(Discussion) Non-Breakable Alliances

[Rilder]

So M2:TW opens up the possibility of locking alliances so they can't be broken by the player or the AI without a diplomat.

Now this isn't a thread to suggest it to the EB Team since they probably already know about it and are discussing it but I was pondering what we players think of it.

It seems good in theory; keeps the AI from betraying you, however I'm worried that it may cripple the AI too much if they can't betray each other and most likely they won't be coded to cancel alliances first. (Aka Seleukia Satraps being locked)

If It could be locked to just prevent the AI from betraying the player however it would be a welcome improvement.

[Belisarius II]

Having locked alliances would be nice in the beginning of the game, but it wouldn't be much fun later in the game. If everything went according to plan then you could beat every faction's campaign in a couple of months or so. That wouldn't be much fun and I'd probably get sick of the game. If you made an alliance with all you're neighboring factions then what? You sit there and twiddle your thumbs?

[Cute Wolf]

(\ /)
(x x)
( | )
( "." )

Just give one faction a "Papal State" faction, now all the Catholics can't attack them...

[Alsatia]

(\ /)
(x x)
( | )
( "." )

Just give one faction a "Papal State" faction, now all the Catholics can't attack them...

There were no catholics at this time...

And how can you give a faction a faction?

[Cute Wolf]

Sorry, language error...

I mean (Dead Rabbit pics), we should include "papal state" faction, and rename "catholic" religion "Hellenic Culture", so all the Hellenic factions couldn't attack each other without suffer some kind of penalty...

But this was illogical, that's why I put those dead rabbit pics...

(\ /)
(x x)
( | )
( "." )

[madbriton]

Wouldn't really fit the period. I mean, there were almost no alliances in those days that weren't broken at some time or another.