PEACE diplomatic exchanges

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Maniac
Is that realistic? IMHO once we declare war we will have trouble with PEACE for the rest of the game, even if we sign a truce later. We would have to keep a strong military force present at all times.

We fight until they are no longer a credible threat. Ie maybe leave them with one or two bases. We will want a strong military at sea anyway IMHO.

Originally posted by Maniac
I doubt two ships would be sufficient to start a credible attack. Do keep in mind that if they have synthmetal defenders, that the odds impact versus synthmetal become equal due to the free naval yards. This mean we will loose on average one ship per defender we have to take out. Especially for that reason I think we should opt for going to war and researching NonlMath right away, and not wait some twenty years before building some offense-capable ships. The longer we wait, the more synthmetal defenders they can build...

They don't have synthmetal, and how does that work with naval yards? We have them too with the MCC, so they won't get the moral advantage. I think we should rush 2 impact cruisers ASAP, but we should build more, just not rush them. We can start to attack with 2 ships, but we need a minimum of 2, IMHO.

Originally posted by Maniac
Do keep in mind that ships have two ways of attacking. IIRC:
a) direct attack: weapon against armour
b) long range artillery fire: weapon against weapon
If the PEACE captains of their 2-1/2-4s have any common sense, they will not attack 2-3-6s directly - with 40% chance of success - but will rather use long range artillery fire, with 50% chance of success.
This is another reason why armour is relatively useless for sea combat and that IMHO we should research NonlMath first.

Doesn't artillery fire take ages to damage, like 3 or 4 turns to kill a ship? I doubt it will be of much use at all, personally.

If we accept, and can have Non Math in 2 years, then yes, IMHO. If not, and we have to have 12 years at war before Non Math, then that is very dangerous without HEC, since they will attack us.

[Googlie]

[Googlie]

[Drogue]

There's more than that though, if you scroll down. They have little defense, and gunships to attack with though We will wipe the floor with them

[Maniac]

Googlie:

I'd rule that accepting the tech, then reneging on any implied deal was a legitimate gameplay tactic.

That's great.

So ideally a naval bombardment followed by a tranny offloading amphibious troops seems to be the best tactic in PBEMs I have played (and, interestingly, is one of the things the AI seems to do well)

Great idea!

Drogue:

It would be very evil of us, and would damage our relations with other factions

Perhaps if we released a communiqué to the world telling the bad treatment PEACE gave us and the reasons we go to war, the other factions might "forgive" us and not hold it against us in possible future negotiations.

I favour the first option personally, although it is evil and could damage future relations. However I think we need war, and this gives us an opportunity to go to war already 2 techs up in diplomacy against PEACE. We have much to gain fromwar, possibly more than from any future diplomacy.

I couldn't agree more.

They don't have synthmetal

They have Industrial Base, so they can start producing it. Now I think about it, I believe they traded the tech with PUT at the initial stages of the IndAut deal (though they claimed they bought it from the Angels...)

and how does that work with naval yards?

Naval Yards add +100% to units in a base defending against naval units.

I think we should rush 2 impact cruisers ASAP, but we should build more, just not rush them.

Ah ok. Though I think we should build a cruiser transport asap too, in Boolean Bay or Aurora, to use for the amphibious assault tactic Googlie mentioned.

Doesn't artillery fire take ages to damage, like 3 or 4 turns to kill a ship?

I'm not sure as I hardly play SMAC (or any computer game) anymore, except for the democracy game. But IIRC, though atillery-to-non-artillery or land<->sea artillery fights only do partial damage, land artillery against land artillery is to the death. Unfortunately I don't know if the same counts for sea artillery fights...
Btw, what are the retreat rules again for sea combat? Was it just that any ship withdraws when it has 50% damage, or is it only under certain conditions?

[Drogue]

I have just done a plan that gives us the MCC at the same time as our first sea unit (the first time we will need it), gives us an impact cruiser in 2144, and means that by 2152 we have 2 impact cruisers, a synthmetal cruiser transport, 2 amphibious impact squads and 2 amphibious impact rovers, all in the same base as the transport.

Sounds like a good attack party to me An thread should be up in 5 minutes with turn by turn details .

Edit: Maniac beat me too it, my post is here in Maniac's thread on the PEACE war.

[Corellion]

Sounds great! The CyCon war machine has kicked into action!

[Phenix]

Let's start training those kickass Navy Seals

[DeathByTheSword]

shall i reply to flubber saying that we dont want to deal...or what? i have been away a little while and there is a lot of new post here...so what is the general concensus?

[Maniac]

Please don't reply anything to Flubber! We're going to try to use the trick again where we claim you are inactive. We'll pretend like we haven't read the PM where Flubber explains why he offered us Doc:Ini. We'll then accept the tech in our turn, so-called not knowing why they offered it, switch research to Nonlinear Mathematics, build the MCC and attack PEACE. By claiming we did not have any bad intention by accepting Doc:Ini, they may start war production a little later.

[DeathByTheSword]

ok

[Drogue]

Glad we're all up to speed. And Maniac is right, do not reply to them at all.

Fellow functions, let us prepare for war

[Maniac]

i just received the following PM from Flubber:

Re: Official communiqué: pact severance
I had no notice that DBTS was inactive as the last item I heard was that he was your ambassador. I sent a PM requesting trade negotiations and herc put in doc ini pre-accepted in the diplo window so we would have no repeat of our earlier miscommunications and not have it offered in time . .. MY PM indicated that it should not be accepted without a deal being completed

I am now doubly suprised as I hear that you folks have accepted doc ini and plan to break our pact. I feel this must have been your plan all along since you have hardly felt like pactmates to us all for a long time. We do have a quandry however if you have accepted something without reaching a deal. . . Future tech does not cut it as consideration this time . ..

As for applied physics . .. IIRC we picked it up where someone "Threw in" an extra tech since the one we offered was perceived as higher value . . . To quote you, your price was too high for a tech we could pick up for a lot less elsewhere. It was essentially free to us in any event.

Frankly, as soon to be ex pactmates, I don't feel we owe you any explaination.

Its too bad you feel as you do. I had looked forward to leveraging both our factions onward and upward together. But my instinct as to you as pactmates was obviously correct .. . How could we trust you as pactmates when you brak pact so easily??

I will send a separate PM with what I sent to DBTS on the doc ini trade issue . ..

Disappointed

FLub

The PM where he resent me the PM he sent to DBTS starts with:

Here is what I sent on the 9th of Oct. INterestingly DBTS shows as online at this moment.

So, who should respond what? Though it seems they're not buying it, still the idea where I claim Drogue accepted Doc:Ini without permission, and is before the Discplinary Committee? Or should we - in an attempt to delay a military build-up - pretend like we're willing to repay their techs, but only Biogen to complete the IndAut deal, as they "lied to us" about AppPhys?

[DeathByTheSword]

hmz...send a PM that because of internal problems over the last played turn the reponse will be delayed...making it seem we have internal fight about something...giving us more time

[Drogue]

Do not say we're willing to give them tech, let them think we'll still repay them with HEC. Try something like

Greetings Flubber,

It was not our plan all along. As I stated in my PM, we wanted to be Pactmates, and to hold it together. However we did not like being played off against other factions, and did not like the way deals were brokered between us. The decision was more for the sake of our stress than for in-game reasons. I do not think we broke Pact easily, we have had a rocky relationship since the start, and it was becoming more and more untenable. As you said, you have not felt like pactmates either for a long time. With us both feeling like that, it seemed that the most logical decision was to cut our losses and reduce to a treaty.

While you had no notice of DBTS's inactivity, we did mention it when apologising for the last mix-up regarding tech choice, due to DBTS not being the most active member of our forum. He posts occasionally at the moment, however we hope he will soon be back to his old active self. What this led too, was us having the turn without knowing of the PM from you. I PMed you to find out. However Drogue, as Prime Function, stated that he "would not delay our turn for PEACE again". While the Prime Function is able to play when he wishes, he was going against our constitution by going against the opinion of the masses who wanted to wait for an explanation from PEACE. Therefore he has been temporarily removed as Prime Function and has been put before a disciplinary committee. We are sorry for his actions. We are currently researching HEC, and will transmit to you when completed to make up for the IndAuto deal. What do you wish for Doc: Ini?

Friendly greetings
Second Function Mani Alpha-3

Obviously in your own words, but what do you think? I will still play the turn, but for the next few turns, if someone else could post them, so it seems like I've been temorarily removed.