Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Open World Diplomacy.


Skeksis

Recommended Posts

Open World Diplomacy – AI Role.

For the most part players will engage the campaign themselves but if not then here's some ideas for how the AI can operate in a free and open world. In general the AI role is to build fleets to challenge the player but the AI still need ways to engage the player.

Such as:

As the antagonist, the role, the AI must test the human resolve, constantly provoking the human into a reaction.    

Primary goal is to kill the human. The AI must let the human know that this is its agenda. By constantly reminding the human that the AI is after him and the human must do something about it. More provoking.

AI to form alliances to endanger the human. Specially if the human just wants to sit on the side-line. This is an very important aspect, the longer the human is inactive, the more alliances the AI forms. Maybe after 25 years (or add 1 nation per 5 years) the human will end up facing the whole world, with the ominous prospect of being heavily outnumber in every battle. Forcing the human to engage the AI to cut down the threats/odds at earlier stages. I.e. destroy a nation before an alliance is made.

If human doesn’t want to from alliances then the AI nation should do a u-turn and start making alliances with its enemies. Pressuring human even more.

The AI should have covert operations, to which the human has hints off but unknowing to the full extent. Human then has to uncover them, via combat, else face the consequences (could be tech based). I.e. the human has to destroy the unknown threat. 

Finally the player needs to know the rewards of going to war. Some friendly messaging warning of imperil danger and he'll be better off going to war, etc. and this is what he'll get. 

Economics, Prestige, Unrest - self-explanatory – in-game - minor aspects.

 

There are ways to keep an open world engaging.

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open World Diplomacy – Vassal States.

Insolvency doesn’t seem like a feature that should be kept. Specially for an oppressor - no rewards. Or maybe nations (the oppressor) should have an option to dissolve a nation or for it to be made into a 'Vassal State'.

But where is the game heading anyway: Single nations fighting and dissolving each other for 50 years until one is left? Or the whole world split into 2 axis’s without any alternatives? – very boring.

Or a mirrored of alliances toing and froing and building towards a final showdown.

I like the latter. Would have random outcomes every time.

But this would mean nations becoming ‘Vassal States’, for periods. Vassal so nations CAN’T (or hard for some to) maintain their governance for the full duration of the campaign.

This should produce an alternating climate of alliances to which the strongest prevails. The victory would not be world domination but end game allied naval supremacy, thus nations don't die, they are subdued.  

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open World Diplomacy –  Bilateral Tension an Impossibility. 

IMO bilateral tension, a.k.a. fleet tension, is a huge problem.

With it, every bordering nation is going to raise tension regardless, well that's in principle.

For example, Britain and France should begin to raise tension as soon as the first ships goes down their slipways. The result is Britain and France alliance has to be manufactured. 

Take Germany too, within a 10 nation campaign they will border Russia, Britain and Spain, France via fleet movements through the English Channel, North Atlantic. Fleet tension would be unavoidable without artificial intervention. With current fleet tension Germany will always raise tension against bordering nations regardless. Germany would war immediately with Russia, Britain and with Spain, France joining in. Totally outnumbered.

Far worst for Mediterranean nations. Even Russia with Germany, Britain, on one side and China, Japan on the other.

Don't forget nation owned ports dotted around the world, e.g. current map Britain has Gibraltar, Valletta and Limassol. How is the game going to manage fleet tension when all the other nations like US and Japan have their independent ports?

In principle, fleet tension will always be raised against every single nation. As it stands, the game is going to have to artificially manufacture peaceful bilateral tension for the full duration of the campaign - for the full 10 nations over 50 years. What a minefield, never going to work.

IMO, an free and open world cannot be possible with fleet tension. Free and open world = war with whoever the player wants, including forming alliances with whoever. I.e. the diplomacy generator does not handle the player.

And with that gone, fleet bilateral tension can be replaced with Taskforce 'Blockade' Command, i.e. added command to taskforces, once set Its purpose is to add tension.

During peacetime player/nation can deploy taskforces in all surrounding oceans of the target nation and set taskforce command to Blockade. This then builds tension and only on the target nation. Any other nation won't be effected because not all of its bordering oceans have said taskforces (the map has enough spilt oceans for this to work).  Now it's completely open world campaign. 

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, tension from fleets should only exist in say coastal waters in nations your already unfriendly with, and then only because your sitting in their costal waters. There is zero reason why a handful of battleships in Scappa flow should spark a war with germany.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...