New "Ancient Empires" PBEM created

[Peaster]

"Again: pre-conditions was your idea:" - I have not forgotten my statement, but I chose to negotiate anyway. Are you disappointed?

My complaint is that you had already made a peace offer, without pre-conditions. We'd both put some effort into it, and there were no major obstacles in view. Then you suddenly decided that Persia's longstanding Stay-Out policy was "bullying" you, and you imposed pre-conditions during our talks . You have a bad habit of throwing up roadblocks to kill talks, as if you are afraid to make a deal. So, now you've screwed up three deals for peace [borders, arms race, neutral zones]. But we've learned not to take Babylon words seriously, so we expected something like this. Babylon's reputation continues to decline.

Response about Trivia The main statement in the Bab warning was ambiguous - "In case of a single weak unit we could act differently." IMO this is meaningless, if taken literally. So, I assumed you meant "would" instead of "could". I guessed you meant "Babylon won't attack an unstacked non-threatening unit". Apparently it really meant "blah blah blah", as Pharaoh could have told me without even reading it. My fault [partially].

BTW - Why don't you give up on the Agade propaganda job ? I doubt anyone is fooled by it, and Pharaoh doesn't have to answer you. Repeating an umimportant question over and over again is just rude.

[Straybow]

No mysterious F11 problems so far with 2 downloads?

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Sinbad
"Again: pre-conditions was your idea:" - I have not forgotten my statement, but I chose to negotiate anyway. Are you disappointed?

I am dissapointed that firstly you pre-condition negotiation by avoiding insults+threats, then you thrown in heavy insults+threats, all that when talks about delay of superlegions are expected or when talks about neutral are running.
IMHO this is some kind of schizophreny. The case of bribed Skirm nad Iron Infantry is similar:
Sinbad A orders a bribery of a Babylonian unit, and thinks this is all right. Then Sinbad B calls a consecutive Bab bribery "an attack" and is surprised and angry.
Sinbad A publishes 3 very unclear warnings/threats (2550, 2440, 2390) and is not willing to make them comparably clear as the Bab red/orange warning/threat is. Then Sinbad B complains the Bab red/orange warning was not clear enough.

My complaint is that you had already made a peace offer, without pre-conditions. We'd both put some effort into it, and there were no major obstacles in view. Then you suddenly decided that Persia's longstanding Stay-Out policy was "bullying" you, and you imposed pre-conditions during our talks. You have a bad habit of throwing up roadblocks to kill talks, as if you are afraid to make a deal.

Two simple questions are pre-conditions and road blocks?
BTW your new threats aren't longstanding. I thought you rejected sneak-attacks until now.

---

I think you can reconsider now which point is more important to Persia:
* to have talks about borders
* or not to answer whether Persia is planning a total war without a warning.

[Peaster]

Originally posted by SlowThinker Two simple questions are pre-conditions and road blocks?
BTW your new threats aren't longstanding. I thought you rejected sneak-attacks until now.

Most of the previous post doesn't make sense, so I will ignore those parts.

YOU broke off talks, over two questions that have almost no relation to the subject - eg neutral zones and borders. Yes, you made the questions into roadblocks. As Zedd pointed out, they are not "simple" questiions. And Persia does not believe that answering two questions [even if they were simple] would cure chronic Bab negotiation deficiencies. And NO, your explanation was NOT clear, hardly a model Persia would aspire to follow, hardly something we feel grateful for.

Persia regards your bribery as a sneak attack, and your warning about red/orange lines as claiming Bab rights to sneak attack. Now you expect Persia to make promises??

Typical Bab snake-talk: "won't answer dumb questions" = "new threats".

[SlowThinker]

war??

Persia regards your bribery as a sneak attack

So you consider Persia to be in war with Babylon?

[Peaster]

The point was that Babylon gave no warning before bribing.

[Kull]

Re: war??

Originally posted by SlowThinker

So you consider Persia to be in war with Babylon?

Pharoah suggests ignoring Babylon until it moves - it's obvious he's trying to twist every Persian word into an excuse for Babylon to attack immediately in the name of "self defense".

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Sinbad
Persia regards your bribery as a sneak attack.
...
The point was that Babylon gave no warning before bribing.

Sinbad, you aren't very percipient. So again:
1) You attacked first. You issued an indefinite warning first ('we will probably bribe the geezer now'), so your attack was not a sneak-attack probably.
Anyway you attacked first, and Babylon is rightful to react to your attacks immediately and without a previous warning.
2) Still you were warned by our red/orange warning. Please read it again.

edit: grammar

[Kull]

Originally posted by SlowThinker

2) Still you was warned by our red/orange warning. Please read it again.

The mailed fist has now been formally removed from the glove. So much for Babylonian "peace overtures".

[Peaster]

Yes. The peace overtures seemed completely out of character - I thought for a while that someone else must have written them for Babylon.

[Straybow]

"I've hired you to help me start a war. It's an prestigious line of work, with a long and glorious tradition."

[SlowThinker]

We hired a very educated translator, his name is Kukl. He came to us with a reference to a notorious man called Kepls. It is interesting today we had this man in mind too.

[SlowThinker]

Bab 2380

a report tomorrow

[Kull]

Egyptian plans move forward, with several new construction projects completed. The people rejoice!

[SlowThinker]

bab 2380 report

Babylon celebrates 2nd cycle of a trade boom. I believe also our trade partners are happy.
Our desert guides help the-egyptian-tramplers-that-don't-see-city-telltales to find a way to Egypt.
Now we are convinced Persia is unable to understand civilized language and methods. Therefore we will conform our warnings to Persian ones (read further), I hope it will help and Persia will become more understanding.