Buffalo Niagara's Blog

We are not going paperless.

There is one significant alliance with only 1 treaty and guess what, they used that treaty to enter the fray.

An aspect from the paperless world we're going to see is the fact that the text in a treaty is going to become less important, while intention will rise to prominence. It was always annoying enough treaties were supposed to be written by would-be or actual lawyers.

Non chaining really is the way to go.

Solutions non chaining, get the treaty whores out of power, and for there to be lots of treaty downgrades.

Non chaining really is the way to go.

Why?

So you can see your ally being shot to hell and can easily say: "I don't have to defend him, our treaty is Non-chaining."

No, every treaty should be chaining. If your MDP ally is being destroyed you should defend him.

We are not going paperless.

There is one significant alliance with only 1 treaty and guess what, they used that treaty to enter the fray.

It only takes one to start a trend thus only one having done it - and recently - shows nothing. More time is needed to see if that picks up. Personally, I think there will be fewer treaties held by some alliances but others will pick more up to balance it all out. I don't really see any significant change here. I miss the days games where alliances were decided by leaders, known to all and things were decided mutually or if unilateral action was taken, it was a given you were on your own.

Why?

So you can see your ally being shot to hell and can easily say: "I don't have to defend him, our treaty is Non-chaining."

Despite what any wall of text says, you don't have to defend anyone if you do not wish to. People are afraid they'll receive negative public relations for making a decision on their own rather then following blindly. Being friends or allies is not an unconditional thing but rather requires a close and working relationship. Frankly, it is my perspective that if you get into a conflict and know your ally or friend doesn't agree with your decision or they were simply never consulted then you should expect to fight on your own and accept your fate as you chose to make it by getting involved.

No, every treaty should be chaining. If your MDP ally is being destroyed you should defend him.

Really, it all depends upon the circumstances. If they didn't heed warnings or showed open lack of regard for you then clearly there is no reason to defend them. An alliance is an agreement between you independant political entities typically formed for mutual benefit and in such a circumstance it might not be beneficial in the short or long term to get involved. It could do very well for humbling them when they were getting out of control rather then enabling them by just tagging along. More to the point, an alliance has obligations for the protection of its members above other alliances. Thus if it's in their benefit then sure, get involved, otherwise I see no reason to endorse an act you might be principally opposed to.

I think the concept that treaties chain is one of the things to be done away with as is this blind obedience people clamour for. If you're really going to get involved in everything together then there is little sense in attempting to project an image where you maintain any degree of independance.

I would be extremely surprised if paperless catches on in any significant way. It would certainly make life interesting if it does, but I don't see it happening.

1. Alliance leaders want to know their chances of winning before starting a war. How is that figured? By people looking up who has a treaty and with whom and what is my sides strength vs. their side.

2. Which alliance is going to take the first step to start this trend? If it happens, right after this war (when everyone is sick of war) would be the time. Then maybe no one will "take advantage" of the alliances lack of treaties right away. But I wouldn't count on it.

However, a large reduction in treaties may happen. I also think the "non-chaining" will catch on.

sometimes your ally starts a rediculous war for no reason and you have to think "well, i dont really know..." If your alliance knows the war is wrong then opting out is a better idea.