StarGateWars Forums

So the idea is that we all have large alliance based agreements. Often they are not kept or they are not understood well enough that accidents happen. This is a main server idea for now unless alliances are brought to ascended officially.

The idea is to have a page that is accessible by only members that the 1ic and 2ic want to see. This page would be an alliance ability page that would allow you to come up with stipulations for DRA and NAP. Which can then ping the alliance party that you are trying to declare a DRA or NAP with. They can review it and check agree or disagree. If they agree it becomes part of the games mechanics preventing you from hitting them or from hitting them too much or from hitting them when they don't have the minimums agreed upon and vice versa.

This essentially would be the place that all agreements are fortified so it is more than just a verbal agreement which many people find hard to trust.

This place you can set minimums of naq-def hits.
If or not to take planets?
If officers are protected under these rules.
Which alliances are grouped under this(for those huge empires spanning 3+alliances)
Lastly there would be a dissolve agreement button for each alliance. As soon as your diplomatic leaders select this it starts a countdown for the other empires giving a heads up of 24 hours to essentially figure out how to handle the new threat or to try to negotiate a new agreement.

There can be various additions or removals from this idea but essentially it is a neutral ground that diplo's can set terms. It can also be used to create terms of war between neutral members...stating that x number of hits on anyone in the alliance is a condition of war. So say 50 hits is the max an alliance is willing to accept incoming in a 24 hour period. If that is exceeded it auto sets war both sides if the side being hit accepts the war/war.

Just something I have been thinking of take it or leave it.

Purely constructive critism, this is a very good idea I just see some flaws:

First, if you can't hit someone unless they have 20:1 Defence to their Naq, doesn't that basically give a free reading on their defence?

Second, many wars start because of broken DRA's or NAPs, perceived breaches where one side/person feels hard-done-by. Putting in actual game-mechanic limitations of these breaches would starve this game of much needed battles that are already few and far between.

These are just my initial reactions and they could well be foundationless in someone else's eyes, or just plain wrong, feel free to argue the point against me if you think I'm wrong or have an idea that would remedy these problems.

~V

what happened to the simple good old days where leaders marked their foes or enemies alliances as friendly or at war?

And not a good thing if you brought a planet of someone, under your proposal you'd have to do the whole leave alliance to take it if seller in a Napped alliance.

maybe some coding that showed enemy alliances as red for example, and blue for friendly.. ofc this would be dependant on leaders keeping up to date ingame.
It wouldnt actualy stop you hitting but warn you you were about to

fem fatale wrote:what happened to the simple good old days where leaders marked their foes or enemies alliances as friendly or at war?

And not a good thing if you brought a planet of someone, under your proposal you'd have to do the whole leave alliance to take it if seller in a Napped alliance.

maybe some coding that showed enemy alliances as red for example, and blue for friendly.. ofc this would be dependant on leaders keeping up to date ingame.
It wouldnt actualy stop you hitting but warn you you were about to

This sounds like the best compromise.