Ambassador Help

[cjnodell]

I can also see Chénier's point. What if no one wants to be a diplomat in a particular realm? Most things in the game can be managed by the straight warrior class with no subclass. Does this treaty friction system make it impossible to have reasonable diplomatic relations without having a diplomat in the realm? Can the ruler handle all the treaties unaided? I think that a realm should benefit from the presence of diplomats, but not be penalized for lacking them. This suggests to me that a realm with no diplomats should be able to maintain at least a few treaties. Of course, I do not really know enough to say, so this is more a plea for information than me telling how it is!

[Anaris]

What if no one wants to be a diplomat in a particular realm?

What if no one wants to be a trader in a particular realm?

What if no one wants to be a courtier in a particular realm?

[vonGenf]

What if no one wants to be a trader in a particular realm?

Region Lords can ship food automatically.

What if no one wants to be a courtier in a particular realm?

Good estate support and/or low taxes become necessary for all regions.

The corollary: If no one wants to be a diplomat, then alliances and agreements are impossible. This does not make the game unplayable, of course (there can still be war), but I would argue that this is a much greater burden.

[egamma]

Region Lords can ship food automatically.Good estate support and/or low taxes become necessary for all regions.

The corollary: If no one wants to be a diplomat, then alliances and agreements are impossible. This does not make the game unplayable, of course (there can still be war), but I would argue that this is a much greater burden.

Rulers can sign agreements--they would have to rely on the other realm having at least one diplomat.

[Bedwyr]

Rulers can sign agreements--they would have to rely on the other realm having at least one diplomat.

Still requires that every realm you deal with has diplomats, and it leaves you unable to draft treaties.  Or, put it another way, one realm on an island with no diplomats is workable.  Two or more makes it impossible for treaties to exist between them.

[Chenier]

Still requires that every realm you deal with has diplomats, and it leaves you unable to draft treaties.  Or, put it another way, one realm on an island with no diplomats is workable.  Two or more makes it impossible for treaties to exist between them.

Precisely my point.

I like ambassadors and the thought behind them, but friction and everything is pushing the idea way too far for what the player base can handle.

[Bedwyr]

Precisely my point.

I like ambassadors and the thought behind them, but friction and everything is pushing the idea way too far for what the player base can handle.

Preaching to the choir.  Indirik actually came up with a (to my ears) sensible modification to the system, but we're waiting on one of the codemonkeys to see if that would actually throw a banana peel in front of something else that we can't see, essentially making it unused treaties that decay, while treaties that are actively used don't.

[vonGenf]

Preaching to the choir.  Indirik actually came up with a (to my ears) sensible modification to the system, but we're waiting on one of the codemonkeys to see if that would actually throw a banana peel in front of something else that we can't see, essentially making it unused treaties that decay, while treaties that are actively used don't.

I would like this very much, and it makes a lot of sense.

[vonGenf]

Still requires that every realm you deal with has diplomats, and it leaves you unable to draft treaties.  Or, put it another way, one realm on an island with no diplomats is workable.  Two or more makes it impossible for treaties to exist between them.

I think it's ok that diplomats are needed to draft and sign treaties, it's a one time action. It's the grinding of maintenance that causes me problems.

[Foundation]

Preaching to the choir.  Indirik actually came up with a (to my ears) sensible modification to the system, but we're waiting on one of the codemonkeys to see if that would actually throw a banana peel in front of something else that we can't see, essentially making it unused treaties that decay, while treaties that are actively used don't.

Coders are people too.   >:(





:P

[Bedwyr]

Coders are people too.   >:(





:P

(pats Peter) Yes, of course you are!  Now here's a banana to help keep you pounding away at that typewriter.

[Vellos]

I think it's ok that diplomats are needed to draft and sign treaties, it's a one time action. It's the grinding of maintenance that causes me problems.

Indeed. Regular maintenance is annoying.

A long term "renewal" could be fine (maybe require that treaties have some diplomat action to renew them every 6 months or something), but constant friction is a bother.

[Galvez]

In Sirion, people hate Fontan and SoA, yet declarations against them are at about 40% friction.

I think the more logical answer would be that treaties require high sympathies to the target realms in order to slow down friction, whereas declarations require low sympathies. However, Sirion's declarations make me confused.

That would make sense. But then I believe it should also be possible to work the other way around. When SoA gets looted, sympathy towards Sirions falls, then the friction of a war decleration decreases as well (for example).

What if no one wants to be a diplomat in a particular realm?

What if no one wants to be a trader in a particular realm?

What if no one wants to be a courtier in a particular realm?

Choosing your class is your Inalienable right. You can run realms without traders and courtiers. Without dimplomats/ambassadors no one can use the new treaty system.