I would lean towards agreeing. 

I agree that something has to be done to force truce yes.

Agreement intensifies. 

Just to know, how do you force truce? Seems that the AI can (and frequently) do it, but if I'm at war, in the diplomacy options it doesn't appear...

That said, I think that increasing the turns you must stay at war before forcing truce should be augmented, especially if the Militarist are the leading party.

I think the ability should remain, but should become significantly more expensive. When I got my economy going as the Lumeris, it was often worth it to let the enemy take a fringe planet on my borderland and impose a 50 dust/turn victory condition on me when I was making ~500/turn. There's not enough penalty to the loser and not enough costs to the party doing the forcing.

Only had my first game today, but was pleasantly surprised when Sophons forced truce on me (Cravers) the moment my probe found their system. It would be really good if the AI had evaluated the situation to see that I'm stronger militarily and was playing for time till it could "science the crap out of me". 

On the one hand, it's a clever use of an in-game mechanic, but on the other - it's just not very believable. How can you force truce on something like Cravers? They don't even have the concept of the thing! You can, of course, try to convince them to wait with their devouring in exchange for some princely sum, but you can't take the agency away - the player/AI has to  evaluate the truce proposal and decide to either accept or reject it.

I agree that it needs to be changed, though I think there are ways to tweak it to be very interesting indeed. 

I made a post about my solution a few minutes ago, if you're interested pop on over and let me know what you think.

An AI sucker punching one of your scouts then immediately forcing a "win" truce as soon as you gather your forces is extremely frustrating.

I agree adjustments are needed for Forced Truce but it doesn't have to be removed completely. 

the simple fact is that you cant force a truce! especialy if your on the loosing side of the conflict. 

who would enforce the truce? the loser certanly cant. 

if you offer enough money, the winning side might let you squirm a little longer, but you have nothing that could stop them if they dont want to.

also in my current game im in my 3rd forced truce for 15 turns again after like 5 turns of war, at this rate i will probably spend around 70 or more turns in forced truce.

if i remember correctly the standard game only goes 150 turns or so and i still have 2 more factions to kill after this one.

spending up to half your gametime in forced truces is a tad exessive no matter how you turn it.

i get that the mechanic is supposed to give the losing side some time to recoup and artificially lengthen the conflict time, but 15 turns is just way to long.

we all know that truces have to be agreed by both partys, but if you have to have this cluncy gamemechanic please turn it down to 5-7 turns or so.

think the same, its awfull ... destroying 10 crawler planets and all his fleets, to left just 1 sistem intact and going for it when .. force truce ... and when it ends i have to deal with 30 new ships ....  

Really strange new mechanic.

I guess this has some sense, gameplay speaking, to give a chance to long terms strategies and factions to win but, lore speaking this has no sense.

Playing the cravers, as they don't know peace (can't even sign such treaties and lote explicitly says they are made for war and destruction) why would they respect a truce or being forced to truce ?

In addition, war result, when truce is forced, is way too light on available informations.

What is war result exactly ?Guess it's the same system as in EuropaUniversalisIV with war score being a direct way to "buy" things from other party.

Mainting fleets to have the upper hand in a conflict is way more expensive that the dust/turn you get in forced truce.

I guess (and hope) it's just some EarlyAccess attempt

It seems like there's some kind of 'war score' mechanic that I haven't been able to find that determines when an empire is able to force truce one way or another. Maybe making this an option of some kind, similar to CK2's casus belli but a bit simpler, would make the forced truce mechanic more responsive.

atejas wrote:

It seems like there's some kind of 'war score' mechanic that I haven't been able to find that determines when an empire is able to force truce one way or another. Maybe making this an option of some kind, similar to CK2's casus belli but a bit simpler, would make the forced truce mechanic more responsive.

CK2 and EUIV instantly popped in my head when i saw this was score. 

I'm sure, in future releases, we will have more informations about this score calculation and, eventually, the effects it triggers

Galanthein wrote:

atejas wrote:

It seems like there's some kind of 'war score' mechanic that I haven't been able to find that determines when an empire is able to force truce one way or another. Maybe making this an option of some kind, similar to CK2's casus belli but a bit simpler, would make the forced truce mechanic more responsive.

CK2 and EUIV instantly popped in my head when i saw this was score. 

I'm sure, in future releases, we will have more informations about this score calculation and, eventually, the effects it triggers

Exactly! The idea I had in my head is that when you declare war, you also pre-determine some victory tributes (planets/resources/techs that the losing civ will have to give up) and this in turn dynamically determines the necessary war score you would need to win. It would also let it be flexible depending on the enemy's income and assets so that, for example, getting 200 dust per turn from a Lumeris faction would cost less war score (and fewer victories) than getting the same amount from a cash-strapped Cravers faction.

Here the rationale from the devs taken from the design documents as a reference to give some context:

War Exhaustion

A ‘War Exhaustion’ system has been implemented to restrict the length and scope of wars. In terms of lore, this should be considered the populations desire to leave or stay in long wars.

The system works by winning battles and taking systems will push a ‘war exhaustion’ bar that exists between the two empires. On each side of the bar, certain ‘truce thresholds’ exist at which both the winning or losing empire can use ‘demands’ to force truce by either demanding or giving up resources depending on whether the empire is winning or losing.

This system includes the Alliance system, such that all members are considered in a single war exhaustion bar, as well as the resources gained from winning will be split according to each empires contribution to the war.

In short, both sides of the conflict always has an ‘out’ to avoid being completely eliminated in a single war. Several wars will be required for elimination of an empire, which is the desired outcome

Have no opinion on force truce yet, haven't really played enough for that, but thought I would post it for those that have not read the design documents and wondering what the rationale is.