long that last?

The diplomacy is completely broken and they are not even going to fix it.

1.) It lasts untill one of you declairs war on the other.
2.) Spouting that diplomacy is broken, when you don't even know what the basic terms mean is folley and ignorance of the first degree. Grow up.

Now, any other quesitons? Or are you just going to assume that which you don't understand is broken :rolleyes:

[baboune]

That makes a lot fo sense thank you.
So an enforced peace lasts until one of us attack the other... Yes.. quite logical.. Never would have thought about it like that... this really is "enforced"...

you really brought a light to my kingdom... we poor babounians applaud your wisdom.

[Patton1942]

Originally posted by baboune
That makes a lot fo sense thank you.
So an enforced peace lasts until one of us attack the other... Yes.. quite logical.. Never would have thought about it like that... this really is "enforced"...

you really brought a light to my kingdom... we poor babounians applaud your wisdom.

Hey, no problem. Sorry if I got a bit snippy. Its the heat. Oh yeah, about the enforced peace, bit. I suppose the reason its not physically enforced in MoO3 is that there is no way to actually enforce the peace. Its not like the senate acts as the united nations in RL, or anything. The fact that whether or not your even in the senate is random pretty much precludes that possibility.

Anyway, if you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

[StormHawk]

Not everyone who reads the forums will post an answer. Lots of lurkers. When someone answers you and it isnt what you want to hear, you dont insult them ("Well, not much of an asnwer so far" - I would consider that insulting to me)

despite my loathing for sarcastic remarks....

This is really for paton1942 and anyone else who matters..

I think enforced peace lasts a certain amount of time. (I cannot remember how much time though). You also agree to give tribute for the same amount of time. 5% and 10% for conditional and unconditional surrender, respectively. I think conditional surrender should be a tribute thing, while unconditional surrender should be a giving up of terratory. But it isn't, it isn't designed to do that, so it isn't broken. It just doesn't work they way you want it to.

[EEBaum]

Post-patch, turn on the help text or right click... all diplomacy options to propose now tell you what they do.

[Patton1942]

Originally posted by StormHawk
This is really for paton1942 and anyone else who matters..

I think enforced peace lasts a certain amount of time. (I cannot remember how much time though). You also agree to give tribute for the same amount of time. 5% and 10% for conditional and unconditional surrender, respectively. I think conditional surrender should be a tribute thing, while unconditional surrender should be a giving up of terratory. But it isn't, it isn't designed to do that, so it isn't broken. It just doesn't work they way you want it to.

Thanks. I never accept peace treaties from the unworthy anyway, so I don't really pay much attention to them.

Anyway, I think they work fine as described. It makes sence to me, I mean, how would you decide what territory to give up? Offers and counter-offers are limited in this diplomacy system. THere's no haggling, just an offer, a counter offer, then yes or no.

Still, its better than many I've seen. (like MoO2: Here, have this crappy tech, now lets be trading partners, research partners and oh yeah, a non-aggression pact. All on the first turn we met.)

[baboune]

Ok. This makes sense. I will try to check the encyclopedia and/or help text.

I will also look for some sort of tribute.

Thank u.

[baboune]

I am using megamod v5. I get no help via right clicking on a diplomatic option (basically says something like #4011ELKCC). I think it is a known problem.

Encyclopedia -> nothing. No imformation on surrenders.

Enforced peace length can be very short. I had an enforced peace last for 1 turn and the empire dowed me again. (After saying relations were improving).

When surrrendering unconditionaly, I saw a tribute being given to the empire I surrendered to, and it seemed like 10% (I did not look at the exact numbers, just saw there was a tribute being paid around 10%).

So far it is not much...

I hope they make the code available... someday...

[ILIKEDMOOB4THIS]

My $0.02 is that a better term is: Vasslage. If we are sticking to RL analogies, vassal states pay tribues. Countries that unconditionally surrender are usually asked to disarm, and other penalities are imposed on top of that. Sometimes, territory has to be given up as well.

Subsequently, the defenders of MOO3 could lighten up on the defense. The game is not perfect, and not everybody is going to agree perfectly with every single little itty bitty design decision. Personally, I thought MOO3 was a discount shelf quality game. Poor UI, poor AI, and plenty of inconsistencies. After the patch, I would say the game has improved a lot :). I still have questions and maybe even suggestions, but I am going to ask my questions in another thread to see if it happens to be that I just managed to overlook something.

In conclusion, in any game as complex as MOO3, it should not be strange that some problems do not become obvious until a sufficently large enough mass of id^H^H players have used it. And that is my soap box message for the day. :p

[Patton1942]

Originally posted by ILIKEDMOOB4THIS
My $0.02 is that a better term is: Vasslage. If we are sticking to RL analogies, vassal states pay tribues. Countries that unconditionally surrender are usually asked to disarm, and other penalities are imposed on top of that. Sometimes, territory has to be given up as well.

Well, I would normally agree, but in the case of a game like this, how would you decide what territory to give up? Who would enforce the disarmament terms? Stuff like that.

Originally posted by ILIKEDMOOB4THIS
Subsequently, the defenders of MOO3 could lighten up on the defense. The game is not perfect, and not everybody is going to agree perfectly with every single little itty bitty design decision.

Oh give it a rest. Just becuase someone likes the game, doesn't mean they think its perfect. I like the game. Is it perfect, hell no. Could it use work? Sure. Will we post in support of a game we like, of course. Its human nature to try to make people understand your point of view. Thats all. Its not like, I'm attacking people personally. Well, not many people anyway. :confused:

Originally posted by ILIKEDMOOB4THIS
Personally, I thought MOO3 was a discount shelf quality game. Poor UI, poor AI, and plenty of inconsistencies. After the patch, I would say the game has improved a lot :). I still have questions and maybe even suggestions, but I am going to ask my questions in another thread to see if it happens to be that I just managed to overlook something.

Well, just so long as you know that your OPINIONS do not make facts. Anymore than mine do. ;)

If you have questions, I'll personally do my best to answer them.

Originally posted by ILIKEDMOOB4THIS
In conclusion, in any game as complex as MOO3, it should not be strange that some problems do not become obvious until a sufficently large enough mass of id^H^H players have used it. And that is my soap box message for the day. :p

Agreed. My opinion is that this game was made overly complex to discourage micromanagement was a horrible idea. Its made even simple seeming bugs difficult to pin down. There are entire sections of old code left in the game, little snippets of <deleted by Rantz> features. Stuff like this only confuses issues and makes for headaches.

[/MY soapbox for the... thread... :p]

[ILIKEDMOOB4THIS]

Originally posted by Patton1942
Well, I would normally agree, but in the case of a game like this, how would you decide what territory to give up? Who would enforce the disarmament terms? Stuff like that.


Now that I think about it, they could make an unconditional surrender the same as losing the game. You unconditionally surrender to somebody, they take over your empire and you lose. Or they could make it so that all the military queues are locked, emptied and cannot be used unless the surrender agreement is broken. Meanwhile, all existing ships, orbitals and soldiers for that player could be automatically and irreversibly forced to be set for scrapping. Plantery defenses could also be forced to be scrapped or removed. Perhaps the scap AUs could even be given to the player accepting the surrender.

Subsequently, under such terms, an uncoditional surrender would be as good as having lost the game. No army, no defense, cannot rebuild, it is as good as lost.

In conclusion, I think the cease fire, armstice and tribues could all be included as items that can be exchanged or demanded. There is already an option for exchaging tech and planets. I am guessing that the biggest headache in this idea may be getting the AI to use it and avoiding letting human players abuse the AI with it.

[Ron_Lugge]

Originally posted by Patton1942
Agreed. My opinion is that this game was made overly complex to discourage micromanagement was a horrible idea. Its made even simple seeming bugs difficult to pin down. There are entire sections of old code left in the game, little snippets of <deleted by Rantz> features. Stuff like this only confuses issues and makes for headaches.

[/MY soapbox for the... thread... :p]

This game wasn't made complex to discourage micro; it was made complex because its fun that way. (Lets remember, Alan's ideas of 'Rules you can hold in your head' and the rest of the universes is different.)

[Beamup]

Originally posted by Ron_Lugge
This game wasn't made complex to discourage micro; it was made complex because its fun that way. (Lets remember, Alan's ideas of 'Rules you can hold in your head' and the rest of the universes is different.)

Read the first post of Econ 101. To wit:

Originally posted by TomHughes
For my part, I decided the best way to ease the micro manager into macro management as the game progressed would be to create a planet development/economic system so vast…so intricate… that the micro manager would THANK GOD he could delegate some of those tasks to the AI as the number of planets he controls reached into the hundreds.

Yes, this game was made complex to discourage micro.

[vosperdw]

What you say about tribute being tied to unconditional surrender makes perfect sense - except that several times I have seen tribute listed as an option in the diplomatic "Gift" OR "Exchange items" list! I have never surrendered to anybody.

My callis belli with the Orions is very bad, so I looked for this option - and now it is not there. What's going on?

[black_panther]

Can someone put a link to patch???
Well, diplomacy is a bit buggy but good. I hate when I can't get AI to exchange items no matter how hard I try. Or fact that most of wars are fought until extermination, AI never accepts my peace offers (wel, 99% of time it won't)

[vince904]

Given unlimited time space & manpower, this is how I'd have handled unconditional surrender.

1. No point in making it the same as surrender in Moo2, that's what the New Game option is for.

2. Unconditional surrender applies not just to the empire been surrendered to but to all its allies too.

3. All territories conquered by you since the start of the war (defined as the turn after the last turn you were at peace with everyone) are restored to their previous owner. A (single) new empire is created to accommodate all conquests which have no surviving previous owner. All your former territories occupied by your enemies remain their property.

4. All planets occupied by races you are at war with are handed over to them. Mixed race planets are awarded to the race with the largest population on planet. In the event of a tie, planet goes to the empire with the highest victory point score. If this is tied, planet becomes independent.

5. All fleets become the property of the empire with the nearest fleet. In the event of a tie, the fleet is awarded to the empire with the highest victory point total. If this is tied, fleet is scrapped.

6. All your discovered techs become available to the empire surrendered to and to the enemy alliance member with the highest victory point total (where this is a different empire)

7. All your orbitals, spys and ground units are scrapped. Build queues are emptied. No new military units (including colony ships) can be built for 4 turns after surrender goes into effect.

8. Your imperial (not planetary) bank balance (if positive) is split among the enemy alliance in proportion to their to their victory point totals. All imperial income in excess of maintenance for the next 4 turns is likewise transferred to your enemies. Tax rates cannot be changed for these 4 turns. For the following 20 turns 10% of imperial income is awarded to your enemies.

This would give you an interesting obstacle to overcome on the path to your manifest destiny.

v

[Warprat]

If we take a look at some "real life" examples, maybe there are some good answers there.


WWI, Germany surrenders unconditionaly, is forced to destroy it's forces and pay war reparations. The reparations build ill will, Germany builds weapons on the sligh, twenty years later we have WWII.

WWII, Germany and Japan (Racial Hatred) surrender unconditionaly, are forced to disband what little forces they have left, but are not forced to pay reparations. Instead, they are helped to rebuild. Result, both are now allies, with racial hatred towards the Japaneese neutralized. Both nations have only self defense forces but are economic powerhouses.


Warprat ;)

[John JayEye]

Warprat: I'd have to look for the World War 1 solution, if there were a choice. The World War 2 one (not counting the part of Germany that the former USSR took over) was like giving them a reward for starting the war. We helped rebuild Japan and Germany, the enemy, while England, our ally, was still rationing up to the 1950s, and was still blighted by "pillboxes" and bomb shells into the 1970s.

If I start the war, I can be magnanimous about what I demand for stopping my attacks. If someone else starts the war, and I kick the snot out of him, he'd better be prepared to give me his first born if he wants me to stop hitting him.

Back to MOO 3. Conditional surrender and only paying tribute almost makes sense as is, although until I read this thread I had no idea what to expect. Unconditional surrender and only paying tribute really doesn't. Reverting to World War 2 again, Germany lost half the country to the USSR. That's what unconditional surrender means to me. The race you surrender to can take whatever it wants, from a single system up to a (random) chance that it'll take you over completely and put you out of the game. If South Korea had been forced to unconditionally surrender to the North, they wouldn't be paying tribute, they'd be calling each other "comrade".

For conditional, there's no reason not to be like exchanging items. A surrender request causes a cease fire, then you (or the other race) sends a box filled with what the cost of surrender is going to be. You can make a counter-offer or two, but in the end you either accept the terms or go back to fighting.

All of which we can all can put on our "TS" list and drop off at the Chaplin, since nobody is going to make any more changes to this game anyway. Other than the mod writers, that is.

[AlanC9]

As long as we're wish-listing, another unconditional surrender option would be to give the winner complete control over the loser's foreign policy for some period. They become your allies, go to full trade and research agreements, share all techs, etc. Under this circumstance you'd want to rebuild the former loser, since they're now part of your coalition.

Something like this was done in SMAC, and it worked OK.