There will be people who will always complain about the feature so long as it requires any amount of attention, because a lot of people are lazy. I think most people would be happier to set things up once and forget about it. If that can't be achieved, then they would be happier if there was something good that happened from the attention to treaties.
I honestly don't think the old system to be that bad. It's really not a system problem, but an occasional people problem. It's not as if treaties are hard to break, you just click a button and they are gone.
The new treaty system, without any friction at all, is basically just adding nice customization options and RP potential to the previous system.
'cause honestly, the current system isn't favoring continental alliances in any way. The only way they can work is by having a set of tightly-knit rulers in all/most realms, and the way I see it treaty friction isn't going to create any more wars if such a context re-occurs. The problem is with rulers all being friends, not with alliances continuing until cancelled.
For lords, paying attention to the region gives money, and good reputation. Being a good lord can make people notice you more and respect your abilities more. Right now, you get not much notice if you are a good treaty maintainer (notice I did NOT say diplomat/ambassador, because even though that's the subclass that does treaty maintenance, that has no bearing on actual diplomatic skills as in actually writing to people). Really, have you ever heard anyone get credit for doing a good job keeping all the treaties at low friction?
Since treaties don't actually change anything yet, I doubt many people really care for bothering to maintain them, so the comparison wouldn't apply.
