Defense Pacts and Protectorates for diplomacy?

Just a little something I think could be neat if added it to the 'adv. Options' for diplomacy options,

We currently have grey and green lines representing peace and alliances, I was thinking about a new diplomacy status (A line with an arrow from the protectorate to the protector, blue?) for a 'protectorate'. Protector has an (unbreakable?) alliance with the protectorate, and receives parts of it's income as well. Protectorates cannot declare war on anyone else but their protector (Rebellion). If one person is at war with an enemy, the other person is instantly at war with them as well (If Austria is a protectorate of Germany and either is attacked by Serbia, both are at war with Serbia). It would add a very interesting touch onto scenarios, and could also be used for RP games. a Protector country can have multiple protectorates.

Military Pacts would you sending an 'X amount of turns' where if the country accepts, both countries cannot declare war on each other for the specified amount of time. There can also be a cost associated with the turns ($500 for example) per turn of a military pact, so you can't just spam it around. Or you can declare war, however the attack would have a penalty with the defender (Increased unit defense for defender, increased unit cost for attacker)

I was bored and just thought of these ideas after playing a few scenario games, there's probably some flaws in them so feel free to poke holes into them. It would make the game slightly more 'historical and realistic' and change the game play up a bit which is why I say it should be more of advanced options which can be checked on and off. 'Check this box for Protectorates diplomacy, check this box for Defense Pact'

So just leave your replies here and if you like the ideas (I personally enjoy the protectorates one) or if you'd rather forget whole post all together~

I like the idea, but try tweaking it a bit.

A defense pact that forces you to actually help your ally seems like an interesting idea.
Not sure if i like the protector option though.

Just wondering how it would work out if you have a defensive pact with two countries that declare war on each other.

作者： The Tactician, 16.10.2013 at 01:46

I like the idea, but try tweaking it a bit.

it's just a rough suggestion, if you want to add onto it with your own ideas feel free to

作者： NoOne, 16.10.2013 at 02:12

A defense pact that forces you to actually help your ally seems like an interesting idea.
Not sure if i like the protector option though.

Just wondering how it would work out if you have a defensive pact with two countries that declare war on each other.

I thought the protector option would be interesting so we have more options rather then one person just trying to kill the other, it also gives more of an 'empire' feel. It was also more for scenario games.

Defensive Pact could be limited to only 1 person, the Pact could be null voided, or you could have the ability to pick who declare war on?

作者： EpicRice, 16.10.2013 at 12:25

作者： The Tactician, 16.10.2013 at 01:46

I like the idea, but try tweaking it a bit.

it's just a rough suggestion, if you want to add onto it your own ideas feel free to

作者： NoOne, 16.10.2013 at 02:12

A defense pact that forces you to actually help your ally seems like an interesting idea.
Not sure if i like the protector option though.

Just wondering how it would work out if you have a defensive pact with two countries that declare war on each other.

I thought the protector option would be interesting so we have more options rather then one person just trying to kill the other, it also gives more of an 'empire' feel. It was also more for scenario games.

Defensive Pact could be limited to only 1 person, the Pact could be null voided, or you could have the ability to pick who declare war on?

I really like this. It does give an emprie feel, that person is submitting to the other and therefore that person has effectively conquered the submitant. It also stops that ally fagging all world against you feel as well. This should be a permanent thing and the protector needs to have a reasonable amount of control to stop people using it like ally fagging and make them think twice before appealing the request.

I like the protectorate idea. Would be neat to have this option.

Not a fan of the defense pact though. Seems a bit odd. Why would there be a defense boost or cost increase for breaking an agreement?