Star trek - Dark Future

A forum for a PBeM in an alternative dark future of the star trek universe. Loosely based on the Birth of the federation computer game
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog inAlpha Quadrant Map Gamma Quadrant Map (coming soon)
RP Rating
Latest topics
» Game changes!
Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:02 pm by Argel Tal

» New turn sheet template
Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:26 pm by Q

» Modifications to the game
Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:20 pm by Q

» Turn 18 - Stardate 2267 *Pending changes to game*
Sat Mar 31, 2012 7:35 pm by Argel Tal

» STAR TREK ONLINE
Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:39 pm by Argel Tal

» The Fate of the Vulcan High Command
Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:03 pm by Argel Tal

» The fate of Star Trek: Dark future
Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:58 pm by Argel Tal

» bollocks and bollocks
Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:32 am by Argel Tal

» Known Alpha Quadrant Map - Stardate 2264 (turn 15 - 19)
Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:23 am by Q

Affiliates

Total Drama Website - Directory of the Best Role-Play Sites

Aeterna Roma
December 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
CalendarCalendar
Social bookmarking
Social bookmarking digg  Social bookmarking delicious  Social bookmarking reddit  Social bookmarking stumbleupon  Social bookmarking slashdot  Social bookmarking yahoo  Social bookmarking google  Social bookmarking blogmarks  Social bookmarking live      

Bookmark and share the address of Star trek - Dark Future on your social bookmarking website

Share | 
 

 Breaking Treaties & Duration

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Grand Nagus Ramark
Senior Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-08-30

PostSubject: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:37 pm

Breaking Treaties

Hi Q. Reading about your slight mishap with the Cardassians, I think the one turn wait is a very good idea when declaring war. Does the same thing currently apply to treaties? The reason I ask is their is currently no drawback to breaking one and you could be allies one minute and have all your ships destroyed the next. Do you think we should introduce a similar thing when breaking a treaty, as the treaties can be negotiated for a set length anyway if one doesnt want it permenantly? Another way to break the treaty would be to declare war I suppose so still only one action required.

Thanks

Lee.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Constantine
Petty Officer Second Class
avatar

Posts : 45
Join date : 2011-09-15

PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:32 am

I agree completely with another alternative proviso. I do think that if you have a treaty, it should take one turn to desolve and another to declare war before you can act on the next turn. Otherwise there's actually no point in having a non-aggression treaty.

However, this is for 'civilised' empires. Theres no logical reason why empires can't just go straight to war, afterall its just a piece of paper (or datapad). I think it should be permitted, but there should be severe penalties for doing this in terms of diplomacy. Afterall who would trust someone that doesn't abide by the terms of a treaty. It would simulate the 'suprise attack' element, but should come at a cost too.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Q
Admin
avatar

Posts : 243
Join date : 2011-08-29
Age : 43
Location : manchester, uk

Character sheet
Name::
Age:

PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Tue Jan 10, 2012 5:30 am

I agree that non-agression, Friendship, afiliation and Alliance treaties can end instantly on the diplomacy action.

However Declare war is a tricky one. We can say they can be instantaneous like the others but as seen by the Cardassian Invasion this leaves empires open to a lot of abuse. However if we are mature about it and condemn breaking the diplomatic pause of 1 turn submission between declaration and invading a planet this could work and promote roleplay, noone wants to be totally shunned by the alpha quadrant.
In the future empires should have enough ships to maintain fleets that can be set to intercept invading fleets, while other fleets are engaged elsewhere, even scanners can give indications of build up of apposing fleets in surrounding systems (not that people have these much)... (perhaps i lower the cost of scanners a little?)

So if we examine the Trill, we see that the Trill may have pulled back from Bajor had the Cardassians waited the one turn they are supposed too. However that leaves Bajor open to attack, unless someone else goes in to cover them. So it would be a dilemma, as the declaration of war against the Trill could be seen as ruse to pull the Trill forces away from Bajor and then the Cardassians steam into Bajor. Its tricky, as their are so many factors involved. However given the distance between bajor and the homeworld of Trill i doubt they would have made it in time.

On the other hand if we gave a compulsory 1 turn pause before invasion of a system can begin, this gives the defending empire a chance to recruit troops on planets and move fleets to protect systems, or not depending on allies and other factors.

I'd like to hear more about what you think about this subject.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://darkfuture.forumotion.co.uk
Grand Nagus Ramark
Senior Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-08-30

PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:24 pm

I think the Declare war 1 turn wait is a must, I dont think Intercept is particuarly reliable (?) and due to the '3 moves in one turn' method of turn submission, it is far too powerful if you can attack planets immediately. I definately think the 1 turn wait is a must. But declare War is only required when invading a planet, you can attack someone ships at anytime of course. As to the treaties, I think agree, normally it should take 1 turn to end a treaty officially, but it can be ended immediately but you become a 'black sheep' in the quadrant, and are ulikely to get another. I think the Declare war can represent that you cant assemble a planet taking amount of troops and fleets without someone noticing....I dont know...but it should dfeinately remain, what happened to the Trill is all the example required to show that way is much too powerful. Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Argel Tal
Senior Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-11-11

PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:40 am

I agree with the waiy perion too, for what its worth

_________________
Admiral Argel Tal
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Q
Admin
avatar

Posts : 243
Join date : 2011-08-29
Age : 43
Location : manchester, uk

Character sheet
Name::
Age:

PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:49 am

Actually Intercept is very good, scouts, destroyers are the best at it and once set to Intercept a Fleet will stay in such a mode until you change it by moving them elsewhere. The more ships in an intercepting fleet the better, give a higher percentage chance they intercept the invading fleet each time they enter a square in range of the Intercepters.

Ok well we will assume for now the 1 turn delay for Declare war is still in effect.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://darkfuture.forumotion.co.uk
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Breaking Treaties & Duration   

Back to top Go down
 
Breaking Treaties & Duration
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» BREAKING(ish) NEWS - Slider S15 Wins TRC Rally Itallia!
» kok lunatic breaking top 15!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
» Discipline duration
» buff debuff cold spell duration
» Humanity Breaking Points (Vampire: The Requiem 2e)

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Star trek - Dark Future :: General in game topics and questions-
Jump to: