Silence means consent?

[unmerged(9622)]

Well, as you might have read sergei said the Team is working over this issue, that is in CK if you get some diplomatic proposal: peace/war/vassalage or something else - you will be obliged to react somehow because if you don't - after 30 days of your silence - this treaty will be automatically imposed on you.

So the question is: do you think it's a worth decision?

P.S. Personally, I am a bit confused as to perspectives of such an option

 

[Eochaid]

As I already said in the Snowball Forum, I am against such a thing. No answer should mean a disagreement.

And BTW, Sergeï admitted that it would be better so after some other people over there said the same thing.

 

[unmerged(8913)]

I think it's a bad idea....

It would be all too easy to become involved in other aspects of the game, and miss a key proposal. I think it would be detrimental to the game if this proposal were then "imposed" on you without your consent.

 

[magicpiper97]

I think I agree - silence should mean disagreement. If they're looking for a way to 'penalize' players who are too busy to get to all diplomatic offers because of war or whatever, maybe a silent disagreement could carry with it a drop in relations or something.

 

[unmerged(8913)]

Originally posted by magicpiper97
I think I agree - silence should mean disagreement. If they're looking for a way to 'penalize' players who are too busy to get to all diplomatic offers because of war or whatever, maybe a silent disagreement could carry with it a drop in relations or something.

I'd imagine an explicit disagreement would lead to a drop in relations as well....

 

[Xoxxon]

The adaptation of the silence rule would mean that the Proposals menu would have to be checked at least once in every 30 day period. Being one of those guys who plays EU at lightning speeds, 30 days is a blink of an eye in EU, since I can't think of anything I have to do every 30 days there. So this seems to suggest that CK is meant to be played at a slower pace than EU. Does anybody know what the smallest unit of time in CK is going to be? Days, hours, weeks, or otherwise?

As for the silence rule, I really have no preference. I could see checking the Proposals screen every month or so becoming more of a chore than a joy as I became more familiar with the game. It might be easier were there some sort of icon that popped up informing you when a proposal has been put on the table, or some other visual aid to alert you, and then an option to either accept, decline, or ignore the proposal.

 

[Aetius]

To be honest a 30 day offer period, if not agreed upon game pauses at the end and forces you to make a decision would be the best

 

[magicpiper97]

The quote from the man himself:

well you are correct, it was proven to me last night that this will destroy game's pace & balance.

we also finalised the proposals as "goods" rather than "information. basically, information in the game transfers momentarily -- you give order, troops start to move. somebody dies -- you learn about it the same moment. but goods like tax money or the tropps themselves move with realistic speed and bear the risk of losses along the way. so for proposals we had a dilemma, do we transfer them immediately? then it will be very easy to deal with the most distant lands in a blink. so the result is, proposal is "goods" and has a cost of sending herald with it (small but still -- something like $10), and the herald is subject to risks (* accident when crossing provinces with combat * illness * murder -- this one gives you lifetime CB against the province where herald was murdered). but the reply -- accept or decline -- is "information".

Sounds very interesting. Maybe we'll also be able to dictate when messengers/goods should arrive, rather then having them get there ASAP? And is there a possibility that we can set our own deadlines for proposals? Hmmmm...
(Also, thanks to Khimaira for forwarding our thoughts to the Snowball forums, though I'll probably end up registering soon)

 

[unmerged(9622)]

Originally posted by magicpiper97
The quote from the man himself:



Sounds very interesting. Maybe we'll also be able to dictate when messengers/goods should arrive, rather then having them get there ASAP? And is there a possibility that we can set our own deadlines for proposals? Hmmmm...
(Also, thanks to Khimaira for forwarding our thoughts to the Snowball forums, though I'll probably end up registering soon)

Ur welcome, indeed

I got one thing which bothers me - imagine that you are in war against some state (let it be County A and County B) - your troops besiege County B capital or main castle - it may turn out to be that ruler of County B has got shot during this siege, but during the anarchy within this city/capital/castle - there is just no one sane to carry on negotiations.

Though from point of view of game balance that can be quite applicable.

 

[unmerged(8913)]

I'm curious as to why the original proposal would be treated as "goods", i.e. it takes time to traverse land, and has the accompanying risks, but the response is merely information. Wouldn't it have to cross that same distance of land that the original proposal crossed, and be subject to the very same risks?

 

[irishpony]

it should be an option this way it would make everyone happy

 

[Commandante]

Originally posted by Aetius
To be honest a 30 day offer period, if not agreed upon game pauses at the end and forces you to make a decision would be the best

Sounds like a nice idea, but I think I'd rather lean on the "no anwer is a disagreement" view.

 

[unmerged(10802)]

That sucks, its not like picking up the phone in those days, who knows how long the messanger could take to get to places, it should be much longer then 30 days....
I say ignoring should mean a total negative to the proposal not a aggreement

 

[unmerged(8913)]

Originally posted by Josquius
That sucks, its not like picking up the phone in those days, who knows how long the messanger could take to get to places, it should be much longer then 30 days....
I say ignoring should mean a total negative to the proposal not a aggreement

Well, I think what was meant was that you would have 30 days to respond after the messanger arrives at your court. Still, I agree that ignoring should at least be a negative reply, or perhaps the game would just pause after 30 days to force you to either agree or decline.