PEACE Relations - To trade or not to trade? REDONE

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by foolish_icarus
"The Email"

JDM's message


MWIA, apply to our forum (if you haven't already) and then you can use this link, along with the "previous/next page" feature to navigate around.



The back door to the PEACE forum

Thanks icarus, but I can't post or anything...

I am on the waiting list for PEACE (have been for a couple of days now). Hopefully I can get in and poke around a bit before the new game dominates completely.

[HongHu]

Thanks! Yeah it is a bit too much to accuse people of spreading viruses and things like that. I can understand the CCs feeling when they read it.

[foolish_icarus]

"The Email"

JDM's message


MWIA, apply to our forum (if you haven't already) and then you can use this link, along with the "previous/next page" feature to navigate around.



The back door to the PEACE forum

[HongHu]

I still haven't read JD's PM. Could somebody link me to it?

I think Enigma had sent a pretty bad PM to the PEACE too, and PEACE contacted Hive and Voltaire clearified that it was something totally unheard of in the Hive and did not representing the Hive.

[Flubber]

As I say, I was away but I don't ever recall seeing the text of those PMs before reading them in the cycon forum. It was enlightening to say the least. As I said, it explains a lot

I don't blame cycon for their reaction but I would have handled things differently, if it were me. If I received such messages I would have contacted someone else in the opposing faction, appending the message and simply saying it was unacceptable and we have no intention to deal with the sender and asking if this was the official position . But thats me ( in my job , I beasically negotiate for a living . .. I advocate positions every day without letting any emotions get into it, even positions I don't believe in-- I have been told off in person by people on the opposite side a few times-- I find it laugahble as its just business . .. and this is just a geme)

There are many in PEACE and in every faction that would have reacted just as you did-- probably the majority of folks-- I just think if I got such an odd message from one person I might have checked it out with someone else

I did find it funny to see how I was personally portrayed in your threads. depending who was posting, I was the biggest ass on the planet or the most reasonable guy around-- I did note an upswing in my popularity once you folks had dealt with johnd for a while.

I enjoyed the diplomatic aspects but in retrospect I wish I had taken a more active role in the gameplay. I never played a single turn and probably only opened the file 2-3 times to see what was up. But parenthood limited what I had time to do.

I actually considered trying for an ambassador role with a faction in this new game but it would take too much time. I will be observing with interest though

[MrWhereItsAt]

Flubber, yes in reviewing some old threads I had not seen before (although I don't think I have as yet read as much as you have, and I have no access to PEACE forums so I can only read here), I agree that some CyCon members were openly talking about war on PEACE before there were any events that, IMO, would have made it inevitable, and this would have influenced actions later on.

However I was horrified when I came across JDM's PMs. There was no joking tone that I could discern, and I am fully satisfied with my team's response to it. When it became clear that, despite a more neutral response, there was going to be nothing but abuse and slander, it is clear to me diplomacy was not possible. War may not have been the best option, in hindsight and given your assurances that PEACE was trying to salvage a pact, but I daresay had PEACE or any other team had such vitriol thrown at them for no clear reason they would have had many members getting angry enough to want an attack. It is equally horrific that your team, or at least you, had little or no knowledge of exactly what he said. Perhaps we should have asked others in your team for clarification: was that message an official communiqué, or was jdm being an a*sehole on his own?

I don't annoy or offend easily here, but those PMs gave me real reservations about having to deal with JDM in any sense.

[Flubber]

Maniac

1. There was a lot of discussion around the plan nets trade about screwing PEACE if we weren't researching it. IN fact the negotiator-- IIRC it was you . . . .wanted to make a deal so we would start researching something else and then renege . . . so right from the start we were on shaky ground. I was a bit peeved with the " we have a deal . .. oh no we don't attitude of cycon negotiators.

2, Johnd's message was bizarre-- I have no further comment since I still don't understand it. I don't think people in our faction were as aware of it as you were ( but I could be wrong as it occurred during my vacation and when I came back, I perfomed diplomacy only for a little while before pretty much dropping out . His message if taken as represenataive of the whole faction certainly explains a lot.

3. I never considered being up front about reasons for not wanting to trade a tech, doc flex, as provocation. I was a big part of the decison not to want to trade it. The pirates need to monopolize the seas and they are very very vulnerable if others get to the sea quickly IMHO and as the cycon demonstrated.

4. Lying about where a tech came from and trying to hide relationships with others-- When I heard about this I thought our guys were stupid since we were pactmates and you could easly see our diplomatic status with everyone


I am not seeking confirmation of anything. Its obvious and admitte who backstabbed who and it was effective, sort of. It was tactically smart but strategically stupid.

What I was seeking was the cycon point of view and I now understand it. Bottom line was that there was stuff done on both sides that led to mistrust. The difference was the reactions. For PEACE the decision was made that the Hive/Drones were the threat and we needed alliances so we started giving techs even when we were not paid for earlier deals. For CYCON the decison was that you don't trust them so attack them

[HongHu]

I also learnt that it was hard for two democratic teams with many active members to reach consenses. One factor that facilitated Hive Drones alliance is that the Drones is largely controled by buster. So the safty of the pact was almost assured if we made sure buster would not betray us. Things get much more complicated in two real demo teams. Different people have different belives, styles, reactions and behaviors.

[HongHu]

Originally posted by Maniac


So what have you learned? Judging from some comments in this and the PEACE forum, I get the impression what you above all seem to have learned is that CyCon are all lying bastards not to be trusted... I beg to disagree with that view of course. While it may hold elements of truth it's rather unnuanced.

I learnt to look at and think about things from different perspective. I learnt that many things we were angry at the time was actually very natural if we were put in the same position.

Just FYI, my personal impression is that whenever I make a comment about you possibly not being honest or not deserving of trust, you are not genuinely interested in the reason, but you immediately go into the defensive to protect your self-image of honesty. Another reason why I consider it pointless to comment on Hive threads.

I truly am, Maniac. I think myself as honest. And if you could show me why you don't think so, then I would have learnt a lot about how one could do something to damage the image of her in front of others even if she was sincerely not trying to be that way. But you are right, I should put down my defense if I really want to hear and learn something. It is always hard to accept criticisms without explaining oneself. But I will try.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by HongHu
It's about learning about people.

So what have you learned? Judging from some comments in this and the PEACE forum, I get the impression what you above all seem to have learned is that CyCon are all lying bastards not to be trusted... I beg to disagree with that view of course. While it may hold elements of truth it's rather unnuanced.

Same thing with me. When I ask why you didn't trusted me when I said the Drone's choppers were for PEACE's defense, I wouldn't get offended if you say that I didn't deserve trust because I did this and that. Actually I was genuinely interested in learning what made you guys not trusting me.

Just FYI, my personal impression is that whenever I make a comment about you possibly not being honest or not deserving of trust, you are not genuinely interested in the reason, but you immediately go into the defensive to protect your self-image of honesty. Another reason why I consider it pointless to comment on Hive threads.

[/Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Flubber
I believe that others lied about the source of a tech we had, ALTHOUGH Hercules recently referred to it as the tech we got from the AI so I'm unsure on the point.

IIRC PEACE sold Doc:Mob to PUT in exchange for IndBase. However to us IIRC johndmuller claimed that PEACE had sold that tech from the Angels for 100 credits. Therefore he wanted a tech and those 100 credits supposedly paid by PEACE in exchange for IndBase. If that scheme would have worked, you would have received two techs and 100 credits in exchange for you giving Doc:Mob to PUT. Needless to say, we were rather pissed off.

no provocation

That's the basic disagreement here. If your goal of reading this forum is NOT to find elements to support your I assume already existing convictions about CyCon, but rather to find out why happened what happened, then you need to understand that from the CyCon point of view you did do things that provoked us to go to war. Also your aim shouldn't be to solve once and for all the question of "who's to blame", but rather try not to make any moral judgements.

For example re the CC feeling of being provoked, Drogue at first was the most heavy supporter of the CyCon-PEACE pact. While he may have made some random belligerent comments before that, IIRC the moment he REALLY decided he wanted to go to war was after johndmuller's mail accusing him of being a hacker.

Likewise IIRC I only personally made my final decision to support a war with PEACE after the failure of the second DocFlex trade attempt, when I incorrectly assumed that Hercules had deliberately not offered us DocFlex that turn. Before that IIRC I made some posts trying to discourage my more warlike colleagues, by saying war would be economic suicide, that we didn't have powerful enough weapons etc...

IIRC it's only after the second failed DocFlex trade attempt that we really started going overboard with all the lies, including that 'DeathByTheSword absent' scam etc. I can't say for sure about the others, but IIRC personally I was still willing to pay back our debts before that.

So it would be inaccurate to say that CyCon was intentionally planning betrayal right from the beginning. It was a more or less logical and gradual consequence of the twenty years of interaction of both parties before that.

[Flubber]

Fun stuff


No temper here-- Don't think I have ever gotten mad about this game-- but I can write as if I have LOL

Maniac

I can acknowledge that I lied about what my faction was researching once(pre-pact)-- I believe that others lied about the source of a tech we had, ALTHOUGH Hercules recently referred to it as the tech we got from the AI so I'm unsure on the point.

Other than that,

1. we bargained hard
2. we never came to trust the cycon fully (in retrospect for good reason)
3. we kept every promise that we made-- I'm not aware of one that we broke
4. Johnd sent what I consider to be a strange and insulting message


Not lilly white but pretty good

The cycon

1. reneged on the tech deal that netted them ind auto by NEVER paying the tech owed
2. broke pact on no provocation
3. Attacked their former pactmate on no provocation

All and all excellent gameplay (if there hadn't been other stronger powerhouses in the game) but hardly commendable pactmate behavior

[GeoModder]

The line in brackets is the translation, dear HongHu.

C'est la vie --> such is life
C'est la joue --> such is (the) game

Never heard James Bond saying the first line? It's from one of our generation Bond movies, ya know...

[HongHu]

Translation please, Geo.

[GeoModder]

on your response above
on the lost (3 times!!!) opportunities for a halt to ingame hostilities

C'est la joue, I suppose... (Such is the game).

[HongHu]

Maniac, I have never thought that it was all CCs fault. It's really not about winners and losers. It's about learning about people.

When Geo asked why I didn't trust him when he said he would not set a base using the captured CP, (while the truth was that I didn't really noticed when he said it ) I said that we didnt' trusted him because he was new and the CCs having a history that we could not trust (the peace incident and peter incident etc.), he didn't get offended.

Same thing with me. When I ask why you didn't trusted me when I said the Drone's choppers were for PEACE's defense, I wouldn't get offended if you say that I didn't deserve trust because I did this and that. Actually I was genuinely interested in learning what made you guys not trusting me.

And though this kind of reading and talking after the game, I feel I gained more understanding and learnt more about how ones act will generate later consequences. I don't see why this is bad. Blaming somebody will not do anything. Learning from what happened on the other hand, helps one grow.

Through talking to Geo for example, I know him a little better. The next time I would trust him more when he says something. (You would think so wouldn't you Geo. ) Trust can only be built when you are communicating with each other.