Alliance declare war voting system

It seems this was previously implemented with the "Veto" system, but I found this was removed around update 1.1 with introduction of "I did not agree to this" alliance denouncement option. I was able to find also there were reports of issues with "Veto" and AI not following on it.

@ Devs - more info on this if possible

Donern wrote:

Yes, something like that has also happened to me. I was in an alliance with one other empire and we were winning easily, but this other AI just accepted all the truce-offers for very little dust. I was besieging some of their starsystems and suddenly we were at truce...

This needs to get in the game fast.The SP is basically a constant wargame from the mid point which in my view is not reallly what the game should be.

i agree

Honestly, I feel like this does not take the concept far enough. Perhaps what I am about to say needs it's own "Idea" post idk, or maybe it's already been said elsewhere. 

Alliances should operate like a functional UN, And should vote on more than just "War" or "Truce". For example, The Sophons want to introduce a motion that affects the entire Alliance, Like a Bill that has the other members donate a portion of their Research production to them for X amount of turns, as a humanitartian measure. This is voted on by the other members. Another example, regarding Wars and Truces. Instead of just getting kicked out of an Alliance for not being willing to conform to the Councils decision, have the Council levy heavy Sanctions upon the troublemaker in question, to punish them for defying the Councils wishes. You can then choose to leave the Council, and thus the Alliance by choice, try to do your thing despite the sactions or swallow your pride and accept it, not being able or willing to burden said sanctions. 

These votes, Bills and regulations would naturally lead to popularity and approval flucuations among your own people, depending on the public sentiment, or can even lead to internal struggle with your other political parties within your faction, which can lead to rebellions or riots, or even force you to leave a beneficial alliance in order to satisfy domestic public demand. This might be too much to ask for, but I feel like it's possible. 

That one really bothers me as well, hope devs change it soon.

This is a really good idea +1

So its stays the same ie broke.War,peace,war,peace every other turn.

I was around back when there was a veto system, and that wasn't fun either. We know a lot of player are frustrated with thei AI allies messing with their plans for war or peace, but there's no solution to that we can feasibly implement in ES2.

Personally I have never experienced the rapid change back and forth between war and peace you imply in your post, though.

Them maybe play with 12 players.The game juset becomes alliance bloc war after another to the end.

It seems odd to me basic mechanics are left bust while new DLC is being made

to allow my weak AI allies to put me at war with anyone without even asking me or at least give me the option to disband the alliance is so odd...

why even make AI ally anymore really ?

ChocKake wrote:

I do not understand; do you want for an alliance to be able to be more connected? would someone explain this?

Currently, any member of an alliance can act for all members. In order to start or end a war, it only takes one member of the alliance to want to start or end that war, and other members have no say. I think lototo is suggesting that this is changed so all members of an alliance have a say in whether a decleration of war or truce is made.

It's a difficult balance to achieve, isn't it- on the one hand, we want to reduce the frustration of having your plans utterly derailed by the actions of our allies; on the other hand, allies are empires in their own right and must be more than just a source of free fleets to throw at factions we don't like. I think that a Vote system would be the best method for alliance war dec/truces- and, in the inevitable event of a tied vote, the vote should go to the side with the larger Influence output.

Having a system similar to Total War might be an idea, where you are able to take a bit more action just before something happens, rather than after. Although it might not change things around terribly much.

This is also annoying when your teammate accepts a member into the alliance, even though the new member has 3 or 4 powerful factions at war with them at the time of acceptance.

Another thing that could be included in the voting system is if you don't see eye to eye with your alliance partner(s) (vote the opposite of what they want too often), they could leave/kick you out of the alliance somehow, encouraging cooperation a fair bit (instead of just forcing Influence points onto them for an eternity).

Yeah, I had this occur several times with the AI. I honestly would like a voting mechanism so that you would have some sort of interaction or say in your allies' decisions. As far as implementation goes, I think it'd make sense if it'd function off of the Pressure mechanic, so that way those who have more sway in the alliance gets to make the final decision sort of deal. Kind of what Tagma was talking about.

Tagma wrote:

It's a difficult balance to achieve, isn't it- on the one hand, we want to reduce the frustration of having your plans utterly derailed by the actions of our allies; on the other hand, allies are empires in their own right and must be more than just a source of free fleets to throw at factions we don't like. I think that a Vote system would be the best method for alliance war dec/truces- and, in the inevitable event of a tied vote, the vote should go to the side with the larger Influence output.

Some mechanics giving high influence factions more power in the alliance would be fun I think. Maybe having a sort of bidding with influence when vetoing declare war or truce?

There need to be more things to spend influence on, so agree.

I do not understand; do you want for an alliance to be able to be more connected? would someone explain this?

Yes, something like that has also happened to me. I was in an alliance with one other empire and we were winning easily, but this other AI just accepted all the truce-offers for very little dust. I was besieging some of their starsystems and suddenly we were at truce...

I had a similar Idea:

https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/ideas/1152-additional-options-for-alliance-diplomacy

The current alliance system should indeed have a vote count on declaring war/truce. Sometimes it is just awkward when you are winning the war while alliance decides to have a truce for no reasons. They should have a majority system.(4 members, has to pass 3/4 in order to initiate a war or a truce.)

This should be a no-brainer, the current system is broken and many times does not align with your personal goals.

Just something similar to the council votes in Alpha Centauri would work wonders.

Whether the votes should be equal or weighted, I'm not sure.

IIRC Alpha Centauri did weighting based on total population - which made sense for that game. With the asymmetry of ES, however, such a decision is not nearly as straight forward. Weighting things wrong could easily turn specific factions the default-underdogs in any alliance. Or perhaps worse: Limit the viable strategies, should you want to keep alliances a useful option in a game.

The safest approach, while providing a clear improvement over the current state of things, would seem to be an unweighted vote.

Later, aside from weighting considerations, you might consider using the alliance voting system for alliance-wide regulation as seen in the Alpha Centauri council and similar mechanics in Galactic Civilizations & other 4x'es.

Totally agree! +1

AngryAnt wrote:

Just something similar to the council votes in Alpha Centauri would work wonders.

Whether the votes should be equal or weighted, I'm not sure.

IIRC Alpha Centauri did weighting based on total population - which made sense for that game. With the asymmetry of ES, however, such a decision is not nearly as straight forward. Weighting things wrong could easily turn specific factions the default-underdogs in any alliance. Or perhaps worse: Limit the viable strategies, should you want to keep alliances a useful option in a game.

The safest approach, while providing a clear improvement over the current state of things, would seem to be an unweighted vote.

Later, aside from weighting considerations, you might consider using the alliance voting system for alliance-wide regulation as seen in the Alpha Centauri council and similar mechanics in Galactic Civilizations & other 4x'es.

Well, why not both! Like English Parliment and American Congress, we can make the vote two-round.

First is  a national vote. One empire one vote. If proposal passed by having the majority (50%+) voted "yes". Second round starts next turn.

Second round is a popular vote, where the number of vote an empire have is proprtional to their population count, like every 5 pop generate a vote. this ratio may be improved by advancing to higher eras in the left tree, and may be modified by in-nation politics (if pacifists are in power, vote toward war will only have 75% effectiveness, but vote toward truce have 125%, or such) . If proposal reached over 2/3 yes, it passes.

It will make aliance dicision rather lenthy, and will make political stalling possible (multiple small nation can stall one big one in round one, while big nations can do the same in round two). But that just adds flavor to  aliance politics...

Also: durig the summit, there will be options to "buy" aliance votes through diplomacy ("I give you 100 antimatter, and you vote yes on war declaration?" "deal.")