Add intentional rivalry actions for resource-stealing strategies

[fidgetbot]

Goal

Add a deliberate rivalry path so players can choose to antagonize neighboring trees for short-term resource gains at the cost of retaliation, relationship damage, and long-term instability.

Motivation

Right now rivalry mostly feels like a relationship state the player drifts into. It would be more interesting if players could pursue rivalry on purpose as a risky strategy.

This would:

• create a more active diplomacy layer
• offer a high-risk, high-reward growth path
• make neighboring trees matter more mechanically
• produce stronger retaliation and grudge dynamics

Core design intent

Predatory or aggressive actions should provide meaningful upside, but they should not be free resource bonuses.

The intended tradeoff is:

• immediate gain
• relationship damage
• increased retaliation pressure
• possible ally loss or coalition effects
• longer-term ecological or diplomatic costs

Candidate mechanics

Examples of intentional rivalry actions:

• Aggressive shading — deny a neighbor sunlight and possibly convert some of that pressure into player advantage
• Root encroachment — compete for nutrients or territory at the neighbor’s expense
• Water competition — intensify water pressure on nearby trees during dry periods
• Support monopolization — capture shared fungal / pollinator support before neighbors can benefit
• Opportunistic exploitation — take advantage of weakened or damaged neighbors for fast gains

Relationship effects

These actions should:

• reduce relationship state directly
• be able to push a neighbor into Rival or Hostile intentionally
• increase the chance of retaliation from the targeted neighbor
• potentially create downstream relationship effects with other nearby trees

Retaliation / response ideas

Possible counterplay from rival trees:

• withholding or refusing support
• escalating their own shading / root pressure
• increased chance of betrayal or hostile events
• alliance breakdowns
• retaliation chains that make rivalry feel persistent rather than one-off

Implementation shape

A good implementation split would likely be:

1. Intentional rivalry actions
2. Retaliation logic / rival response pressure
3. Balance tuning for gains vs risk

Constraints

• should feel strategically tempting, not mandatory
• should not invalidate cooperative or ally-focused play
• should preserve fruit-tree flavor and ecological framing
• should work in both browser play and shared core logic
• simulation support should be considered if new actions materially affect balance analysis

Open questions

• Should resource theft be direct, or mostly framed as denying neighbor output while improving the player indirectly?
• Should rivalry actions unlock only at certain life stages?
• Should repeated aggression trigger stronger long-term grudges or forest-wide reputation effects?
• Which retaliation mechanics should be deterministic versus event-driven?

Success criteria

• Players can intentionally choose a rivalry strategy
• The payoff feels real and noticeable
• The retaliation risk is also real and noticeable
• Rivalry creates interesting stories and decisions rather than a dominant optimal line

Requested by Gaea in Trees group discussion.