New "Ancient Empires" PBEM created

[Kull]

No - i was away for two weeks and somebody sent two massive attachments that killed my email for most of that time. Better resend!

[Peaster]

OK - I just sent it again.

[SlowThinker]

Bab 2530

Persia agreed Babylonian units would visit upper Al-Kabir and return. The visit has been accomplished, citizens in Negru are partly tranquillized and their powerfull lobby didn't block an export license to Persia this year.

Borders with Persia:
We are waiting for last answer from Persia, then we will launch our official statement about borders.

[Peaster]

Babylon's latest question-list did not escape the message eaters until today. Persia has now answered it. However, Babylon still has not answered basic questions, such as "What do you want?". I guess our border talks are dead.

ST has been worried about our eastern border [eg near Ecbatana] for two years now, and nothing I say seems to satisfy him. IMO that border is unreasonable, but I accepted it LOOOONG ago, privately and publicly. Still he badgers me to make another public statement. So, here is a recent Persian statement from our correspondence.

">Please review posts 2897 and 2911. I have stated (for example) that I agreed to the old borders, which clearly implies that I do not plan to change them by force. What else can I say without lying ? If you offer to change them, I will probably accept. I may make some offer for Bab land, at the risk of scaring you. If you start a war with Persia, my views could change. But what you seem afraid of here, it is just not real. "

But if Babylon keeps insisting that I say this again and again, I will change it !!!

[Kull]

I was waiting for a civdip file, but now I have to leave for the long weekend. Will be back monday and should play then or tuesday (hopefully the email will be sitting there!)

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Sinbad
However, Babylon still has not answered basic questions, such as "What do you want?".

After end of War Babylon sent a clear map with proposed borders. Persia said that it was reasonable but she disputed 2-3 squares. But in the middle of borders talks she changed her mind and came out with the Tushpa-Arraphka line and so she suddenly disputed about 15 squares.
Then Sinbad asked also Babylon comes out with her claim, but he wasn't able to propose a method how to continue then (it was clear both claims would differ very strongly).

[SlowThinker]

Babylonian announcement about minimal land

During last Bab-Pers private talks we have verified what Persia means by 'negotiations about borders'. Persia is ready to debate about land exchanges, mutual concessions, neutral points, but she insists these deals start with a basis the Tushpa-Arraphka line (light blue line on the picture) is Persian. Persia also insists that during negotiations no Bab unit steps on that line without Persian approval.
This idea that Persia grabs land near Babylonian cities (also by threatening war) and then mercifully sells/exchanges/cedes some squares to Babylon would be mortifying for Babylonian people and we don't accept it. We won't get in such kind of 'negotiations'.

Therefore now we will publish 'minimal' land acceptable for Babylon. This is not something that we would be contented with and it would have a very bad impact on Bab-Pers trade.
The western part of the minimal Bab land: Although we see no reason why Persia should get squares so close to Nimrud, the miniBabland agrees to the Persian claims. This corresponds to our past indication that Babylon was ready to give up land but would react by cutting trade. Persia may want more trade or firm trade agreements but only if she accepts Babylon gets more land.
The eastern part of the miniBabland: it corresponds to the fact that all Assyrian land around Zariqum and Arraphka was undoubtedly conquered by Armies of Babylonian Front (this was accepted also by Sinbad). Still we can agree the Mountain massif (white line on the picture) gets some neutral status (to be free of units or open to weak scouts or ...).

(In our humble opinion also Hittites should participate in debate about land (mainly forests) between Nimrud-Nineveh-Tushpa)

Map legend:
Approved by both sides:
White point at eastern edge of the map: Persia and Babylon agreed this point is neutral. We have firm borders east from this point already.
Thick light blue line: this is pre-war Persia (as described on map provided by Sinbad recently). Babylon confirms again that she accepts this land is Persian.
Not approved by sides:
Thin light blue line: this is land claimed by Persia during late border talks.
Green line: minimal land acceptable by Babylon.
White line: Babylon can accept this land gets some neutral status.

[Kull]

Alas, the civdip had not arrived, but it's not critical, so Egypt proceeds. Pharoah has watched the Persia-Babylon negotiations with some interest, and would offer this piece of advice to his Northern Brother - do not surrender the headwaters of the Arrariver! From there, Babylonian troops will drive into the heart of Persia in a single turn.

Pharoah hasn't heard any reports of Event messages in a very long time - brother Straybow, are you keeping us informed?

[Straybow]

I have indeed been careful to watch for them, but no events have been triggered to report.

[Eivind IV]

Hi!

I don't know if you guys have noticed it yet, but the last couple of days you have been 'victim' to a mass immigration wave from EVO. There's now a lot of activity in this pbem section.

We have decided to settle here, so if you guys are interested in starting more pbems or joining the existing ones we have brought with us, you are heartly welcomed.

Here's the new Players Needed Thread: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=156973

Hope to see you around!

[Peaster]

According to ST's utility, Kengel and Zedd will finish our 99th turn soon; 2520 will be the 100. HAPPY 100th !!!

Eivind - Welcome to Poly! I hope 1- 2 of you will sign up for Seeds#2. I've been waiting almost a year for 7 players.

Kull - I haven't heard anything from you lately. Have you gotten my messages + the 2540 barter ?

Persia is glad to see Babylon clarify her position on borders. This map is a bit surprising, though, since our conflict seemed to be mostly over the Al Kabir valley, but this new map suggests a conflict mainly over the Zagros mts. Perhaps SlowThinker can also clarify what "minimal land" means - do you mean this as a "claim" that you intend to fight over ? Or as a step forward in border talks ? As usual, I'd prefer to handle most tedious details, clarifications, mistakes etc privately.

We remind all players to please report all new techs, and tech trades to ST, for GL monitoring.

[Straybow]

And we just hit 60 pages! Zounds!

Kull mentioned he was waiting on a barter...

[SlowThinker]

Sinbad wrote:
>Perhaps SlowThinker can also clarify what "minimal land" means

This is a minimal border Babylon can agree with. Of course we can stay without western borders accepted by sides. Such a situation exists between Babylon and Egypt and it works satisfactorily.

>do you mean this as a "claim" that you intend to fight over ?

Persia can expect Babylon will defend if she feels endangered. Sure we would react on a Persian C4 at Zariqum promptly.

[Peaster]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
Persia can expect Babylon will defend if she feels endangered.

This is your clarification ? IIRC Babylon badgered Persia at least three times about the meaning of the Tushpa line. Under exactly which conditions would Persia defend it, etc, etc, etc....

[Straybow]

There is a mostly confirmed bug in Civ2Dip.

If you make more than one barter in a session it may hold over some of the things from the earlier barter.

Twice I've made a barter for Peaster right after making map barters for others, and the map gift appeared in the barter to Peaster. In the first case I was uncertain it was a bug—I could've been distracted or something. The second time I am dead certain I did not put a map offer in the barter.

On other occasions I've seen unit barters from allies with maps attached and assumed they were deliberate. In all likelihood they were not, but since we already swapped maps I ignored it.

On another occasion Slo made a barter to Peaster for Peace and then made a barter to me transfering some units. The unit barter had a spurious peace offer in it.

It appears that going back and loading a new save file, or reloading the same save file, clears out the buffers and prevents this from happening. At least, it hasn't happened yet after a reload.

I think it is safe to say quitting Civ2Dip and restarting clears everything and that doesn't take much more time than backtracking to the start and reloading the save.