Truce system

It occurred to me that perhaps it could be a good idea to implement some sort of "automatized truce system" to manage and visualize the various truces that players have among themselves during a game. I'm throwing it out here for discussion.

The motivation behind this is to:
(a) make it easier and clearer to know, at each moment, exactly which players have truces among themselves;
(b) to implement an easy mechanism for offering, entering into and ending truces;
(c) to avoid truces continuing too long or near indefinitely, which happens sometimes (and is not particularly fair to the other players)
(d) avoid awkward negotiations and discussions regarding truces and their interpretations (with sometimes heated disagreements and consequences).

I imagine the implementation could have components such as the following:
(i) In every game, a table would be visible showing exactly which players have truces among themselves.
(ii) Possible rule: As long as 2 players have a truce between themselves, it would not be possible for them to attack each other.
(iii) A player could declare the end of one of his/her own truces by simply clicking a button in the table ("End truce" ). Once the end of the truce has been declared, it would take effect according to a specific rule, for instance starting after the end of the other party's turn.
(iv) A player could formally request a truce with another player by clicking a button next to that player's name, e.g. a button with the label "Offer truce". The other player would then be able to accept or reject the offer.
(v) All offers of, enterings into or endings of truces would be notified in the chat.
(vi) The system could also implement some system-wide rules for truces such as: a maximum number of turns that a truce would be allowed to last, a maximum number of truces that a player would be allowed to enter into during the course of a game, etc.

Some possible bad consequences that might happen, I imagine could be:
- Perhaps it will take away some of the human dimension of truces. It becomes too easy to just get a lot of truces and quit them, instead of actually having to discuss them with other players.
- Perhaps there will be too many truces formed, leading to too boring games for some.

It has been discussed before in some other threads, (cant remember which), but it seems the general consensus amongst the managers of the site is to NOT have a formal truce system. Reason? It will alter the gameplay.

Other sites have a formal truce system, which i also enjoy. I think MajorCommand had a pretty well working one - however its been years since ive been there. I think it can work well in low capped/fixed cards games, but as said, it was decided to not have it on this site. (unless something has been changed i dont know about).
 
So here u have to stick with a less formal declaration of: "i will not attack u for !insert time, condition, etc! , and hope for the best lol. 
However i have found the times i made a "truce" of some kind in chat, other player will respect it - it might not be set in stone with a certain amount of rounds, and may be up for discussion/negotiation, but it s spirit will be respected, and it they want to break you ll get a fair warning of some rounds. (Usually when that occurs, it because the situation have changed significantly anyways, and uself dont really want/need it anyways)..  

Why not just use the public game chat? That way you can make truces with everyone, and everyone can see the truces you made.
And if the truce is unfair, that's also for everyone to see, and a simple quote and visit from a mod will solve things.

Also, that way you can make a truce: 'lets not attack each other in North America this turn', but you can still take his 1 territory in Asia for a card.

That being said, I would advise to not make too many truces lasting longer than one turn (for example things like "if you move out of my region next turn, I will not kill those troops" ). Long truces have a tendency to backfire.

I'm playing a few games now where I see some problems related to chat-based truces:
- In one game, 2 players started out the game with a truce "for a few rounds". But they have now kept that truce for approx. 100 rounds, they're effectively play back against back, and it's somehow not fair against the rest of us. I think they are afraid of taking an initiative to formally end the truce, and in that sense I think it could be good to have a system that would do so explicitly for them.
- In another game, there have been all sorts of truces back and forth between various players, and it seems we are all a little bit confused exactly which players are currently having a truce and which not. Here, it would be great if one could just look that up quickly in some sort of display dedicated to showing what truces are currently existing instead of having to review the entire chat conversation and still not find it clear.

I think truces shouldn’t be allowed period. You can create an informal truce by just stopping to attack. You can further do it by staking “claim” to an area/region and saying you would rather not go to war on a border, etc.

I agree

I agree.

If I'm correct; there are no 'legal' truces on this website at this point in time, right?*
You can 'agree' on anything in the chat, however, if someone decides to not stick to whatever was agreed, there won't be any action by admins, right?

And that's fine, right?

*Only exception would be the 'truce' in which a game is drawn. If all players agree in the chat on the draw (within a reasonable time frame of one another, without 'too much action' in between), then that's binding and a staff member can simply draw the game (regardless of outcome, if the game had ended before the arrival of the staff).

That is correct. From the site rules:

This does not mean players can't discuss things in the chat about respecting borders and such for a very limited time but no agreement is binding and they need to be careful not to make the game unbalanced and unfair with such agreements.

The bottom line, play to win. Always.

That's correct, there are no "legal" consequences from the admins. But no one will trust you ever again and people won't like you. (Just like in real life: I can break my promises to others without facing any legal consequences, but I won't have any friends and everyone will detest me.)

I agree with dough_boy, Elysium5 and others that truces should not be allowed.

However, they _do_ happen, and they are currently being allowed. So the question is how to deal with them, to avoid for instance truces that extend forever and cause unfair playing conditions for the rest.