Federation Soup

[Vita`]

We have code that is supposed to make it difficult for larger realms (I believe they need readjusted when looking at realms like Sirion, Morek, Tara etc.). In the same light, I do like the idea of federations being based on number of regions in federation, nobles in realms, or both, that was briefly mentioned above. This way you can have five+ small realm federations, three medium realms federations, or two large realms federations, or what have you.

[Indirik]

Players do not like these artificial restrictions. Every time we implement something like that, we get a LOT of pushback from the players about how these restrictions stifle the game. Arbitrary restrictions like this are a bad idea.

[Jens Namtrah]

Understandable.

Simply throwing out ideas:

what if:
  -  Federations are scrapped
  -  You must be in a state of War to have an alliance. Alliances automatically cancel if your realm has no more war
  -  A harsher set of restrictions about "circular alliances" (being allied to the ally of your enemy)
  -  Treaties can continue to allow sharing resources, etc, but automatically cancel if there's a war "link"

Would that get rid of criticisms of maintenance?
Would it make any difference to the game?

[Indirik]

what if:
  -  Federations are scrapped

Why this big prejudice about federations?

-  You must be in a state of War to have an alliance. Alliances automatically cancel if your realm has no more war

Again, artificial restrictions are a bad thing. This makes no sense. I can't even think of a remotely plausible explanation for it.

-  A harsher set of restrictions about "circular alliances" (being allied to the ally of your enemy)

It's already supposed to be impossible. With regular alliances, it is. It is only possible now due to a bug in federation relation checking. How can we get more strict than that? (Other than fixing the bug, of course....)

-  Treaties can continue to allow sharing resources, etc, but automatically cancel if there's a war "link"

This already happens. Facilities can only be shared (repair, entertainment, academy, etc.) with an alliance/federation. Trading is not possible when at war.

[Forbes Family]

what about making it less difficult to leave a federation? so using this instance if Strombran were to leave the Federation the other 50 realms wouldn't automatically be at war with them but could decide to be at war or neutral?

[Jens Namtrah]

Why this big prejudice about federations?

When I was a small child - couldn't have been more than 4 or 5 - I had a puppy. Called him Fred. Fred loved me, and I loved Fred. We went everywhere together; frolicked in the creek behind my house, hunted squirrels and tadpoles, snuggled before the fireplace. We were inseparable, best of friends.

Then one day the men from the Federation came and took him away.

Every since then, I've roamed the internet, searching out online games that had federations in them so I could join the communities and try to stamp them out.

That's my sad tale, and now it's told.

[Indirik]

what about making it less difficult to leave a federation? so using this instance if Strombran were to leave the Federation the other 50 realms wouldn't automatically be at war with them but could decide to be at war or neutral?

That defeats the entire purpose of federations.

[Indirik]

That's my sad tale, and now it's told.

Aww.... I'm sorry to hear about Fred.  :'(

[Stabbity]

When I was a small child - couldn't have been more than 4 or 5 - I had a puppy. Called him Fred. Fred loved me, and I loved Fred. We went everywhere together; frolicked in the creek behind my house, hunted squirrels and tadpoles, snuggled before the fireplace. We were inseparable, best of friends.

Then one day the men from the Federation came and took him away.

Every since then, I've roamed the internet, searching out online games that had federations in them so I could join the communities and try to stamp them out.

That's my sad tale, and now it's told.

The only way to avenge Fred properly is to form your own group... It could be a "Frederation".

[Eldargard]

I really like the idea of GoldPanda's suggested change. It makes sense, leaves control in the player's hands and the constraint is more natural than artificial. Of course, it does nothing to keep a few large realms from federating but it makes federations consisting of many countries more difficult to form. Besides, it only makes sense that all federation members agree before new members can join. It can even create some fun situations. If A and B are federated and B wants to have C join while A opposes, B can only break the federation with A (new war!) before finally federating with C!

Of course, one could already say that all this is possible with some RP and inverse logic. RP can establish the rules for bringing in new federation members. Realms that oppose the joining of an unapproved member can all leave the federation (new war!). I just think that having the 'require approval from all members first' just seems more natural as a default.

Alternatively, a way to split federations would serve as well. I do not know the current logic beyond 'leave a federation and be at war' but the little I hear can make things challenging. From my basic understanding, the following examples detail why the current system, as I understand it, feels off. Of course, I am sure that I am missing something here...

Now:
A, B and C are federated.
C brings in D and angers A and B by doing so.
A leaves federation and is at war against B, C and D.
B leaves the federation and is at war with A, C and D.
A and B try to work the mechanics so they can return to federated status since they never wanted to separate or be at war.
C and D enjoy a favorable position.
Feels off

Approval First:
A, B and C are federated.
C asks to bring in D and A and B  say no.
C leaves federation and is at war against A and B.
C and D federate.
Feels natural

Splits:
A, B and C are federated.
C brings in D and angers A and B by doing so.
A and B split off into a new federation. A and B are now at war with C and D.
Feels natural

[Anaris]

I really like the idea of GoldPanda's suggested change. It makes sense, leaves control in the player's hands and the constraint is more natural than artificial.

I like it, too, and it should make it much easier to ensure (in code) that all the diplomatic restrictions are respected.

However, it does require a way of delaying an action while waiting for people to agree to it—something that I've been wanting to add for a while, but haven't had chance to yet. So when I do, this will probably be one of the first things that it gets added to.

[Eldargard]

You guys are just plain awesome. Not because you are agreeing with me in this instance but because you love this game and constantly strive to make it better! I am sure looking forward to coming back and playing again sometime soon!