Peacemaking

[Verrucosus]

When I play the Peacekeepers, I very often try to stay in character and to stop vendettas between other factions. Sometimes this is counterproductive from a strategic perspective, but very often it isn't because one of the combattants is one of my natural allies (Deidre, Zakharov), whom I want to keep in the game rather than marched over by a stronger opponent (Yang, Miriam). Getting a peace deal is easy as long as I have only a Treaty of Friendship with the leader who started the vendetta and he is willing to talk.

However, I get into problems when the vendetta has been started by my pactmate, because before I get the chance to ask him to stop the vendetta, he will ask me to join it. After I do that, there is little point in asking my ally to stop unless I can get out of this myself which I cannot know in advance.

Questions:
1) How do you deal with this problem when trying to be "peacemaker"?
2) What are the terms of a Pact of Brotherhood in this respect? The manual description ("If one pact brother declares vendetta ..., the pact partner is expected to do the same.") suggests an offensive pact while the datalinks entry ("... are expected to defend one another from attack") points to a defensive alliance.
3) Is there a way to find out who started a vendetta other than asking one of the opponent to stop?

[CEO Aaron]

Good questions. And I like the way you approach the challenge of bringing the belligerent AI to heel. Unfortunately, the diplomatic options in SMAX still leave a bit to be desired, in so far as there's no way to determine who is the aggresssor in a vendetta.

As a general rule, I do not Pact with any AI opponent unless they are submisssive. There are very few circumstances where a pact will serve my interests better than a treaty, as I'm quite keen on maintaining my borders, and I find the AI's habit of shipping units to me then transferring them to be highly irritating, even if I can just disband the junk they send over. I also find that staying in treaty will keep your rivals respectful longer, and they don't have the expectation that you will take care of them as the disparity between your factions grows.

[Verrucosus]

These are good points. Also, if a pact is more than just a defensive alliance and requires to support your ally even when he is the aggressor, it is something that Lal shouldn't sign anyway which fits in with the roleplaying idea.

[Kadrian]

This is something I should keep in mind as well. I usually play the Gaians just because they're the default, but it seems that I end up doing a lot more peace-keeping than Lal does. In fact, in the game I played last night Lal seemed rather aggressive, continually violating his treaties with me by sending probe teams into my bases and sabotaging things.

For my part I'll often talk to other faction leaders and try to get them to call off their vendettas against each other. This is usually a matter of self-interest since it in my favor to have the less troublesome factions (Morgan Industries and The University) fighting the more aggressive factions (The Hive and The Believers) rather than having the more passive factions fighting each other.

[Archaic]

I personally find that the best option is to simply pay the AI aggressor in a war off, preferably with tech, while refusing to get involved in wars yourself. Simply put, the AI will never hope to match a human's tech progression, so it really doesn't harm you if they have more. Try and maintain Pacts with as many factions as possible, it'll help your economy. AI's generally are less demanding of you diplomatically (at least in regard to war) when you have such a tangled web of relations that you'd be friendly to practically anyone they want to attack anyway.

[Verrucosus]

That's true, but when I try to "stay in character", my options are more limited. For example, when it comes to the UN Charter, Lal is not just an idealist, but also a bit of a legalist, so I imagine that he would want to know the exact terms of Pact of Brotherhood and - as a rule - not sign them, if he cannot honour them.

[Kadrian]

I've not managed to get a pact going with all other factions (or even most of them) at once. I've noticed that when I do have a pact with a couple of them who decide to fight each other, one or the other will demand I drop my pact with their enemy and if I refuse to do so, they drop their pact with me. Sometimes they even declare a vendetta. Seems like that game is just itching for a fight.

Kadrian

[Verrucosus]

Yes, it is set up that way. I've pulled it off a few times and kept humanity united for a few decades, but I had to refrain myself from using social engineering (someone always takes offense), stop any vendettas between my pactmates as soon they started and shower them with gift. Even in those cases it was only a matter of time before someone noticed that I was setting myself up as "the only legitimate authority on Planet". Of course, submissive pacts are more reliable, but I would have to break character to get there.

Verrucosus

[Hydro]

Forming a coalition and maintaining Pacts can be fun role playing, but it does involve compromises. Generally my SE is more limited than I’d like, and it is generally impossible to maintain a Pact with an aggressive faction unless they are submissive. What I find works is calling them up every 10 years and offering a gift of tech. It seems that this does more to improve their attitude than when they ask for it, so keeping them Magnanimous isn’t all that difficult. Then when they call and demand that you declare war on so-and-so you can say no and may get away with it. Your relations will drop, but this is a good time for another gift. Then do what you can to stop/cajole/threaten to stop the war.

Also, remember that even the Peacekeepers will realize that at some point another faction is simply a loose cannon (literally), has displayed behavior that is wildly against the intent of the Charter (wanton wars, conquering, etc), and in this case the faction needs to be brought to heel, or at least rendered such that they aren’t a threat to their neighbors. Consider such pointed military action ‘peacekeeping’, if you will.

Hydro