Conquer Club

First, i want to apologise about my bad english. I've got a disease when i was young : i'm french. Scientists tries to find a vaccination against this virus but it doesn't work : there are still more and more frenchies in the world.


So this is my proposition : last time, someone broke a truce he had with me (without any notification) and ruined my game i was going to win.

I propose to integrate in the game an option. If you have a truce with somebody, it would be good to make it clear in the game. Like buttons : ask for a truce with this guy. If the guy click yes, the truce begin to be active. And as soon as it's active, the 2 guys can't attack each other in the border(s) where there is a truce. Because the computer will not allowed them, like "impossible move, you've got a truce here".

Truce could be negociate for limited time or unlimited time (1 turn notification). The notification would be automatically accepted by the computer and sent to the other player, and the guy will be allowed to attack in this border from the next turn.

Because, too many people are backstabber with the truces. It's never clear, and that make the game for not honest people. Sometimes, the winner is not the best in strategy but the less honest person.

So after that, the current solution is just to give a bad rating. The problem is : there is no influence. If you play in 12 players game, what will happen ? One person break a truce. So you start to complain in the chat. But the breaking truce is good for everyone except for you. So finally, everyone will not be agree with your complaining. And in the final, you will even get a less rating than the backstabber who broke the truce and fooled immoraly your game.

I hope you will listen my proposition.

Thank you. Merci.

Don't expect someone to hold a truce when you're about to win a game. Most are not crazy enough to let you win because they made an agreement without proper conditions (e.g. you'll be attacked if you're sweeping the board).

This is mostly an unwritten rule. And 'unbreakable truces' aren't gonna happen. Learn to adapt.

For me it's just honesty and integrity. With most of people, truces are not broken. In most of games, they just leave 1 troop in the border because they trust each other. Why to have truces if you can't expect anything ? I'm absolutely not agree with you.

Truces are breakable if you notice it. It's an unformal rules but usually it's 1 turn notice. It's the first time for me someone break a truce without any notice.

In my opinion, i prefer to lose the game and respect my opponent to notice him about stop a truce, rather than breaking a truce without any notice. That kind of people are just not honnest person...

The surprise is half the battle. Many things are half the battle, losing is half the battle. Let's think about what's the whole battle.

So if i understand what you mean is : i can break a truce when i want without any notice.

Ok so if i have a problem with that with a player (if i break a truce without notice and he's not happy), i will give to him this link. And what to do if he give me a bad rating because i have broken a truce without any notice ? I guess it's not a reason for giving a bad rating because surprise is half of the game. So maybe someone in CC could take off his rating ? right ?

But now i understood that truce is not a truce. I can break it when i want. Thank's to make it me clear.

That's good because, my new strategy will be : make a truce with everybody and when they take off all their troop in the border, just attack them. And if they are not happy, i will give them this link to clarify the situation

babiscus wrote:So if i understand what you mean is : i can break a truce when i want without any notice.

Ok so if i have a problem with that with a player (if i break a truce without notice and he's not happy), i will give to him this link. And what to do if he give me a bad rating because i have broken a truce without any notice ? I guess it's not a reason for giving a bad rating because surprise is half of the game. So maybe someone in CC could take off his rating ? right ?

But now i understood that truce is not a truce. I can break it when i want. Thank's to make it me clear.

That's good because, my new strategy will be : make a truce with everybody and when they take off all their troop in the border, just attack them. And if they are not happy, i will give them this link to clarify the situation

Sure, you do that.
Never a good idea taking ''all'' your units off your border...just asking for trouble.
Learn to adapt.


The surprise is half the battle. Many things are half the battle, losing is half the battle. Let's think about what's the whole battle.


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=200590&p=4383723&hilit=truces+War#p4383652

Unfortunately a truce is a non-binding agreement!

But, please fill out the template in your original post (viewtopic.php?f=4&t=205336) if you'd like further discussion of this suggestion.

babiscus wrote:So if i understand what you mean is : i can break a truce when i want without any notice.

Ok so if i have a problem with that with a player (if i break a truce without notice and he's not happy), i will give to him this link. And what to do if he give me a bad rating because i have broken a truce without any notice ? I guess it's not a reason for giving a bad rating because surprise is half of the game. So maybe someone in CC could take off his rating ? right ?

Nope, leaving bad ratings (or using the Foe list) is the solution to people breaking truces. Next time you are thinking about making a truce with someone be sure to check their ratings. Look at their fair play stat and compare the number of "Trustworthy" to "Backstabber" tags.

I actually think it s a brilliant idea.
You could have the option for a truce mode that you couldn t break. Giving conditions such as: green and blue can t attack each other for 3 turns; or green and blue can t attack each other until red is dead.

You could still do truces in normal games at your own risk.

That would just plain suck, breaking truces are a part of the war (and game in this case). It would easily lead to prisonment, in example killing other player's regions to contain your truce-mate in the region, as he can't attack you. If the system was already in place (ie. in dubs you can't attack your partner), this could go, but otherwise, bad idea.

I was just in a game where somebody requested a ''little'' truce.
I did not respond; I pulled my units off of his border...in so doing he thought that was enough to acknowledge the commencement of the truce?
Two turns later he was sweeping the board, naturally I attacked.
Of course he started bitching (rating of 4.0) about me being a truce breaker?
No truce? Little truce??

Many risk players do not like or understand diplomacy.
Watch whom you make a treaty with.
Don't make treaties if you are not set up for a backstabbing.
Treaties serve two purposes...peace or surprise attack.
It is better to have an unspoken (treaty) understanding, rather than a treaty.
Try to be the first one to break a truce...that way you should always be prepared.
truces (cease-fire; armistice) are never meant to last.

I think this Idea could work.
Two players (or multiple) have a truce; first person to break truce has to wait till his next turn before he can attack.
Other player can attack on his immediate turn.
Team games are irrelevant on this subject.

I think this just brings a new level of secret diplomacy; two friends join a game and create an unbreakable truce until everyone else is dead. Having truces broken is a pain, granted, but one should learn to adapt like BBS said and anticipate it happening.