Nation Diplomacy

[PhoenixKnight]

The declaration of war is saying that the 2 Kings signed a treaty together. That looks wrong to me

[Jeanne de Clisson]

Sorry if already covered elsewhere:

@ PK ~

If a Monarch of one Flag sues for peace towards another Flag [SKN vis a vis Spain] for the sake of discussion

A Vote reflects the will of the (2nd) Flag but the Proposal only reflects the Intention of a single individual

Who then is more bound by this 'agreement' should the Throne change hands in the case of the initiator,

since the general body of that Flag has not committed to anything?

(Purely hypothetical example, no disrespect intended)

[PhoenixKnight]

Sorry if already covered elsewhere:

@ PK ~

If a Monarch of one Flag sues for peace towards another Flag [SKN vis a vis Spain] for the sake of discussion

A Vote reflects the will of the (2nd) Flag but the Proposal only reflects the Intention of a single individual

Who then is more bound by this 'agreement' should the Throne change hands in the case of the initiator,

since the general body of that Flag has not committed to anything?

(Purely hypothetical example, no disrespect intended)

Jeanne, I don't think you understood me. I am saying the message for war declaration is wrong. A war is not a signed treaty as the other nation does not get to vote on a war. They just receive a notice. Here is the war declaration details we got.

"Treaty Details
War
Between the proud nations of Paraguay and St Kitts-Nevis
The treaty was proposed by Paraguay Tom Lowe
The treaty was signed on day 1,851 between:
Paraguay Tom Lowe and St Kitts-Nevis PhoenixKnight "


This is wrong because St. Kitts never voted for war and I never agreed to it. It is one sided. It should have red something like:

" Diplomatic Details:
War.
The Proud nation of Paraguay has declared war on St. Kitts-Nevis.
The declaration was signed by Paraguay Tom Lowe on day 1,851."

[Jeanne de Clisson]

Actually, I went offtopic & was not referring to your previous post at all

[Captain Jack]

Issues reported by Kangaroo and PK have been addressed.

I do not really get your post Jeanne.

[DezNutz]

Would be nice if there was link to the Diplomatic Office on the Nation Diplomacy TAB without the need to go into the Parliament.

[Jeanne de Clisson]

As a separate example I was trying to ask:

PK generated a vote in the Spanish Parliment for Peace

Spain will vote to Approve/Disapprove

But SKN does not ratify the matter since it initiated the proposal (As I understand it)

On one hand, you have a Monarch deciding the will of his country & Spain declaring a majority of the Vote Table to accept it. Spain then knows that the Top of SKN is in favor of this but not how deep this sentiment exists with the Governors, Dukes & other noble and military ranking members of SKN.

The commitment seems asymmetrical

If A Monarch can propose then a Monarch should be able to accept or

If a Country is required to Ratify then both should vote.

or leave Diplomacy to Governors & above

[Captain Jack]

Treaties Diversification
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

We need to diversify each treaty from another as much as possible. Here are the current plans:

Peace Treaty
-Allows special Hostility ratings through a law
-Allows nations to establish Trade, Services and Industry Pacts
-Maintains these pacts in case the previous treaty is an Alliance

Alliances
-Maintains all pacts signed in a previous Peace Treaty
-Allows Military Cooperation pacts
-(Future Version) Prerequisite for Vassal/Lord system

War
-Nullifies any previous pacts.

Cease Fire
-Only possible after a war
-Does not allow signing of any pacts
-Automatically resolves to Neutrality after 3 days

Neutral
-No pacts are possible, any pacts are nullified.
-Possible any time except if there was a war.

=--=-=-=-=-=--=-=--==---============================------------------================----------=

Extra ideas:

War
We could establish more side effects for WAR. Here are some ideas:

1)Banks Blacklist
You cannot enter the bank of any nation that is at war with yours. (Automatic payments still possible)


2)Basic Reward System
Each nation could have a standard law (applicable to every war enemy) in how (any) rewards are given to the loyal subjects in time of war.
The law would describe which actions are rewarded and these should be limited (perhaps similarly to Hostility law, Plunder/Skirmish/Offensive voodoo).

The rewards should not be coin based at version 1.0
Coin rewards can be added later as this is already possible through an indirect way (Send payment to a trusted nation player and he can afterwards use the bounty system). We should put our priority to adding extra features instead therefore this has to receive low priority.

The rewards could be different. For example, Loyalty Points (needed for missions). We could even script loyalty points to go far beyond the standard 100 and then used to other nation control features. Besides the obvious help to complete the missions easier (without the need of exterminating millions right?), they could still be useful to the nobles. The could be used to create badges/achievements (Medal of Honor of St. Kitts for example) or simply as an internal way to rank nobles (sounds like a useful rank for the king when he will want to choose his governors, right?). More ideas are welcomed.

3)Port Side Affects

For nations that control a port, there could be side affects. Whichever these are, they should be limited, at least a early version of the feature. Some ideas would be:

i)Port Population Morale (if and when implemented) should receive a penalty.

ii)Extra Trade tax on Profit (excludes Gold Bars trading - we will assume that players sell these on the Black Market which is outside the reach of the government). This will be applied from the nation to the enemy trade fleet on both buy and sale and will be percentage based. The tax will apply before bonuses.

Here is an example to understand the functionality of this:
A fleet of 5 Trade Galleons under the Flag of St.Kitts arrives at a port controlled by Spain.
St. Kitts is however at WAR with Spain.

The total fleet capacity is 750 Crates of Tools.
The current price paid by this port of tools, is a mere 20gc per crate.
If there was no war, the merchant would receive 15,000 gc

However, Spain requires an extra 10% profit tax for those who serve under an enemy flag. To calculate this, we will check to see the highest selling price of Tools in Avonmora, which is 18.
So, maximum base cost is 18 * 750 = 13,500 gc
Therefore, the minimum Profit for the merchant is 15,000 - 13,500 = 1,500gc
So the 10% tax will be applied on the 1,500gc which equals 150gc.

Therefore, the merchant will receive 14,850gc and the Spain coffers will receive 135gc (10% corruption fee on the tax earned - it's war folks! Corruption is at its highest!)

Similarly, an additional tax on projected profit should be applied to sales tax. Let's suppose that this port sells Iron for 10gc a piece.
So, the merchant will pay 10 * 750 = 7,500 gc to full his fleet.
To find the extra tax, we will need to see the minimum projected profit. We will do this by calculating the minimum price paid for Iron crates elsewhere. This amounts to 12gc per crate or 750 * 12 = 9000
So again, the maximum figure stands at 1,500 which means a tax of 150gc.
So the merchant will have to pay 7,850gc instead while the nation will receive 135gc.

At the end of the trade, the extra burden for the merchant amounted to 300gc while the nation earned a total of 270gc.

Of course, if the merchant chose to store to Warehouse instead, he would escape this fee.

iii)Extra Services cost
Similarly, shipwright usage, repairs and crew hiring could also have extra fees. These can all be specified in the same law.





For more War effects ideas or treaty diversification ideas, please post here.

[Captain Jack]

SKN

What SKN is?

[Noffin]

St Kitts-Nevis