GoW- Diplomacy comments #2

[Arrian]

I think we should play dumb on the "GoW is trying to find justification to break the NAP" front. Let them make the accusations before we start defending ourselves, otherwise it looks guilty.

I agree.

-Arrian

[notyoueither]

I would apprecieate if you guys could give me the day to think about this before sending anything. There is something not quite right about what he is asking, and the way he asked. 5 or 6 messages... man to man... Something is off.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Aeson


With each one of you taking a different city to ask about if it's garrisoned.

nice

[Arrian]

There is something not quite right about what he is asking

Ya think?

They're fishing for justification to break the NAP.

But yeah, I'll hold off. I was waiting for you to comment...

-Arrian

[notyoueither]

I think I would like to look up UnO for a chat this evening. Something to be very careful about. What do the rest of you feel about it?

[Shiber]

If it's just NYE and UnOrthOdOx, then I'm for it.
Edit: I'd rather if we sent the reply first, and waited a whole day before contacting UnOrthOdOx.

[asleepathewheel]

dangerous, but what have we to lose?

They already know basically what happened, maybe not the war and the cats.

They are already going to declare war on us, this is just one more reason.


at least this way nye can possibly learn who ratted, or at least the team. And you can be more open and honest in a chat than in a simple pm. And we can get a lot more information this way.

from me (easy to say from someone not participating in it )

[Arrian]

NYE, what do you intend to chat about? I mean, I think most of us agree that UnO isn't entitled to the info he asked for, and that he's only asking to dig up a pretext to use in breaking our NAP. So what is to discuss, really?

Are you going to try and prevent war? Do you think that's even possible? Unless they're willing to turn on ND...

-Arrian

[Theseus]

I don;t think there is anything to be lost.

Either:
* GoW is going to declare war, and is looking for a justification (which we can deny).
* GoW is not going to declare war, was planning on leaving our territory to the SOUTH, and actually really did want to know if RP has some extra units to play with.
* GoW intends to or can be convinced to backstab ND.

A chat, well-handled, may be able to swing UnO at least in a direction mor of our liking... it won;t really make things any worse.

[asleepathewheel]

What we must figure out before anything else, I think, is:

Do we want war with GoW in the near future. Near future probably meaning this turn or the next.

I think we want war, to free up our army that otherwise would be stuck in Toledo.

We need to come up with a dtrategy depending on what we want out of gow. And we have to figure that out before a response or a chat.

Do we want peace? Well, then pleasant chat would be the best. Do we want war? A short curt message telling them to bugger off would be the best. Even if we want peace, it might be out of reach now. So what is the best alternative to frame us with relation to Lego? Because I think that's almost where we are, setting up the stage so lego won't come over invited or uninvited.


War or Peace.

Peace or war.



I vote war

[DeepO]

I think GoW's decision on declaring war or not is going to depend on how ND does in Zaragosa / Pamplona. If ND achieves victory there, they will have an easier time declaring war, as they will anticipate that we have to split forces over two fronts. If RP is able to withold ND this turn, GoW probably is going to keep out of our cities, as otherwise the risk to them is too big: we would run over them. This really is a crucial turn (this and the next), I think most teams involved know it.

As to chatting: I'm not against it, as it would be a man-to-man thing. However, it is very risky, and as long as GS hasn't made up its mind of how we want to handle GoW, it's not easy to keep options open.

For me, I wouldn't mind a war with GoW, however I would love it if it could came after our next wave lands, and we have more troops in RP territory. Next turn, we will probably have enough to handle the 14 riders, but not to split troops over both ND and GoW. But... the longer this gets stretched, the longer we have to defend 2 fronts, I would want GoW to attack us before the 30-turn NAP is over, ideally in let's say 4 turns. Which will be very difficult to achieve: either they do it now, or they won't do it.

DeepO

[notyoueither]

I would like to get a better feeling for which way GoW is leaning. Harsh words from MZ and GF is just more barking. UnO might give us a better picture of how close to war we are.

I would like to chat with him about GS and GoW relations. Anything to do with RP (such as Inchon) will be 'no comment' from me.

re his message. It is and was an attempt to drag more information from us. They send a note with a hostile or demanding tone. We take our time and reply. They send us another note with a hostile/demanding tone. We send a well considered reply. They respond immediately by peppering 5 or 6 of us with a 'man to man' note. If we had responded as individuals, as in times past, then they could have derived much useful information from the many replies.

I think we should avoid war with GoW if possible, or at least delay it. Once the GW is complete, then we need less force to cover important sites for RP, and with every turn we grow stronger in Spain. If we cannot avoid war with GoW, we should at least arrange to be as strong as possible when it breaks out. That is why I would like to chat with UnO.

[Theseus]

[notyoueither]

re GF's latest barking.

I would like to reply simply that we hope that their coffin makers are prepared for the business. They are going to be busy if GoW provokes us any further.

[Theseus]

I would like to go insane in the public forum.

Playing further in a roleplaying mode, I would like to announce my religious allegiance, and my undying commitment to the protection of the Two Realms (that's kinda catchy, huh? ).