New relationships

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • New relationships

      I’d like to add a new relationship like trade embargo. to many times I set up a barricade of ships to seal off an area only To realise their ships or troops managed to slip through while I’m offline.

      I haven’t worked out anything yet just a basic concept.
      New relationship would basically give sea units the authority to engage other countries sea units trying to pass by your ships without having to declare direct war beforehand.

      Obviously normal war relation will happen after you attack and only the countries you give the new relation to will be affected and can see the new relation status
    • Kanaris wrote:

      Uummm putting a blockade up around someone's port and shooting at anything that comes out is indeed an acr of war!
      ummm I don’t want to be rude but did you even read the post. The relation would be used to defend your coastline or to control a choke point like the suez canal while your offline and stop potential enemies from sneaking past.

      And like I said

      Vlanchavic wrote:

      Obviously normal war relation will happen after you attack and only the countries you give the new relation to will be affected and can see the new relation status
      yes it’s an act of war and war will start after you sink them but the difference is it’s started a little earlier and they have no troops near my shoreline to surprise attack
    • Oh I read the entire post and replied accordingly. What you dont seem to understand is my reply so I will spell it out for you.

      What you are asking for is a quasi state of war without the penalty of war. What I am replying back is the moment you issue shoot on site orders to your troops in any capacity be it while taking the offensive or defending or manning a blockade or what ever reason, a state of war already exists.

      Furthemore I was trying to point out that this function already exists in the game. If I declare war on a nation but there is no exchange of fire and no territory lost, I can set relations back to peace at any time and the realtion reverts back to peace seamlessly. However during the time of war I do suffer morale penalties which seems to me is what you are trying to avoid.
    • Fair enough yes it seems I misunderstood your reply.

      Kanaris wrote:

      If I declare war on a nation but there is no exchange of fire and no territory lost, I can set relations back to peace at any time and the relation reverts back to peace seamlessly. However during the time of war I do suffer morale penalties which seems to me is what you are trying to avoid.
      yes the the point I’m trying to make is a relation that makes your sea units ready for war without actually declaring it.

      As declaring war like you say to get the effect I want usually results in them starting a full offensive and rarely do they just sit in a defensive position.

      The relations is basically saying to them if your troops attempt to cross my barrier/ blockade then we’re at war

      It’s just another way to protect your ocean territory without having to declare war beforehand
    • The problem with that is that you are assuming the waterways belong to you just like land territory belongs to you. While its true in real life we have territorial waters I bet thats really hard to implement in the game.

      So you can't simply seal off a part of the ocean the way you can seal off a part of your border and say if you cross this line we are at war. If you are really worried about being invaded from the sea then put land units on your coast so the moment they land they attack your units and you at least slow them down before they can march to the center of the province and conquer it

      What I am really disliking in your proposal is the war footing without the war morale penalties. I think it would break the game as I can think of several ways to abuse this new state.
    • I agree. Read my threads "Border Police" and "Trade Embargo?". The suprise attacks are really ridicilous. It isnt antique times, well even then Romans had strong fortifications at the borderline in Britannia and Galia, why do suprise attacks exist in this game. Obviously they do, but your army would react as soon as the border has been hit, not when your enemy is at the gates of your capitol.
    • Kanaris wrote:

      The problem with that is that you are assuming the waterways belong to you just like land territory belongs to you. While its true in real life we have territorial waters I bet thats really hard to implement in the game.

      So you can't simply seal off a part of the ocean the way you can seal off a part of your border and say if you cross this line we are at war.
      well some cases in the late stages of the game the waters literally belong to you such as the Black Sea.
      If you’ve taken all provinces around the edge of the Black Sea you should have the ability to control who enters the waters as the only way is to pass though the narrow gap between instanbul and bursa.

      There’s no reason for any other troops or ships to pass through there.

      I think your focusing on the war abilities without declaring war however my suggestion is to declare war automatically when I’m offline as I would do if I saw their troops In the area when I’m online
    • One older suggestion along this idea is an additional fire control setting called “blockade” which would allow your units to open fire on any unit without right of way or share map that comes within range.

      This would apply to both ships and land based artillery. Anyone approaching an artillery group on land without permission would also be fired upon.

      Of course responsible use is up to the player. If you leave a submarine set on this at the strait of Gibraltar and find yourself declaring war on 5 nations while you step away for lunch, well you have to deal with that.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Main Administrator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • Sounds pretty much what I’m asking for however my suggestion adds the ability to target specific countries that you’re wary of and expect some sort of aggression from.

      This ability avoids accidentally starting wars with countries and as players often work together simply changing your relation with each country in the diplomacy tab is simpler and easier to utilise than a fire control setting.
    • i see what you mean, if i declare war to another player becasue i dont trust him(so to make a block with my subs that will sink him) it gets a notification and newspaper article plus a casus belli if it wasnt his intention..... while if i make a "blockade" diplomacy setting will only start a war if he really isnt trusworthy and try to cross it :whistling:


      it will be useful to lock people out of a late night invasion by the sea, sneaking behing my sub and land..... which is what its most feared on. again the only way to avoid this is to place one unit per region, have spies and check or declare war and then go to sleep if he tries to pass he will die, if he doesnt he will be pissed for a war declaration, even tho not used


      it could be useful but again, there are some other ways to counter this and will reduce the risk of betrayal which beeing this a war game, defeat the purpose of it
      You merely adopted the shitposting. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see a proper post until I was already a man, by then it was nothing to me but blinding!
    • Kanaris wrote:

      If I declare war on a nation but there is no exchange of fire and no territory lost, I can set relations back to peace at any time and the realtion reverts back to peace seamlessly. However during the time of war I do suffer morale penalties which seems to me is what you are trying to avoid.
      If you put someone at war it's published in the newspaper. This act alone is a reason to go to war against another player. Good luck declaring war to everyone on a 100 player map.

      I put blockades as well for example from North to South in between America and the European & African continent. It's not cool if someone can sneak trough. There should be a function indeed that ships can engage to any ship or convoy that tries to slip trough.
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • BMfox wrote:

      If you put someone at war it's published in the newspaper. This act alone is a reason to go to war against another player. Good luck declaring war to everyone on a 100 player map.
      Why would you need to declare war on everyone? Do you suspect everyone of attacking you while you are AFK?
      As for war declaration being reason enough to go to war that is of course your prerogative but that doesn't make it neither the best course of action nor the smartest. I routinely avoid situations getting ugly via diplomatic dialogue and even if it fails it buys me enough time to re-position my troops. Thus personally if someone war decs my nation but there is no exchange of fire I do not move my slider unless all other alternatives are exhausted or that i am ready for it.


      BMfox wrote:

      I put blockades as well for example from North to South in between America and the European & African continent. It's not cool if someone can sneak trough. There should be a function indeed that ships can engage to any ship or convoy that tries to slip trough.
      So did the British they put up a hell of a blockade on the GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK) to prevent the Bismark from reaching the Atlantic and yet it still got through, yeah but thats just one ship says you. Well the Japs sailed an entire fleet under the cover of a storm and launched the biggest sneak attack known to man. Surprise is part of warfare deal with it...

      And for the record one more time my objection is to the fact that you propose to implement a quasi state of war without the penalties, in essence making it too damn easy! Knowing who you can trust and who you should not is part of being a good statesman, I don't think it should be made easy, I don't believe there is a need for such an option as we have so many other alternatives outlined above not my just me but others as well.

      Cheers
    • Whatever big fan you might be of history, you can play the historical or roleplay maps. When it comes to my own games i'm the master of my own tactics. When i put a blockade then i kill every ship that tries to get trough. Which is the point of making a blockade. As this suggestion was made that when sleeping there is no attack what so ever, i find it usefull to have an engage function for ships even for players you are not at war with yet.

      Why would i have to declare war to everyone? Because otherwise the ships won't engage when i'm asleep and the blockade is breached. So yes a function like that would be useful.
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • Well thats the whole point isn't it? Unless a state of war exists its not really a blockade just a bunch of sailors getting a sun tan... And knowing when to declare war when not to is all about spycraft, diplomacy and statesmanship.

      Also that is the difficulty with the sea as I said from the beginning outside of territorial waters (which we have no way of reproducing) no one owns the sea its international so its not as simple as it is on land ie. if they cross our border without permission shoot them.

      Why you would want to remove that from the game and oversimplify it is beyond me... As far as I am concerned it brings an extra intricate layer that makes it that much more fun!
    • honestly im a fan of sneak attack, i always place the armies to land at 3-4 am and gain a bunch of land before you can even realize to move your troops....... but im more than happy if a blockade will be implemented, it disrupt this tactic to me, but also to my enemy which makes a good night sleep a solution, as they said after a certain point water and skies is your own terriotry, black sea, mediterran, mexican gulf, if i see a unit in there i will immediatly contact you for a reason and escort you out of my water casue that isnt anymore free water, but my garden before my land i need to protect it, same as skies, if i notice your plane patrolling my land i will either ask why or directly use it as a casus belli.

      in one match i was madagascar, ive conquered half of africa and alto volta the other half and was starting to expand in the middle east when ive discover that my sub line(protecting me from pakistan, india and siria) going down from italy to red sea and antartica got breached and texas (he embarked all of his unit and sailed for more than two weeks, the reason was becasue its a huge prolonged on mulitple match war between me and his alliance so they always hunt me down in every match hoping to win using those cheap tactics) was landing on my core. you can see how that is not forseable in any shape or way(if he was sumatra i could even tought of it.... turky too.... texas is basically the other side of the world. i want to meet a player that start as japane and wonder at day 12 if congo will have his troops around hokkido 8| ), if i had the blockade system country like syria india and pakistan i was already at war with and having all the malus that comes with it, but random players that pass by could land in my core and :love: me up..... if the blockade sytem will send a message like on land saying " if you keep pursuing this action you will be at war with X" it would be already a solution, otherwise an automatic war declaration would be suitable

      you talk about malus? dunno, place an increase consumption of oil for this feature using the excuse of patrolling more therefor using more fuel :thumbsup:


      adding another option for players to use diplomacy and tactic is never a bad thing. surely more useful then embargo at the current moment, it just need to be well balanced and thought out


      p.s. texas got sunk casue he litterally landed with the start units(15 infantry, 2 aa and 2 cars) with my planes, arty and AT ive cleared the area in a day (he conquered some of my land and used the factory to spam AA and LT) stuck with the malus -5 for the rest of the match till ive manage to conquer asia, made a deal with brasil to NAP and leave eachother alone "making" brasil wage war against texas and relive me from that... then our coalition won for dropping out incative and the last player joined together to quickly finish :whistling:
      You merely adopted the shitposting. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see a proper post until I was already a man, by then it was nothing to me but blinding!
    • Kanaris wrote:

      Well thats the whole point isn't it? Unless a state of war exists its not really a blockade just a bunch of sailors getting a sun tan... And knowing when to declare war when not to is all about spycraft, diplomacy and statesmanship.
      Indeed, that's why state of war should be added in the diplomacy list. Well you can't spy everyone on a 100 player map so if someone wants to slip trough to land on my shores it would be nice that my ships engaged even when i'm not online. Same for on land. If an enemy is moving trough your province towards the centre war will only be activated when troops are locked in combat. The artillery in that province will never attack. Which doesn't make sense, as any unit has during the night a guard duty and if a "friendly" force shows up all of a sudden than the regiment will be woken up by the sentry guards and attack.
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • I understand the meaning of what you are trying to communicate but lets not make real life comparison as they do not necessarily fit the pattern of the point you are trying to make. There are countless examples of entire units not reacting to enemy movement in a real shooting war do to the fact that they did not receive the order to do so...

      But to try to make an in game analogy lets say you agree with your neighbour to exchange right of way, and while you are AFK he betrays you moves his troops into your provinces and takes over. You will get no alert until its too late. Thats how it works on the ocean even though you are st peace there is an implied agreement of right of way as the ocean belongs to no one and its shared by all. Thats what I am trying to explain and to me at least it makes sense that it works this way
    • Kanaris wrote:

      But to try to make an in game analogy lets say you agree with your neighbour to exchange right of way, and while you are AFK he betrays you moves his troops into your provinces and takes over. You will get no alert until its too late. Thats how it works on the ocean even though you are st peace there is an implied agreement of right of way as the ocean belongs to no one and its shared by all.
      That's why i never give ROW in the first place and only coalition members get shared maps with me ;)
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh