General Vengeance Posted July 9, 2008 Report Share Posted July 9, 2008 (edited) It is my understanding that the Blockade is a form of attack, so obviously the nation subject to a blockade would have to be in war mode? What I would like to suggest that even a nation in peacemode can be subject to a Naval blockade. Some nations and alliances have used peacemode as a tactic as to not to have to face diplomatic or military repercussions. To counter this tactic by permitting Blockades against nations in peacemode, would require said Nation to promptly seek a diplomatic solution or to come out of peace mode and engage their aggressor, before enough blockade's are in place to block 100% of their daily income. Peace mode would still be effective against all current forms of attacks they are immune to now in peacemode. I merely suggest that the Blockade be the one form of attack that even nations in peacemode could be subjected to. Edited July 9, 2008 by General Vengeance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Emares Posted July 9, 2008 Report Share Posted July 9, 2008 peace mode nations already have their income severely reduced...so no i would not support this if the rest of the system stays as is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted July 9, 2008 Report Share Posted July 9, 2008 (edited) peace mode nations already have their income severely reduced...so no i would not support this if the rest of the system stays as is This @ OP: You think certain alliances live in peace mode because they don't want to solve their problems diplomaticly? In all but a few rare cases where nations and alliances are eternal peace mode it's because their attackers are unresonable and refuse to ever grant them peace under any condition. Aggressors are able to be completely unresonable because game mechanics favors the strong immensely making it impossible for the weak to fight back, thus, they are forced into eternal peace mode. Your idea fails, hard. Edited July 9, 2008 by der_ko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Vengeance Posted July 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 This@ OP: You think certain alliances live in peace mode because they don't want to solve their problems diplomaticly? In all but a few rare cases where nations and alliances are eternal peace mode it's because their attackers are unresonable and refuse to ever grant them peace under any condition. Aggressors are able to be completely unresonable because game mechanics favors the strong immensely making it impossible for the weak to fight back, thus, they are forced into eternal peace mode. Your idea fails, hard. Yes, I actually do think certain alliances and or nations take to peace mode for either they will not attempt diplomatic resolve for their past transgressions. Your right some won't be given peace under any circumstance, however usually due to their own prior actions. My reply is simple, "to bad that's life". Cyber Nations is a combination of several factors Diplomacy and Military victory among them. By having nations and or alliances forced out of peace mode to "Face the Music" if blockades are permitted against those in peace mode. Is perhaps what this game needs more of. Leaders are then held more accountable for their actions and words, both as the attacker and defender. You don't give people enough credit who play CN. You honestly don't think alliance's don't keep tabs on which Nations and Alliances conduct themselves in a unsavory manner. Smaller nations probably will never be subject to blockades, The Navy is expensive to purchase and maintain. So I would imagine these nations will never be in range of such an attack. By permitting a Blockade against a nation or alliance in peace mode, you would definitely see some sort of resolve to any conflict. You may not find this suggestion attractive, but that is why it's a suggestion. I do have a question, what is so endearing about eternal peace mode? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ch33kY Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 You don't give people enough credit who play CN. You honestly don't think alliance's don't keep tabs on which Nations and Alliances conduct themselves in a unsavory manner. It could not possibly be that people who conduct themselves in an unsavory manner are those with great amounts of power backing their actions. No, it surely could not be, because this is the best of all possible Cyberverses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordd Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 You have to declare war in order to blockade, thus you can only use naval anything in a war, if you blockaded a nation in peace that would be illogical, then peace mode would be worthless as you could reduce someone's income by up to 100% in peace mode, not to forget the fact that the navy would have to be re-implemented in the code like spies, which are not part of the war system and thus can be used against nations in peace mode. So i, and i imagine most people, would oppose this suggestion because what you are proposing would change the fundamental nature of navy as another part of the war system like aircraft, tanks, etc... and make navy akin to spies instead, which then brings a whole host of other implications along with it which would diminish the overall effect of having the navy in the 1st place imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Vengeance Posted July 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 You have to declare war in order to blockade, thus you can only use naval anything in a war, if you blockaded a nation in peace that would be illogical, then peace mode would be worthless as you could reduce someone's income by up to 100% in peace mode, not to forget the fact that the navy would have to be re-implemented in the code like spies, which are not part of the war system and thus can be used against nations in peace mode.So i, and i imagine most people, would oppose this suggestion because what you are proposing would change the fundamental nature of navy as another part of the war system like aircraft, tanks, etc... and make navy akin to spies instead, which then brings a whole host of other implications along with it which would diminish the overall effect of having the navy in the 1st place imho. Fair enough, I was trying to make an association between Team Senators who may sanction your trades even if you are in peace mode and blockades. I guess I'll have to be content with nations taking to peace mode and suffering a -14 happiness penalty. If a Mod would be kind enough for a lock please, this thread needs no further dicussion, it has addressed my query. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 Fair enough, I was trying to make an association between Team Senators who may sanction your trades even if you are in peace mode and blockades. I guess I'll have to be content with nations taking to peace mode and suffering a -14 happiness penalty. There's more than the -14 happiness penalty. On day 6, there is a massive income penalty on top of the happiness hit. Peace mode is much more severe than most folks give it credit for, because most folks pop out after 5 days. A military blockade is an attack, and peace moders already have it hard enough without getting attacked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.