Suing for Peace and Demanding Surrender

I have found that a far too common end to world games is 'allied victory'. Everyone allies just to end the game. Often it is clear that one player or one team will inevitably win, or one player will have the most SP by turn 50, but people opt to ally victory to save time.

I am proposing an idea that plays with the idea of real war diplomacy:

Suing for peace is when a warring party is looking for a way to surrender or end hostilities either by way of treaty or conditional surrender.
My idea is that "Sue for peace or conditional surrender" should be an option whereas the surrendering party sends a proposition to all opponents saying they will surrender but only if they are guaranteed to keep x% of their earned SP. Normally if you surrender you only keep 50% of your earned SP. I propose that a surrendering player can send an offer to all warring parties saying they will surrender if they can keep between 50 and 100% of their earned SP (the surrendering party chooses). Then the warring parties must unanimously accept the surrender. If they decline the play continues.

Demanding surrender is an option for a warring party to use, where that player sends a proposition to the other player demanding surrender, but will let that player keep a certain amount of their SP, and they set the number between 50 and 100%. All warring parties, not just the surrendering player, must agree to these terms.

I think this would make for a more interesting way to end longer games and still have a clear victor.

Thoughts? Clarifications?

Sounds good

I approve

That feeling when people get fanny flustered when I don't want to ally end.

That's one of the reasons I thought of this. Instead of begging to ally victory, you can pressure them to surrender but still keep their points.