It is an extremely annoying and unrealistic mechanic that has to go away until something more clever is in it's place.

It is especially devastating to Cravers, since they rely on that +15 happiness per war, and when 3 opponents are forcetrucing a craver one after another - the craver is like a dog with a leash put on him, left with a bunch of rebelling planets.

Not to sound like a jerk, but this has already been stated it's going to be gutted. Why is this still a concern?

Romeo wrote:

Not to sound like a jerk, but this has already been stated it's going to be gutted. Why is this still a concern?

Indeed. Looks like some people just looking for any excuse to have a moan at the devs. 

Romeo wrote:

Not to sound like a jerk, but this has already been stated it's going to be gutted. Why is this still a concern?

Indeed. Looks like some people just looking for any excuse to have a moan at the devs. 

Sir-Rogers wrote:

N.N.Thoughts wrote:
However, the penalty here is not simply for spreading yourself thin, it's for not defending your territory adequately. Sir-Roger's scenario involved Player A losing a few systems before being able to bring the might of his fleet to bear on the opportunistic attacker.

The only problem I have with this is that you were either quoting me out of context or that you didn´t read my post in its entirety, and/or missed the point - as this was a clear centerpiece of the post "even though I was constantly killing their fleet, they were making small insignificant advances that counted for much more war-score than me wrecking their fleet"

The territory was not inadequately defended - in fact I was beating the combined military might of 5 other players alone, and I was crushing them. I find it inadequate to constantly discuss another game´s shortcomings on this forum, if I do mention Stellaris it´s because I want to avoid the same mistakes being carried over. The problem is that the way the "Forced Truce" mechanic is implemented there is just to showcase how such a mechanic can completely ruin the game´s fun.

In our case Stellaris was giving more weight to a number of insignificant things adding up more than the significant battles. Added to it that occupying an entire player´s systems didn´t count at all. The system is based on the WarScore system of their other games - where it works well. It just doesn´t work in Space. And they made the big mistake of thinking that they can just translate their existing system into a space game. Their historical games have military which moves in a realistic way - Space has jumpdrives, hyperdrives and warpdrives that are a complete game changer, and the game designers - or whoever was in charge of the decision making - did not account for this.

As I have stated before it´s almost impossible to make a good mechanic that will account for everything and make it balanced. I want Endless Space 2 to be everything that Stellaris couldn´t be - and for that force truce has to go.

It's already gone. Have you edited your original post? Can't seem to find the scenario I was referring to. From memory, it ran something like, weaker empire attacks my borders, but by the time I bring my fleet over from wherever it was roaming, the marauding savages are declaring forced truce on me. This won't be a problem going forward as you can just refuse and go after them. As for killing fleet vs insignificant advances in terms of their contribution towards war score, sounds like a fairly straightforward number balancing.

Hello everyone

As some of you have been reminding newcomers to the thread, indeed the Forced Truce is going to be changed to a Truce, thus effectively removing the very unsatisfactory "forced" part.

When a Truce proposal is made, the recipient of the proposition will be able to either accept or refuse it. 

Accepting will cause the losing party to pay a tribute in Dust to the winning party for a certain amount of turns (the tribute will stop being paid if the Truce is broken prematurely). 

Refusing the Truce will cause the recipient to suffer an approval penalty for refusing peace, and cause a few more turns of war before the Truce can be proposed again by the original sender (note: the recipient, after refusing a proposal, will be able to send their own proposal at any time). Accepting a new Truce or proposing one will negate the Approval penalties caused by the current war.

On a side note, it's not implemented nor decided yet but we can always consider making special cases tied to the Cravers Affinity or Militarist governments.

I hope this clears things up

Cheers,

well it seems that the possibility to break a truce was always here anyway (i fiddled with the files a bit to allow attack while in truce and noticed that the factions all had custom lines regarding the fact that you attack while being in truce)

So i always thought that we would get something that would allow us to break truce sooner or later that's why i wasn't very preoccupied ^^ .

also i believe that the other IA empires should get more wary of you the more you declare war on others (something like a threat to galactic stability) and mayt be draw to league against you if you prove too agressive (and breaking a truce would add a lot to that)

Pejman wrote:

also i believe that the other IA empires should get more wary of you the more you declare war on others (something like a threat to galactic stability) and mayt be draw to league against you if you prove too agressive (and breaking a truce would add a lot to that)

Yes, this is something that we plan to do, but we're not quite there yet!

In the example you wrote, another scenario we'd like to achieve is that a militarist/cruel faction might also actually want to ally with you and help you eradicate all life in the galaxy - if you didn't have bad relations with it that is.

well you could add a system of attitudes based on the government they have (militaristic respecting fleet strength and victorious campaigns, scienfic will be nicer to those who prefer sciences but will show less interest to those with more primitive techs etc etc) .

The only problem i have with this is that i fear the IA would become very unpredictable due to the fact that election can completely change their behavior if you make them based on their leading party (for instance waging war together with a militaristic Lumeris against a sophon empire, election hit the lumeris, they swap to pacifist leader and will turn against me).

it can possibly be a very good system or a completly cahotic one depending on how it's handled (but that could become very interesting with a spy system that allows medling in other empires political affairs (propaganda scandal affairs and stuff))