Diplomacy

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

I am unsure the point of Diplomacy in this game.

Let's Start with minors.
I played 25 turns as France in the Grand Campain recording my Diplomacy request and responses. I focused my Diplomacy efforts on Nassua {Starting 95}, Wurttemberg {Starting 55}, and Tuscany {Starting 50}.

Over those 25 turns, I had 45 proposals of State Visit and Commerical Alliance. I also had 3 Local Support treaties and 3 Alliance requests to Nassua before it dropped to low to offer it again. I had one negative resonse and 0 postive responses. During that time, Nassua dropped 15 points to 80. Tuscany increased two points to 52 and Wurttemberg dropped 1 point to 54.

Since I had no postive replies to any of my offers, I don't know what the postive effects for these options would be. And there is no way to predict what the rate of postive replies will be but it will be less than 2%.


Now to Major Powers.
Austria declared war on Bavaria in the 2nd week of February. Since Bavaria was my ally, I declared war back. I waited until the last week of February {Which was good weather} before I started moving the Army from France to Bavaria. It was about the 1st week in June before I cleared Bavaria and captured Salzburg.

In the south, I had big stacks under Molitor and Massena. Arch Duke Karl had a stack about the same size or a little larger than Moitor and Massena stacks. It took me 2 1/2 months to have 2 turns that both Molitor and Massena were active. {One turn to move next to Karl, and one turn to move Molitor into Karl's hex. I wanted both Molitor and Massena to be able to support each other because Karl is a good leader and was in command of a big stack. Waiting payed off because during the ensuing battle, Karl's army was almost completely destroyed. By the time Napoleon Army had taken Salzburg, the Massena's Army had captured Padova and Venezia but did not have over 20% French Loyaty needed to annex it. The month after Salzburg was taken, Austria offer peace of $385 over 5 years. I rejected it because I wanted to annex Padova, Trevisa, and Venezia.

About a month later, the Northern Army had taken Linz, Wein, Pilsen, with Innsbrook, Eger, and Prag under seige. In the south Massena's army was expanding out and taking Cities and Killing any small corp showing up. Over 20% loyaty connecting Padov, Trevis, Venezia, and Trento. Trieste had over 20% loyaty buy the two areas between still needed on Develop Territory to bump them up to 20%. A month after I take Wein, Austria offers peace for less that $285 over 10 years. Over $100 less than the previous offer and over twice the time period. Of course I reject the offer.

Forward four months to November. France now holds 9 Austrian objective cities and 12 other cities with flags. Austria still holds 6 objective cities and 6 flagged cities. {Gouvion can't take Inssbruck, Davout can't take Prage, and Murat can't take Graz even though we have been besiging them for nearly 5 months} The rest of the French army has been running amok establishing a supply network and military control over most of Austria exept for the Southern and Eastern Part of Hungray. The army needed to fall back and establish supply before winter. Austria offers peace again of $345 over 10 years. I think that I must not understand the interface and I would get a chance to annex land. By now, I had the entire pass from Tranto to Salzbury with over 20% loyalty. The major cities, Slabury, Linz, Wein, and Pressburg have over 50 loyalty. {Build Defense works Cards are very powerful. Currently as France I am getting 10 of them. Any city that has troops garrisoned gets one every time they become available.} so I accept the peace.

Nope, only got the money. For being the winner and accepting the peace, I feel really screwed. I lost all the National Morale and Victory points for the cities I gave back. My National Morale went from 173 to 122. I got the message I was losing the war and lost 15 engagement points. And other bad things including a huge VP loss. I had no idea that accepting peace was such a bad thing.

I quickly undid that turn.

IAt this point I fail to see why I should accept any peace from Austria. In 6 months I will get more money from the captured cities than from the peace settlement. And I get War Supplies, conscripts, horses, etc as a bonus. And I get to keep all the National Morale, VP, and Engagement points.

Austria got to this point because it failed to make a resonable peace offer. If it had offered money and territory on its second offer after I took Wein, I could have only taken Padova, Trevisa, and Venezia and I most likely would have accepted and they would still have their country instead a small part of Hungrey.

If you are going to be punished for accepting peace, {Losing 50+ National Morale and 15 engagement points is punishement} why bother.

Again, I fail to see the point of the Diplomacy. If you are going to be punished for accepting peace, {Losing 50+ National Morale and 15 engagement points is punishement}, you only need Diplomacy to be able to declare war on other countires. Everything else is a waste of time for no or bad results.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

As a follow up, in December, Austira offered peace again. $265 over 20 years. Keeps getting worse. By March, nearly all of their cities will be 100% loyal to me.

In January, Austria offered Peace again $235 over 20 years. Looks like as the Austrian Loyatly goes down, they don't have the income and are offering less. I managed to take two more objective Cities. One left seiging. I now have 20% loyalty regions reacing to Wein. I wonder if that wil be avialbe if Austria ever offers territory during a peace.

[Khanti]

I am unsure the point of Diplomacy in this game.

I played 25 turns as France in the Grand Campain recording my Diplomacy request and responses (...)

Wow, that was something!

(...) For being the winner and accepting the peace, I feel really screwed. I lost all the National Morale and Victory points for the cities I gave back. My National Morale went from 173 to 122. I got the message I was losing the war and lost 15 engagement points. And other bad things including a huge VP loss. I had no idea that accepting peace was such a bad thing.
(...)

If you are going to be punished for accepting peace, {Losing 50+ National Morale and 15 engagement points is punishement} why bother.

Again, I fail to see the point of the Diplomacy. If you are going to be punished for accepting peace, {Losing 50+ National Morale and 15 engagement points is punishement}, you only need Diplomacy to be able to declare war on other countires. Everything else is a waste of time for no or bad results.

The problem is that after taking objective city and not getting it in peace treaty game treats it as lost and punish you with that loss.
Something should be changed here, because it's not sensible at all. Peace is peace and should not be treated like losing war
I've seen all of the things you wrote in my campaign as Prussia. I am glad you wrote it.

Anyway I'm curious with that 20% loyalty regions. Can we get that regions in peace treaty regardless of adjacency?

PS: The reason diplomacy works this way is because Ageod rely on "historic" events that should fire and make your diplomacy true with history

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

In January, the Pressburg event came into play. I bought the card.

I am now at peace with Austria. Bavaria did not get Tirol. Kingdom of Itatly did not get Venezia. France did not get $2000. France did lose 30+ National Morale. I played ahead 4 turns to see if Austria would honor their aggreement. No luck, but I did lose 2 National Morale per turn because

Morale past turn inital amount
Return to netural value: -2
Final amount 139

So, Allies are bad because they block supply. Accepting Peace is bad because you stop collecting resources from your conquered regions and you lose large amounts of National Morale.

The winning stragey seems to be conquer and hold the entire country and move on to the next country. Ignore the scripted stuff because it causes you to lose national morale and resources, just like peace.

[veji1]

Diplomacy in this game is over complicated. slightly modified EAW diplomacy would have done the trick perfectly and been enough. They went for something that is just too complicated with too many countries and therefore too many AIs...

[Pocus]

minor AIs should really not take much time now.
Diplomacy is a much improved version of PON. This was so it can be versatile and not hard coded.

[sorta]

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a helpful reply as there are a number of threads on the same subject as yours eg peregrino05 started a thread called Military Annexation 3 weeks ago and there are others all asking how diplomacy/conquest/annexation works. The manual is silent on these areas which is surprising given its the new part of the game. At least you are lucky playing FR that you have scripted items - Ottomans get bugger all.

If you have a chance look at peregrino05 Military Annexation thread as its the same basic questions.

[Captain_Orso]

In the first war between France and Austria you can either wait for the Pressburg Peace option to become available or decide on a 'normal' Peace Treaty created through the Diplomacy Page.

You do not have to wait to see what conditions Vienna offers you. You can also go into the Diplomacy page -> select Austria on the right side -> select Treaties to Offer -> Peace Treaty - and then put a treaty together the way you would like it to be. If I understand correctly, the more War Score you leave unused, the greater the chance of your opponent faction accepting your peace offering.

[Montbrun]

We need a listing of ALL EVENTS, especially the Peace Treaties, with triggers and requirements, and the outcomes of the Events. Right now, we have no idea whether to "accept" peace through Diplomacy, or wait for an event. We also have no idea whether we're missing out on other Events, because we haven't met a specific requirement, or, at worst, an Event that didn't fire.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

In the first war between France and Austria you can either wait for the Pressburg Peace option to become available or decide on a 'normal' Peace Treaty created through the Diplomacy Page.

You do not have to wait to see what conditions Vienna offers you. You can also go into the Diplomacy page -> select Austria on the right side -> select Treaties to Offer -> Peace Treaty - and then put a treaty together the way you would like it to be. If I understand correctly, the more War Score you leave unused, the greater the chance of your opponent faction accepting your peace offering.

Thanks for the info.

I did that. Austria was offering 9 territories on the eastern border of Bavaria 6 of which did not actually touch Bavaira. I believe they designed it on purpose so you would not accept a surrender and the territory would be avaialbe for the Pressburg Treaty script. That's fine and all but why would I want to give my annexed territory back to Austria. Just say no to Peace Offers and Peacy Treaties.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

We need a listing of ALL EVENTS, especially the Peace Treaties, with triggers and requirements, and the outcomes of the Events. Right now, we have no idea whether to "accept" peace through Diplomacy, or wait for an event. We also have no idea whether we're missing out on other Events, because we haven't met a specific requirement, or, at worst, an Event that didn't fire.

Why, they just give your conquered/annexed territory back to your enemy. Just say no to Peace Offers and scripted peace events.

[Captain_Orso]

???

Stop using the term conquered. It is ambiguous and therefore meaningless.

Annexed refers to regions who's ownership are given to your faction through a peace treaty or an event. Afterwards I don't thing there is anything remaining in the regions which indicates that it had once belonged to another faction, other than perhaps loyalty to the other faction.

Controlled regions are those where you either have the highest MC (Military Control) of all factions or were the last to have had a non-leader/non-artillery combat unit in the region.

When you sign a peace treaty, all regions you have captured from the other warring faction which are owned by the other faction, have their MC returned to the other peace treaty signing faction, except regions you annex through the treaty. The inverse is also true.

[veji1]

Why, they just give your conquered/annexed territory back to your enemy. Just say no to Peace Offers and scripted peace events.

If you want to play a total war type of game, yes do that, ignore the diplomacty and events and just conquer and trash, the game allows you to have fun this way. But for many of us we want to play a historical wargame where we feel we can sense a similar atmosphere to that of real history, which does not mean repeating it necessarily.

I agree with Montbrun though to some extent : either there are no scripted peaces and it's just using the engine, or if there are scripted peaces their possibilities should be announced to the player beforehand "You are now at war with austria, if you do this or that you should get the possibility of this peace" for example.

[Captain_Orso]

You're not going to believe this, but I tend to agree with Bruce here ... ... really ... ..., no really .

Why, you might ask--after having recovered from the shock--? Because the game should give the player the same incentives as his real-world counterparts. Then the player can choose his strategy on a realistic basis, and not to exploit a shortcoming of the game.

[Captain_Orso]

Thanks for the info.

I did that. Austria was offering 9 territories on the eastern border of Bavaria 6 of which did not actually touch Bavaira. I believe they designed it on purpose so you would not accept a surrender and the territory would be avaialbe for the Pressburg Treaty script. That's fine and all but why would I want to give my annexed territory back to Austria. Just say no to Peace Offers and Peacy Treaties.

Please, please, please stop waiting for the other faction to service you. If you want some specific regions, pick them out in Diplomacy -> Select from available Treaties -> Offer Peace...

If the region isn't offered, check why, and work toward fulfilling the requirements.

[veji1]

You're not going to believe this, but I tend to agree with Bruce here ... ... really ... ..., no really .

Why, you might ask--after having recovered from the shock--? Because the game should give the player the same incentives as his real-world counterparts. Then the player can choose his strategy on a realistic basis, and not to exploit a shortcoming of the game.

To me the the player should be encouraged to go for peace settlements or be faced with growing resentment in occupied territory (partisans, uprisings) and a growing "bad boy rating" to quote an EUII term : basically as the french going for all out conquest of Austria in 1805 an just occupying the whole country while refusing acceptable peace settlements (ie the event or peace close to the WS level) should lead to other states disliking you more and more : Prussia maybe Dowing earlier, Spain maybe dropping out of the alliance, Denmark siding with Sweden and Prussia, etc..

Right now the game is very inert in that respect.

[Captain_Orso]

I pretty much agree. Maybe for every 4th region of a land occupied give that land a Partisan RGD. The larger the land and the more regions occupied, the more partisans that might be generated.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

Please, please, please stop waiting for the other faction to service you. If you want some specific regions, pick them out in Diplomacy -> Select from available Treaties -> Offer Peace...

If the region isn't offered, check why, and work toward fulfilling the requirements.

Until I read your earlier posts, I did not click on Offer Peace because I was not going to surrender to them. I did not understand that I could ask them to surrender. I thought that was me surrendering.

After I did click on it, Austria only offered 9 territories on the Eastern Border of Baviara of which 6 did not actually border Baviara. None of these had cities with flags and I had 0 loyality in all of them. Padova which is NEXT to the Kingdom of Italy had 70+ French Loyality and was not offered.

At the same time, I had 50% loyality in all the Austrian Cities North of Venice, and East and South of the Danubue except for Innsbrook and Graf. The seiges in those two cities was taking a long time and I was besigining them. I had territories in the Venice area and linking through Treiste with above 20% loyality. I had the entire mountain pass between Trento and Salzburg with above 20% loyality. I had territories from Salzburg through Linz and had only one Develop Territory Card to finish so the the path to Wein would have all had above 20% loyality.

What more did I need to do to make them offer me territiory other than the 9 undeveloped territories somewhat close to Barvia. {Again only 3 of them actually bordered Bavaria.} The territories that Austria offered, I had only ever been in one of them.

I believe they have hard coded Austria's Surrender Conditons in 1805 so no one would take them and would accept the Pressburg Peace treay when offered in January of 1806.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

???

Stop using the term conquered.

I understand the term "Conquered" is not a term used in the game to describe a region's status. But read on.

I believe that once you have Military Control of a city, resources stop flowing to the owner. Then as your loyality goes up in the city, resources start flowing to you. Once you get to 100% Loyality, all of the city's resoruces start flowing to you. That is "Conquered. {overcome and take control of (a place or people) by use of military force.}"

The point I am trying to drive home by using the term "conquered" is that you don't have to have a territory ceded to you by a peace treaty to get value {Resources} from the region.

As an example, take the Kingdom of Piedmont. France is currently at war with the Kingdom of Piedmont. The two cities in the Kingdom have 100% French Loyality. The rest of the area of the Kingdom of Piedmont hass 75% loyality to the French and 25% to the Piemonteses. The Kingdom of Piedmont has not ceded any territory to the French but that area is "Conquered." I think "Conquered" is the best term to describe the Kingdom of Piedmont's status even if it is not an offically used as a region status in the game.

Again, people think because there is Diplomacy in the game, the they must have a peace treaty to have it "conquered". The point I am trying to drive home is that there you don't need a territory to be ceded to you by a peace treaty to be "Conquered".

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

If you want to play a total war type of game, yes do that, ignore the diplomacty and events and just conquer and trash, the game allows you to have fun this way. But for many of us we want to play a historical wargame where we feel we can sense a similar atmosphere to that of real history, which does not mean repeating it necessarily.

I agree with Montbrun though to some extent : either there are no scripted peaces and it's just using the engine, or if there are scripted peaces their possibilities should be announced to the player beforehand "You are now at war with austria, if you do this or that you should get the possibility of this peace" for example.

So what you are saying is that after I took Wein in July I should have all the stopped all the French troops from moving until January when the Scripted Pressburg Peace treay becomes active?

Wait, in 1805, the Austrian did not wait until the French took Wein to come to terms. They surrendered as soon as the Austrian and Russian armies were destroyied in Ulm. They did not wait until France had taken 3/4 of their country to make the offer. So to be historical, Austria should have offered the Pressburg Peace treaty after their armies in Bavaria were destoryed.

If Austria would have offered me the Pressburg Peace treaty in July after I had destroyed the Northern and Southern Austrian armies and captured Wein, or even if they had just offered the territories I had more than 20% control {Padov, Trevisa, Venezia, and possibly Trento} at the time, I would have accepted peace offer and that would have been close to historical. Maybe 6 months sooner that in history, but with close to the same results. But waiting until I had captured 3/4 of their country to offer the Pressburg peace treaty is completly and totaly un-historical. In 1805, the Hasburg's surrended after their army was destroyed. They did not wait for their territory to be seized from them.

In 1805 after Ulm, if the Austrians did not come to agreement, do you think that Napoleon would not have marched on Wein and taken it. And if the Hasburgs still did not offer peace, do you think he would have not marched into Hungary to force them to surrender. That is exactly what he did in 1809. {Well in 1805, he might not gone into Hungary because the France itself was not nearly as stable as it was in 1809. Also, Prussia was much more of a threat in 1805 {Well, at least on paper} than it was in 1809. But at that time, he did not have to because the Hasburgs were not going to take the chance of losing "Austria" {the regions around Wein} which was the Hasburg power base which they needed to control the Austrain "Empire". It is very probable that had the Hasburg's lost "Austria" in 1805, the entire Austrian empire would have disgentrated into its component "Regions."

It is not me being un-historical. It is the Austrian AI that is being un-historical forceing me to be un-historical in turn.

In 1805, the Austrians surrendered after their army in Ulm was destoryed and they had no way to defend Wein and the surrounding area, their power base. You could do something similar by counting the French and Austrian troops in the Wien and the surrounding area and if the Austrian have less than 20% or if Wein has been taken, then fire off the Pressburg sript. That would be more Histrocal than waiting until January of 1806 to enact it.

[sorta]

I take full responsibility for using the word conqueror and also upsetting my German friend by repeating it. However conquest of minor countries has a long and noble usage in strategic wargames from the paper counter ones to the new fangled pc types e.g. Empire in Arms circa 1980s had it and so does the PC version so does many other venerable games which are the ancestors of WON. Basically big power wins war against minor county and conquers it. The real problem is that the current programing for say ottomans conquering Tunisia result in permanent war. Why would ottomans give up all the cities (all 3?) for nothing. In EIA (and War and Peace) you were forced to make peace but you did gain some regions.

I assume the playtesters played the ottomans and expanded into north Africa - how did they do it? Or did they just decide that as it didn't happen it shouldn't? Are the Ottomans just a punching bag?

Also who can explain 'adjacency' for annexation?
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1710575&mpage=1&key=�

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

I take full responsibility for using the word conqueror and also upsetting my German friend by repeating it. However conquest of minor countries has a long and noble usage in strategic wargames from the paper counter ones to the new fangled pc types e.g. Empire in Arms circa 1980s had it and so does the PC version so does many other venerable games which are the ancestors of WON. Basically big power wins war against minor county and conquers it. The real problem is that the current programing for say ottomans conquering Tunisia result in permanent war. Why would ottomans give up all the cities (all 3?) for nothing. In EIA (and War and Peace) you were forced to make peace but you did gain some regions.

I assume the playtesters played the ottomans and expanded into north Africa - how did they do it? Or did they just decide that as it didn't happen it shouldn't? Are the Ottomans just a punching bag?

Also who can explain 'adjacency' for annexation?
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1710575&mpage=1&key=�

I think you are using your experince with other games and thinking they must offer peace and give me parts of their county.

Well if you have MC and Loyatiy of 100 in all their cities, you will be getting all their resources. I equate this to "Conqured" in Empire in Arms.

If however, you go the Diplomacy route and get Defense Treaty with the minor, then I equate this to "Free State" in Empire in Arms. The "Free State" gets to keep its resources to spend on its army/navy. In this game, the AI makes all the decisions for the "Free State" that the controlling power would make in "Empire in Arms."