Author Topic: United Planetary Delegation  (Read 4222 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cripes Amighty (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
United Planetary Delegation
« on: April 20, 2014, 04:29:07 PM »
United Planetary Delegation
In order to better organize the treaties both proposed and approved by the Solar powers, the Martian Union establishes the United Planetary Delegation. It is hoped that the creation of such a body will better serve the powers in their wish to maintain peace.

Approved Bills
Zone of Exclusion Treaty


Proposed Bills
Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty
Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty
Rules of War for the Limitation of Civilian Casualties
Dueling Code
« Last Edit: April 21, 2014, 11:50:06 AM by Cripes Amighty »
 

Offline Cripes Amighty (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2014, 04:29:25 PM »
Details of Bills

Zone of Exclusion Treaty
Quote from: Zone of Exclusion Treaty
Article I: In times of peace there is no reason for military craft to pass too close to settled planets of other factions.

Article II: As such every settlement of at least five million people and falls into a publically recognized claim shall have a zone of twenty five million kilometers in which military craft of factions other than those who have claimed the settlement can not enter into except in times of war or training.

Article III: As training fleets can not always avoid straying too close to a planet any fleets that are in training and may breach this zone must be publicly announced as in training prior to the breach and shall continue moving as is standard for training fleets.

Article IV: Factions are defined as the Martian Union, the Triumvirate of Venus, and the Jovian Syndicate. If at any time other factions form and become signatories of this treaty this article will be amended to reflect that.
Proposed Amendments by the Jovian Syndicate
Quote from: Zone of Exclusion Treaty Amendment
Additions
Article III (with remaining Articles moved backwards): Non-military permitted craft shall include civilian owned and operated vessels operating under transponder, and survey craft lacking active scanners whose designs have been publicly declared.

Article V: No active scanning by any vessel is permitted within a rivals exclusive zone. Each faction is responsible for deactivating the scanners of any training fleet or military auxiliary that might pass through such a zone.

Deletions
Article IV: Factions are defined as the Martian Union, the Triumvirate of Venus, and the Jovian Syndicate. If at any time other factions form and become signatories of this treaty this article will be amended to reflect that.

Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty
Quote from: Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty
Article I: A Garden World is defined as any world which has a colony cost of 0.

Article II: As Garden Worlds are assumed to naturally occur rarely and to create a Garden World from a non-Garden World requires a large investment of time and resources, the signatories of this treaty agree that Garden Worlds should be protected.

Article III: Garden Worlds should be free from the threat of orbital bombardment and as such the signatories of this treaty agree to never bombard a Garden World and conduct any warfare on such a planet with ground forces only.

Article IV: The signatories of this treaty agree that enhanced radiation missiles cause excessive collateral damage to civilian populations and as such will not bombard any planet with enhanced radiation missiles nor will they attack any civilian craft, or suspected civilian craft, with enhanced radiation missiles.

Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty
Quote from: Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty
Article I: Each Faction is permitted to claim One (1) Jump Point as their primary corridor of exploration and colonization. This Corridor may not be infringed upon by other Factions, and defense against extraterrestrial life forms is left to the means of the claimant.

Article II: If the Sol System contains more than Three (3) Jump Points, then these Secondary Corridors may be explored by any faction.

Article III: In the event that a Jump Corridor is discovered to be a dead end, then the claimant faction may abandon it and claim a Secondary Corridor as their new primary. All survey records of the abandoned corridor must be made public, and other factions are welcome to use their survey ships in order to make a sweep to ensure that there are no points available.

Article IV: In the event that a Primary Corridor is abandoned, existing planetary claims will continue, however unclaimed bodies may now be exploited by other factions. In contested systems, standard interstellar law will apply.

Article V: If, during the exploration of a Primary Corridor, connections are found between Systems claimed by two different factions, then exploration into this system must cease and the survey ship must return through the explored jump point, in order to avoid misunderstandings between factions.
Proposed Amendments by the Martian Union
Quote from: Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty Amendments
Additions
Article I (to the beginning of Article I): If Sol has three or more jump points,
Article II: If Sol has less than three jump points, then the jump points will be unclaimable by any power.
Article VII: Any connections between two claimed corridors must be declared publicly. In order to maintain peace between the Solar powers, an agreement must be reached to determine which power will own the jump corridor.
Article VIII: If an agreement cannot be reached, the third unaffiliated power will act as mediator to resolve the conflict.

Rules of War for the Limitation of Civilian Casualties
Quote from: Rules of War for the Limitation of Civilian Casualties
Article I: In times of War any aggressor assaulting a populated world of 5 million or more by missile must declare their objective for the fight.

Article II: The first volley shall be a warning salvo no greater than 3 warheads with further waves on hold.

Article III: After the salvo has intercepted or reached its target request the defender will be called on to make the demanded concessions.

Article IV: If defender doesn’t back down then the aggressor can proceed with salvos at his fullest capacity until such a time that the defender concedes or the the aggressor retracts the demand. The missiles and warheads used on the warning salvo and to the next full salvos must be of the same tech.

Article V: No aggressor may demand the unconditional surrender of a garden world. They may demand safe troopship passage to begin an honorable trial of conquest by ground combat.

Dueling Code
Quote from: Dueling Code
Article I: Limited war may be used to solve disputes for colony rights, sport and honor between dueling ships and generally to solve small stuff that diplomacy is unable to but without the fear of total war.

Article II: The challenger must declare his intention clearly, and allow the challenged a year* to prepare. No possibility for surprise attack.
*One normal player turn increment be that longer or shorter than a game year.

Article III: Duals may not be conducted by or against ships or assets within a Zone of Exclusion.

Article IV: Established colonies and mining projects more than 10 years in age but less than 5 million in population may not be endanger or demanded by any duel.

Article V: Such limited war will not result in great loses for the defender or the attacker, expect the ships involved in combat and fate of the stakes in question.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2014, 05:27:05 PM by Cripes Amighty »
 

Offline Cripes Amighty (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2014, 05:33:41 PM »
Concerning the Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty:
The Martian Union is war of accepting the proposed treaty. Our largest is over how numerous these jump points actually are. If the end result is that there are only one or two jump points, how would the distribution be handled? What is the probability of such an outcome?
To address these concerns, the Martian Union has suggested amendments to cover these scenarios.

The amendments are listed above in the detailed bills section.
 

Offline Gidoran

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 135
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2014, 06:09:21 PM »
The Triumvirate of Venus sees no issues with the additional Articles VII and VIII. They are reasonable additions to the treaty as it originally is. With regards to the modifications to Articles I and II, I have been authorized to state that these are unnecessary due to the current information relayed back to Venus from our survey corps regarding the nature of Sol's Jump Points.

Edit:

Additionally, I am declaring the Triumvirate's intent to sign the following bills:

  • Zone of Exclusion Treaty + Amendments
  • Dueling Code
  • Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty + Amendments

The Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty we are unwilling to ratify due to its prohibitions against taking out valid ground targets, such as Planetary Defense Centers. PDCs are capable of striking targets in orbit and beyond, and being unable to neutralize these targets due to the regretful collateral damage is unacceptable. An amendment to allow for the neutralization of Planetary Defense Centers is necessary.

As for the Rules of War, with the Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty this would be mostly unnecessary, and would only add strange rituals to combat. An additional addendum to the Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty requiring that in the event of planetary assaults, the Attacker offers surrender to the Defender rather than face orbital bombardment and an invasion, both of which would do great harm to the populace and industry. In this, the Attacker must offer ample opportunity to surrender, and define what this surrender entails.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2014, 06:25:52 PM by Gidoran »
"Orbital bombardment solves a myriad of issues permanently. This is sometimes undesirable."
- Secretary General Orlov of the Triumvirate of Venus
 

Offline Sematary

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 732
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2014, 07:52:32 PM »
The Triumvirate of Venus sees no issues with the additional Articles VII and VIII. They are reasonable additions to the treaty as it originally is. With regards to the modifications to Articles I and II, I have been authorized to state that these are unnecessary due to the current information relayed back to Venus from our survey corps regarding the nature of Sol's Jump Points.

Edit:

Additionally, I am declaring the Triumvirate's intent to sign the following bills:

  • Zone of Exclusion Treaty + Amendments
  • Dueling Code
  • Fair Distribution of Jump Points Treaty + Amendments

The Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty we are unwilling to ratify due to its prohibitions against taking out valid ground targets, such as Planetary Defense Centers. PDCs are capable of striking targets in orbit and beyond, and being unable to neutralize these targets due to the regretful collateral damage is unacceptable. An amendment to allow for the neutralization of Planetary Defense Centers is necessary.

As for the Rules of War, with the Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty this would be mostly unnecessary, and would only add strange rituals to combat. An additional addendum to the Protection of Garden Worlds Treaty requiring that in the event of planetary assaults, the Attacker offers surrender to the Defender rather than face orbital bombardment and an invasion, both of which would do great harm to the populace and industry. In this, the Attacker must offer ample opportunity to surrender, and define what this surrender entails.
The Triumvirate does realize that the Garden World treaty only applies to worlds that do not require cost due to infrastructure correct? Only the last article on the proposed treaty would apply to all worlds. The conversation that has been had on the point the Triumvirate does not agree with does not indicate to me that the treaty only applies to some worlds.
 

Offline Gidoran

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 135
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2014, 08:50:56 PM »
The Triumvirate does realize that the Garden World treaty only applies to worlds that do not require cost due to infrastructure correct? Only the last article on the proposed treaty would apply to all worlds. The conversation that has been had on the point the Triumvirate does not agree with does not indicate to me that the treaty only applies to some worlds.

The Triumvirate is aware that the Garden World treaty only covers Colony Cost 0 worlds, yes. This does not change the fact that the Rules of War are mostly unnecessary, nor the fact that restricting strikes against PDCs puts any attacker at a significant risk for no gain. Allowing for limited strikes against PDCs is fair, as it will pave the way for ground forces to come in, if such is truly necessary... Really, when you've taken the PDCs and you have the capability to land troops, it is easier for everyone involved as well as less bloody if the planet simply surrenders.

An alternative, placing PDCs on a nearby body such as a moon (either in orbit around a planet, or orbiting around the same body such as the Jovians have), would be untenable to the Triumvirate. Any individual knows full well that Venus is lacking in Moons, and there are no nearby bodies suitable to serve as a PDC nest. A halfway between this would be to require the placement of PDCs on such a body if available, but allowing for them to be placed on worlds like Venus which lack a suitable candidate, in exchange for permitting strikes on Garden World PDCs.
"Orbital bombardment solves a myriad of issues permanently. This is sometimes undesirable."
- Secretary General Orlov of the Triumvirate of Venus
 

Offline Sematary

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 732
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2014, 08:59:29 PM »
The Triumvirate is aware that the Garden World treaty only covers Colony Cost 0 worlds, yes. This does not change the fact that the Rules of War are mostly unnecessary, nor the fact that restricting strikes against PDCs puts any attacker at a significant risk for no gain. Allowing for limited strikes against PDCs is fair, as it will pave the way for ground forces to come in, if such is truly necessary... Really, when you've taken the PDCs and you have the capability to land troops, it is easier for everyone involved as well as less bloody if the planet simply surrenders.

An alternative, placing PDCs on a nearby body such as a moon (either in orbit around a planet, or orbiting around the same body such as the Jovians have), would be untenable to the Triumvirate. Any individual knows full well that Venus is lacking in Moons, and there are no nearby bodies suitable to serve as a PDC nest. A halfway between this would be to require the placement of PDCs on such a body if available, but allowing for them to be placed on worlds like Venus which lack a suitable candidate, in exchange for permitting strikes on Garden World PDCs.
The Martian Union will take that under advisement and discuss the potential for such a change.
 

Offline sublight

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Captain
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 592
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2014, 07:15:41 AM »
The Jovian Syndicate equates missile strikes on PDCs as equivalent to Enhanced radiation strikes directly against a population. Both deal equal damage to planetary ecosystems and industry. We regrettably must reject the Garden World Treaty for offering insufficient protection to civilians.

The Rules of War Treaty was proposed as an alternative to replace the Garden World Treaty. We are greatly concerned that the force required to destroy a 500BP PDC could easily destroy 5000 BP worth of industry as collateral damage. Thus, the intent of the Rules of War Treaty is to allow a vastly overwhelmed population to either ransom themselves or voluntarily deactivate their own PDCs before suffering debilitating civilian losses. We welcome any suggestion for amendments to make this treaty viable.

Internal faction debate on the merits of the Jump Points Treaty continues.

For now we will be signing
• The Exclusion Treaty with Amendments
• Dueling Code
 

Offline Sematary

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 732
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2014, 11:07:41 AM »
The Martian Union is in favor of the Zone of Exclusion treaty and its amendments, however we can not vote in favor of either the Rules of War or the Dueling Code, and we are still discussing the merits of the other two treaties.

The reason why we can not vote for the Dueling Code is we feel that codifying war will diminish the likelihood of factions sitting down at a diplomatic table and settle disagreements in a diplomatic way which will lead to large amounts of civilian casualties.

However we wish to call to vote The Zone of Exclusion treaty with its current amendments and the Rules of War treaty.

The Martian Union votes in affirmative to the Zone of Exclusion treaty amended as agreed on.

The Martian Union votes in negative to the Rules of War for the Limitation of Civilian Casualties treaty.
 

Offline Cripes Amighty (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2014, 11:51:49 AM »
With our agreement for the amendments added to the Zone of Exclusion Treaty, it has officially been passed with all powers voting in favor.
 

Offline Gidoran

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 135
Re: United Planetary Delegation
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2014, 02:31:57 PM »
<Snipped Martian Stuff>

The Triumvirate of Venus' position on the Rules of War for the Limitation of Civilian Casualties remains in the negative. The rituals do not equate proper protection of civilians.

The Jovian Syndicate equates missile strikes on PDCs as equivalent to Enhanced radiation strikes directly against a population. Both deal equal damage to planetary ecosystems and industry. We regrettably must reject the Garden World Treaty for offering insufficient protection to civilians.

The Rules of War Treaty was proposed as an alternative to replace the Garden World Treaty. We are greatly concerned that the force required to destroy a 500BP PDC could easily destroy 5000 BP worth of industry as collateral damage. Thus, the intent of the Rules of War Treaty is to allow a vastly overwhelmed population to either ransom themselves or voluntarily deactivate their own PDCs before suffering debilitating civilian losses. We welcome any suggestion for amendments to make this treaty viable.
<snip>

As stated earlier, an alternative involving multi-body planetary systems was offered for the Garden World Treaty. The Triumvirate's issues with the Rules of War stem from effectively the body of it, rather than the spirit. However, the Triumvirate wishes to offer as an alternative the following, although we are still supporting the Garden World Treaty.

Limitation of the Threat of Orbital Bombardment
Quote
Article I: For the purposes of this treaty, the following definitions are used
  • Section I: A Garden World is a stellar body with a colony cost of 0, with suitable oxygen, gravity, and temperature to be a viable home for terrestrial life.
  • Section II: A Candidate World is a stellar body with a colony cost that can be brought to 0 via introduction of a suitable atmosphere. A Candidate World may also qualify as a Supported World.
  • Section III: A Supported World is a stellar body with a colony cost that cannot be brought to 0, and is inhabited via Orbital Habitats or Infrastructure.
  • Section IV: A Mining World is a stellar body with the same definition as a Supported World, with the exclusion of population. These worlds are entirely automated.

Article II: It is forbidden to commence Orbital Bombardment against a Garden, Candidate, or Supported world with the intention of killing the civilian populace or industry. This prohibits the following weapons from being used on planetary civilian targets: Standard Warheads, Enhanced Radiation Warheads (all possible variants), Lasers, Railguns, Coilguns, Plasma Carronades, and Particle Beams.

Article III: Planetary Defense Centers, where possible, are recommended to be constructed on uninhabited moons that either orbit the same stellar body (such as with the Jovian system), or orbit the inhabited body (such as with Earth and Luna).

Article IV: Planetary Defense Centers located on an inhabited world are valid targets for surgical orbital strikes, which are to be performed via Microwave weaponry if possible, Mesons if not. These strikes are intended to neutralize the sensor and fire control of these PDCs to permit the landing of ground forces if strictly necessary.

Article V: In the event of the threat of a landing and protracted ground campaign, the Attacker must inform the Defender that they have 30 days* in which they may surrender. During this time, if PDC sensors have been neutralized, they may not be repaired in order to maintain good faith in the negotiations.
[ooc]We'll use this as 'A game turn' for most things, although I think Panopticon could stop and ask the defender faction their decision.[/ooc]

Article VI: Orbital Fire Support for ground forces is prohibited due to the extreme nature of starship weaponry.

Article VII: Mining Worlds are the only valid target for orbital bombardment, however such actions remain frowned upon.

Article VIII: Orbital Habitats are to be afforded the same protections as the planet they are orbiting. They may be equipped with CIWS protection, but no offensive tools - doing so allows for an Orbital Habitat to be considered a warship, and thus a valid target of War.

Edit: I think that's all of it. Had to do some research on Mesons.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2014, 02:52:37 PM by Gidoran »
"Orbital bombardment solves a myriad of issues permanently. This is sometimes undesirable."
- Secretary General Orlov of the Triumvirate of Venus