I hope everybody knows that "from the people" is stated to be "tongue in cheek"
Hegemony Team,
I want to praise you for the simplistic yet very effective diplomacy system in Hegemony. I think maybe most will agree that the diplomacy system isn't realistic at all. Having said that, I don't know of a game that does a good job of realistically portraying diplomacy. Diplomacy is probably inherently to difficult to design with today's technology. Negotiating borders, money, size of armies, complicated and ever changing alliances etc. must be extremely difficult. I imagine it would take almost a true version of artificial/conscience intelligence to design diplomacy correctly. But instead of trying to realistically portray diplomacy and inevitably failing like other games, the blunt monetary/economic consequences of diplomacy found in Hegemony works very well. I don't think it is realistic but the simple economic consequences of making/breaking truces and alliances cuts to bare essence of the objectives of diplomatic negotiations. The diplomacy system doesn't try to be more and it also doesn't inevitably become unrealistic like other diplomatic systems found in other strategy game. I thing maybe refining it would be fine if your team thinks it's necessary, but I hope you never change it. Though I think it would make more sense if the AI factions proposed truces/alliances to the human player more often...good luck with Rome.

I do agree, I'd like to be approached by the AI with truces and alliances. Especially when the intimidation is high, it would make sense that a faction genuinely terrified of my forces, sues for peace.

P-Dynamo - A proper diplomacy system would likely have to be the meat of its own game for the true depth. Here it is not realistic, but I agree, it is great. Simple and easy to understand/use, keeps your focus on the game instead of having to micromanage every aspect of relations with other factions.

"Here, have some gold and GTFO" = fine in my book.