War settlement treaties

[Kevin Ar18]

When a war ends you should have to negotiate a settlement treaty.

There would be a few types.
1. Unconditional surrender
You require the Civ to give an unconditional surrender. This would require you to completely break their war ability in which they surrender. At this point you could basically force any agreement on them because it was an unconditional surrender. You would only be limited in what you can do to them by your government or other Civs perception of you.
2. Negotiated surrender or cease fire.
Here you negotiate a settlement to end the war.

Some of the options in the negotiation should be:
The ability to put control of their cities into other Civs hands (including your own or even a minor civ).
The ability to take away or give territory to the civ.
The ability to place an occupation/police force in their Civ.
and more....

[Footie Mad]

Im positive to your suggestion mainly because of the empty feeling i got when signing treaties in civ 2. There are many examples of advanced treaties ( the germans after ww 1 being totally humiliated, something that paved the way for the nazis )
and I would be greatly dissapointed i they dont include this.
When I think of it I cant think of any peace treaty written like:
" Now we are at peace, lets get out of eachothers face ".

[To_Serve_Man]

The capturing of the city with the 'Palace' should be very devistating.

[Ralf]

Im not principally against your ideas - but, before adding more complicated war-settlements negotiations, that perhaps civers can exploit much better then the AI can, I think they should prioritize the following two things first:

• Peace & alliance agreements that both the the HP and the AI-Civ actually can TRUST 100%; meaning mutually "hardcoded" binding treatys - although time & turn-limited. of course.
  Im sick and tired of erratic and unlogic backstabbings, there everyone doublecrosses everyone else. I explain it better in THIS THREAD.
  
• Also, the developer team should do something about meagre "I refuse to speak with you" diplomacy. I explain that one to in THIS THREAD.

[Kevin Ar18]

As much as I love conquering the world, I also like those games where I play a part of many other civs on a planet. Just watching some build up/ die off etc... And I'd like to be able to play a part in some like put a police / occupation force in some civ instead of taking it over.

Or fortify my weak ally with troops because he has only one city left and people want to kill him. And build new cities for an ally and give 'em to him. etc... etc...

[meriadoc]

I'll admit it, I'd love to see some options when signing peace treaties. It would make the game more realistic, and probably more fun, if I could tell the Germans that they now owe me 5 gold per turn for the rest of the game or I will declare war on them again. However, what I'd really like to see is a peace treaty that works.
No matter whether I was playing a game of Civ2 or CTP1 or 2, the civilization that I had signed a peace treaty with would almost always backstab me and attack, breaking the treaty. Why? I don't know, because I was overly nice to them. Sure, I'd remind them during the war itself that I can obliterate them, but I'd never do too much damage, and when we were at peace I was so nice I almost had to throw up from it.

[Rollo_CH]

I totally agree - More possibilities for after-war agreements. It would be nice to see a sort of "limitation" to the losing parts number of military units. Example: If your enemy agrees to a cease-fire, an end to hostilities, simply a surrender, you can decide that his military force should not exceed one per city/colony. Germany was forced to limit their Army/Navy/Airforce after the WW1 & 2. Though they did break it after a few years...

[Kevin Ar18]

Yeah, I would like those after war diplomacy options. But they would have to include options to rearrange land territories, give cities to any civ including a minor civ, impose a police/occupasion force, and impose limitations you maintain on the conquered civ for a certain amount of time.

As in the example with Germany.... let's apply it to CivIII....

You conquer 3/4 of German cities and land, then they surrender. In your terms of surrender (not peace) negotiations you decide you don't want to keep all their cities as your own nation.

So...(All in the diplomacy screen of CivIII)
You give their cities back to them.
You decide what their new borders (territory will be)
You may even make some of their cities into a new minor civ or keep some for yourself or your allies (like Russia did).
You decide that you will put an occupationary / police force in their civ.
You may also decide that you are gonna impose a restriction on that country for the next few years.

Depending on what you impose on them in the surrender terms, it could affect what happens to them.

Good surrender terms - good outcome
Bad surrender terms - bad oucome
(that is if you decide to give the land back to them, otherwise it don't really matter does it? )
Then again if the Civ is just too agressive anyways, they may want another go at a war anyways.

[Footie Mad]

In addition I think you should have the opportunity to " sell " the cities back. A large sum of money...perhaps something like " we will give you 5 gold every year for the next 100 years "..this could be done with resouces as well.