Peace for all turns after first?

I think that something should be done to AW to make it more realistic. They have made it so that peace is on first turn. Well I think it should be peace for all turns. Until, of course, when someone declares war or makes an alliance. This makes afterwind more realistic. Countries aren't all automatically at war. This also allows army building and more bigger and epic battles. Not noly that but I would think that this should only be a short update and sohuldn't be that difficult to do. Also, this doesn't have to be made so this is how it has to be. That'd be bad for some scenarios and stuff. So, I think that it could atleast be added as a new option that yuou can turn on and off. Please choose what you think in the poll.

The thing is, oftentimes in real life war isn't officially declared before an invasion. The concept of surprise makes invasions more possible in both real life and AW, so to force everyone to have to declare war first would actually be less realistic, in my opinion.

Написано от goodnames679, 28.09.2012 at 12:48

The thing is, oftentimes in real life war isn't officially declared before an invasion. The concept of surprise makes invasions more possible in both real life and AW, so to force everyone to have to declare war first would actually be less realistic, in my opinion.

Which is why there is also the option to vote it as Yes, but only as an option. So you don't have to have it.

Well, you stated that you wanted this for the sake of realism, no?

The very existence of this option would be the opposite, for reasons stated above.

While I hate getting randomly attacked by people (I'm sure we all do), I have to admit that it would probably ruin a lot of games if you'd actually seen it coming

No thanks, i don't want to manually declare war with everyone in the game every game i play.

Написано от goodnames679, 29.09.2012 at 03:29

Well, you stated that you wanted this for the sake of realism, no?

The very existence of this option would be the opposite, for reasons stated above.

While I hate getting randomly attacked by people (I'm sure we all do), I have to admit that it would probably ruin a lot of games if you'd actually seen it coming

Yes, but it's not by surpise. This is more realistic because on normal AW everyone is at war. You say that people can attack people by suprise. But it's not by surpise, because if you're at war with everyone you attack everyone. It'd be different if you could attack someone when you have peace with them, though. Automatically declaring war on them. That'd be more realistic. So this is more realistic than AW. If it were that you could attack from peace, however, then that'd rpobably be the most realistic. Unfortuently that also wouldn't work, as people would just treat it the same to how AW is with war now. So there'd be no point having peace really. Therefore the most realistic is the option to have peace all turns and have to declare war. Of course it doesn't have to be forced on people. That is why there is the option to have it as an option so you can choose whether you want that or not.

Написано от nonames, 29.09.2012 at 05:44

No thanks, i don't want to manually declare war with everyone in the game every game i play.

That is why there is the option to have it as an option so you don't have to "manually declare war with everyone in the game every game i play".

I think this would be kind of good for my scenario where everyone dies by turn 5 :p

Написано от Utah, 29.09.2012 at 12:05

I think this would be kind of good for my scenario where everyone dies by turn 5 :p

lol.

I like this idea, is very realistic, read my wiki summary:

Casus Belli

Reasons for use

Countries need a public justification for attacking another country. This justification is needed to galvanize internal support for the war, as well as gain the support of potential allies.
In the post World War Two era, the UN Charter prohibits signatory countries from engaging in war except 1) as a means of defending themselves against aggression, or 2) unless the UN as a body has given prior approval to the operation. The UN also reserves the right to ask member nations to intervene against non-signatory countries which embark on wars of aggression.In effect, this means that countries in the modern era must have a plausible casus belli for initiating military action, or risk UN sanctions or intervention.


World War II
In his autobiography Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler had in the 1920s advocated a policy of lebensraum ("living space") for the German people, which in practical terms meant German territorial expansion into Eastern Europe.
In August 1939, in order to implement the first phase of this policy, Germany's Nazi government under Hitler's leadership staged the Gleiwitz incident, which was used as a casus belli for the invasion of Poland the following September. Poland's allies, the UK and France, honoured their alliance and subsequently declared war on Germany.

Написано от Goblin, 30.09.2012 at 14:21

I dont think peace option should even exist (except in first turn). Offering peace is like saying: later in the game if i am stronger then i will attack you but, if i am weaker i will beg you to accept alliance.

welcome to real life tactics.
war is never fair, when some one declares war, is because they feel stronger. you fight with stronger people than you? of course not.

Написано от Goblin, 01.10.2012 at 07:06

Написано от Tundy, 30.09.2012 at 18:56

Написано от Goblin, 30.09.2012 at 14:21

I dont think peace option should even exist (except in first turn). Offering peace is like saying: later in the game if i am stronger then i will attack you but, if i am weaker i will beg you to accept alliance.

welcome to real life tactics.
war is never fair, when some one declares war, is because they feel stronger. you fight with stronger people than you? of course not.

This is a game ,not real life political war simulation. I never offered peace in this game to anyone, and i do fight stronger and better players than me in this game. How will any of us become better if we fight only people who are weaker then us.

i am glad you suck at diplomacy, now go and pick Luxemburg and declare war on Germany.
[btw i was not talking about ranks, i am talking about money and units]

P.S: a noob rank 10 can crush a expert rank 0.... upgrades are a big difference. once i buy extra air unit capacity i turn into a living god.

I dont like this idea if be peace after 1 turn i will always forgot to declare war,and in world games with 20 people you will lose 1 turn declaring wars to evryone you wil not have time to make moves,this is very bad idea sry

I think it's a very good idea and like he said it will be an option. If you don't like it just disable it!

Написано от Utah, 02.10.2012 at 15:49

I think it's a very good idea and like he said it will be an option. If you don't like it just disable it!

This

This is boring and wasting time , if i join world game with 20 players , this will take time to declare war or send alliance with all players so i don't like this idea

Написано от Goblin, 30.09.2012 at 14:21

I dont think peace option should even exist (except in first turn). Offering peace is like saying: later in the game if i am stronger then i will attack you but, if i am weaker i will beg you to accept alliance.

you do realize that peace is a 2 way street don't you? Except for low ranks that are pretty naive in the way of diplomacy, I think that most people understand that peace either ends in a backstab or an alliance, most of the time it's going to be the backstab. So if they understand what's going on, I think of peace as more of a "We need to take this guy out, as he's going to kill both of us, so let's not attack each other until we kill him, and then we go back to killing each other" sort of deal. I don't ever use peace as a long time deal unless I'm giving somebody the assurance that i'm not going to attack them, but let somebody else kill them instead, or if i'm considering an alliance with the person.

It's also useful as a stepping-stone diplomatic tool. Some people won't immidiately accept alliance requests, but are fine with peace requests, and having peace with somebody is going to give you a better shot of getting the alliance.

цитирам:

Написано от Goblin, 09.10.2012 at 12:57

You do realize that peace is a 2 way street don't you? Except for low ranks that are pretty naive in the way of diplomacy, I think that most people understand that peace either ends in a backstab or an alliance, most of the time it's going to be the backstab. So if they understand what's going on, I think of peace as more of a "We need to take this guy out, as he's going to kill both of us, so let's not attack each other until we kill him, and then we go back to killing each other" sort of deal. I don't ever use peace as a long time deal unless I'm giving somebody the assurance that i'm not going to attack them, but let somebody else kill them instead, or if i'm considering an alliance with the person.

It's also useful as a stepping-stone diplomatic tool. Some people won't immidiately accept alliance requests, but are fine with peace requests, and having peace with somebody is going to give you a better shot of getting the alliance.

yes i understand all that ...and it sucks. Two players having peace just cuz they are scared of the third player is cowardly.

you don't know shit about diplomacy.

I think the problem with this is the idea of the game in the first place

"Make peace through world domination"

"Global food crisis and depleting resources have left your nation with a hard choice; to be consumed by your rapidly militarising neighbours - or push back until your troops march on their cities and their puny dictators are begging you for unconditional surrender."

The idea of the game is from what I understand set in a future in which there is no option but to fight, every country for itself so to speak. I do see the logic in the idea, but unfortunately it goes against the idea of the game imo.

The reason that peace is needed for first turn is to stop people rushing into their opponents cap first turn and killing the game instantly, it was annoying as hell when this used to happen and quite frankly this tactic required 0 skill. Anyways I think it is uneeded and is much easier to select who you want to be with or against

I voted yes.

And in a world game, you don't make contact with other nations straight away, so it's all good.

Although I do think it should be an option... I voted full on yes because it makes sense to me that this should be the default.

The description of the game could always be changed, given the name of the game will be. Given that's to be called "AtWar", there's probably little chance of that happening though lol

Написано от Cherse, 02.11.2012 at 15:38

I voted yes.

And in a world game, you don't make contact with other nations straight away, so it's all good.

Although I do think it should be an option... I voted full on yes because it makes sense to me that this should be the default.

The description of the game could always be changed, given the name of the game will be. Given that's to be called "AtWar", there's probably little chance of that happening though lol

the game is called "Afterwind" but we never got nukes! >in 2 years

Peace in first turn will be implemented

Написано от b0nker2, 10.10.2012 at 09:18

I think the problem with this is the idea of the game in the first place

"Make peace through world domination"

"Global food crisis and depleting resources have left your nation with a hard choice; to be consumed by your rapidly militarising neighbours - or push back until your troops march on their cities and their puny dictators are begging you for unconditional surrender."

The idea of the game is from what I understand set in a future in which there is no option but to fight, every country for itself so to speak. I do see the logic in the idea, but unfortunately it goes against the idea of the game imo.

The reason that peace is needed for first turn is to stop people rushing into their opponents cap first turn and killing the game instantly, it was annoying as hell when this used to happen and quite frankly this tactic required 0 skill. Anyways I think it is uneeded and is much easier to select who you want to be with or against

since custom maps are implemented, your argument is invalid.