Relations -- Both parties should agree to a relation change

NightWolf

Relations -- Both parties should agree to a relation change

I have a suggestion. It has to do with relations (whether or not you are at War, Neutral, or Peace) with another party.

Over the last few attacks, I've had a few people set their relation with me to war. They attack, then they immediately set their relation with me to neutral. I don't think that this should be allowed. It's really not realistic...

My suggestion is this.

If a person sets his/her relation with you to War, then that person should not be able to change the relation with you unless both parties agree.

Example: <insert name> has set their relation with you to War. They want to change it to neutral, so you get a mail saying ... " <insert name> wants to negotiate a neutral relationship with you. Do you wish to negotiate? [YES] [NO]"

People should just be able to set their relation with somebody else to war ... since war is usually unexpected.

But, if somebody wants to 'upgrade' a relationship to Neutral or Peace, then I think both parties need to agree ...

Example: <insert name> wishes to negotiate a peaceful relationship with you. Do you wish to negotiate? [YES] [NO]

Thanx for takin' the time to read this. I hope it inspires some ideas..

-Nightwolf
Last edited by NightWolf on Mon May 23, 2005 11:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Chris M
Forum Expert
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:06 pm
Race: System Lord
ID: 13122
Location: England

i totally agree!!!

this is the best suggestion i have heard in ages, or at least of the ones i've read...
RETIRED
Spykie
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:53 pm

Agreed!
Muhahu?!
Elemental_FIRE
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 6:40 pm

That is a great idea! :-D :-D :-D
xcrunnermr06
Forum Grunt
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:11 am

aggread... but I also think that for the benifits of war (ex: all the naq stolen when attacked) both sides need to declare war. That will stop the "I'll declare war with you just to get your NAQ." ideas
IcER
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 3:54 pm
ID: 0
Location: England, either Surrey or Warwick

I disagree with that last post (sorry xcrunnerme06). It makes sense for both sides to have to agree to imporve relations War -> Neutral -> Peace. But I think if one side degrades the relations then it automatically degrades for both players, but both agree otherwise. Thats how it works in the real world anyway.
xcrunnermr06
Forum Grunt
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:11 am

yes... but usually you see the enemy comming... Here, you could be logged off, and still have everything taken from you. You get on to see that someone you trusted (or someone you don't even know) is jumping ranks by doing just that. I hate to do this, but my officer did this. His war page is 30 Pages long... He jumped from A rank around 950, and he jumped into the 350's... anything that allows someone to do that with just a hundred attack turns needs to be strictly concidered.
Gatedialer
Forum Regular
Posts: 545
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:09 pm
Alliance: None
Race: Asgard
ID: 5650
Location: Houston TX
Contact:

okay say that your farming some guy. You declare war on him and steal his naq every time it accumulates to 2 mil. Why would you undeclare war every time? Its easier just to make them your enemy and keep them their to keep track of all your farms in ONE page. Whoever uses the stategy of declaring war and undeclaring is a moron.
Gatedialer
Forum Regular
Posts: 545
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:09 pm
Alliance: None
Race: Asgard
ID: 5650
Location: Houston TX
Contact:

xcrunnermr06 wrote:yes... but usually you see the enemy comming... Here, you could be logged off, and still have everything taken from you. You get on to see that someone you trusted (or someone you don't even know) is jumping ranks by doing just that. I hate to do this, but my officer did this. His war page is 30 Pages long... He jumped from A rank around 950, and he jumped into the 350's... anything that allows someone to do that with just a hundred attack turns needs to be strictly concidered.


why so people cant keep track of farms?
xcrunnermr06
Forum Grunt
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:11 am

why farm to begin with... in an essance, your taking advantage of the game. I think those that farm are **Filtered**.. They know that the people they farm can't hit them back
NightWolf

I appreciate all of your ideas and comments when it comes to this topic, but please don't change the subject. This is about relations, not about 'farming'.

Thank-you.

-Nightwolf
xcrunnermr06
Forum Grunt
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:11 am

We did stay on topic... part of farming is finding someone with a s**t load of naq, declairing war with them, and taking all of their naq.
Lord_Zeus
Forum Regular
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:28 am
ID: 0
Location: Where the world is better...

I use the declare war trick, however I would like to see it changed to 1 day before anything takes effect.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Stickin it to the man!
Owen
Forum Irregular
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 6:17 pm
ID: 0
Location: The Matrix

why should war have to be 2 way if currently you declare total peace with someone you and your officers can't touch them even if theyare able to attack you before their commander sets relations to total peace also
Sleipnir
Merriest Mod in the West
Posts: 2340
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:16 pm
ID: 0
Location: Off-world

Honours and Awards

Lord_Zeus wrote:I use the declare war trick, however I would like to see it changed to 1 day before anything takes effect.


Hey, that's actually a good plan.

God to first prime: prepare the fleet for WAR.
First prime: Yes my lord, the fleet will be ready in 24 hours.

It makes sense.
Image

As soon as you build an idiot proof system, somebody else builds a better idiot.

If it moves, kill it. If it doesn't move, kick it until it does move, and then kill it.
Locked

Return to “Suggestions Archive”