Originally Posted by
TommyB
..and then a non-top kingdom comes along and steals the crown (SWEA) :p
I just remembered an old quote about utopia, think it was on the login page once?
I find it hilarious that people actually try to pretend that deals made between kingdoms should somehow be higher and more valuable than everything else in the game, including winning. And then go on to call this "good sportsmanship".
If this kind of thing happens in real sports, clubs making deals to determine the winner of a competition in advance, it's a big scandal and for good reasons. But somehow now in utopia it's not only OK but more and more the only way to go - up to and including an angry mob to destroy everyone threatening the sanctity of making a deal.
Protection for war win, acres for war win, acres for science, ... you name it and it's probably been done a couple of hundred time during the last couple ages.
Deals are fine as they are, as long a both parties get something out of it. So for example in utopia it's often "we'll stop hitting you if you do A,B and C". Basically making a vassal out of a previously independent kingdom. However, this kind of deal only works for as long as the vassal kingdom has to be afraid of retaliation. If you overextend and do this thing to a lot of kingdoms, they might realize that you cannot punish them all at once and you have a revolution on your hands.
This is the nature of deals. They are made between individual kingdoms in a specific situation. If you are the stronger party you can force a **** deal on the other kingdom but they will always look for ways to get around that from then on. Wiser rulers might realize this and offer better deals which are more stable.
In short, I see nothing that would put breaking a deal on the same level as 2vs1 or hitting into another conflict. It's an action between two kingdoms in a war game that could, but doesn't have to, lead to a war between them. Nothing more, nothing less.