Dear fellow fans and developers,

I've come up with a new mechanics, new forms of diplomacy, which may enrich the game and in any case make it more competitive or complex, also according to the logics of our modern times. If you read my posts, you may know that I really like diplomacy in this game, and I think, precisely because it's one of the strenghts, it could be expanded. I've already made some suggestions about diplomacy, here: https://gtm.steamproxy.vip/app/1124300/discussions/1/5940851794735665754/

Concept: Cyberwar
My new suggestion is that cyberwar should be introduce, because that is what ist used today and we face times of mixed warfare. I think the best way to introduce cyberwar is using the same logics as with diplomacy with the consulate. Cyberwar would then be interaction possibilities with other players like leverage actions. In order to activate the interactions the player must build the "Intelligence agency" in present times, which works just like the embassy: cyberwar actions could appear in the same tab and not in a separate tab.

Using cyberwar: actions and defense against it
You may thing that it would be logical to introduce a new type of ressource, like "intel" (just to give a name), which would only be used in the mechanics of cyberwar. Intel would be the cost of cyberactions and at the same time a type of cyberdefense (because the cost would be calculated according to the intel of the other player): again, it should work pretty much like leverage. However, it wouldn't be illogical to use only leverage (or, if you want, a mixed form of leverage and the new ressource intel). This for two reasons: first of all, because as long as intel no other function has as cyberwar, then it's not use to duplicate a ressource which in any case has to do with relationship between nations. Secondly, because leverage is also used in main diplomacy actions, like the Congress, which means that cyberwar would indirectly affect diplomatic power: one would have to decide if investing more into developing peacefully relations or in investing into disrupting the other nations.
In any case, there would be some general actions to choose from - cyberactions should be by the way very expansive. So far I've come to the following examples:
-Crash financial system: the money that the targeted player would recive in that turn is deviated to you, so you "steal" his gold.
-Disrupt infraestructure: port, airports and trains don't wok for a turn.
-Cause blackout: buildings using coal, oil or uranium don't work for a turn.
-Disrupting communications: all military units don't move for a turn. This should be the most expensive action.
-Markets crash: stop trade for one turn. Or even worse: annulate the trade agreements.
-Diseminate misinformation: suddenly -20 stability in every city.

These actions can be pretty annoying, I suppose. If, as I said, it works like leverage actions, then there is no defense against it. But that's not the case. I thinkg these actions shouldn't be actions which are implemented no matter what. No. In this case it is to imagine that every nation takes some part of the cyberwar and has defenses. Here you can think again, that "counterdefense" or also "intel" could be a new property of the nation in the regions, but I think it's quite much confortable to use the detection rating of a territory. This would be used like a countermesure which works in the game like probability: the more detection in a territory, the less likely is the cyberaction to be effective. That means the following: cyberactions are lunched for the whole (enemy) nation, but apply actually in individual territories according to this probability estimation.
Another important point is that cyberattack take place digitaly, so no one knows who is responsible for it. This should also be primarly like that in the game, but of course the players should have the possibility to reveal who is the perpetrator. I think there would be two main ways to do so, one would be automatic and the other one would be a human decision:
-Automatic detection: every time a cyberattack is activated, there is some probability (according to the global detections rating) to discover the perpetrator. This should generate a great amount of Grievance and even give the nation the possibility to declare immediately war.
-Active countermesure: in the embassy window there would be the action "investigate cyberattack" (just like diplomatic ultimatum, for example). The logics ist that he player should carry on an investigation for every nation or try to deduce who attacked him. This action should be a bit expensive, but pretty much effectiv, although the chances of discovering the perpetrator would disminish with the time. For example, if I investigate a nation after the attack (and this nation is certainly responsible for it) the probability of discovering that it was the perpetratior should be almost 100%. After 5 turns, for exemple, only 50% and after 10 turns this action would already be deactivated.

Finally there is something I would like to say: the mechanics of cyberattack should be a "normal" part of the game. But that means that players are "forced" to play with this type of aggressive actions. Maybe not everybody finds it nice, but I think it's the same like stealth: it is there. Howevery maybe in order to make the game confortable for all, there could be the function to deactivate cyberwar in the menu.

Interrelation with other functions or mechanics
With this explanation it is very clear that there are some interralations with cyberwar and diplomacy. Now I would like to point at some other interrelations between some mechanics or concepts and cyberwar:
-The should be of course an agreement to forbid cyberwar between two nations. Cyberwar should however not be automatically forbidden between allies. Another agreement could be the joint countermesures (aggregation of detections rating of both players).
-Cyberattack has also a lot of sense when energy is at stake. At this point it would be good the reformulate the mechanics of energy and pollution in Humanking. I personally don't know yet what the best way would be, but maybe can Civ6 serve as example.
-Spys could have another passive function: increase or decrease the chances of cyberattacks beeing succesful (in the territory). Or maybe an active function?
-Logically buildings should be changed to generate more leverage and detection. If the developers decide that it's better to create "intel", then it would also be logical to use intel as countermesure and not detection. Special buildings should be created.
-Cyberwar ist a part of the present era, withous doubt. However it can be interesting to expand it to the atomic era. In this case the correct designation should be "special operations". The actions in the atomic era and in the present era should be different: in the present era the would be more actions and maybe some of the atomic era wouldn't be possible any more. An Example for an special action in the modern era could be "create military distraction": decoy armies appear randomly in the border with the nation.
-I would like to emphatize, as I said in the last post that I linked at the beginning, that the concept of spionage like the concept of cyberware are in my understanding of the logics of the game forms of diplomatic actions, not forms of war, although they can certainly be aggressive. This is important if we are considering to rework agreements and diplomatic actions.


That was all. Thanks for reading and I hope the developers could take my suggestions into consideration :-)