Announcement

**alva** · January 3, 2003, 01:56

3. The Voice begat Willy. The Voice begat Tim. The Voice begat Thadeus.

Could they be serious about this???

Would they be so stupid to tell us their capital is now defended by one warrior and one only???
Not to mention their second (unsettled) city has no defense???

**alva** · January 3, 2003, 02:03

our reply to VOX

(originally posted by MSS -see other thread)

ManicStarSeed

Here is our reply:

I wanted to push the point of the warriors , but I figured not yet. We do not want to push too hard or too soon..

Mss

Ambassador BeatHound:

Why yes thank you for asking, we are doing well, although we do miss our former leader (NYE) whom has be absorbed by this thing called RL. Suffice to say the nation is doing well despite this brief time in mourning.

Thank you for sharing that fine piece of culture, what do you call it? I hope that, together we can do some more of...well, whatever it is you call it, about the triumphs that our two nations achieve against what can be a hostile bob.

Again we eagerly await your relpies to our previous envoy. Let me know if you have any questions so that we can get them answered.

Warm Regards;
ManicStarSeed and Gathering Storm

PS. Please enjoy these few bottles of this champaign, Share it with the team and loved ones as a token of our good will. It is from 3050 BC, a very fine year for champaign, if I may say so.

**alva** · January 3, 2003, 02:05

not bad MSS, not bad at all.

I understand they can't give a complete answer on the issues immediately, but I would repeat the warrior thing again IMHO.
They should be able to decide that one before thei next turn comes up

**ManicStarSeed** · January 3, 2003, 02:06

I do not know. I have not done any critical analysis of what they sent. I figured it is mostly role play and did not pay it any mind regarding intelligence. But then again alva, you might be right. Little unconcious things creap out that can be worth analyzing.

I did say that 3050 BC was a very fine year, though I was talking specifically about champaign. I do not even know if that is the year we got a goodied a settler, but I know it is close.

**ManicStarSeed** · January 3, 2003, 02:13

Thanks Alva;
I wanted to give them a day before I brought it (the warrior thing) up again. I do not want them thinking we have something to hide and pushing that point will do it. As I learned from Dune... "beginnings are always delicate"

I would love to discuss this more, But I have to drop out for the night and spend time with the wife. Please post away and I will check back on Friday (PST=GMT-8)

G'nite
mss

[edit]typo

**Dominae** · January 3, 2003, 04:12

I also Wonder why they told us what their initial build queue was. If we discover that they're lying about their actual troop distribution, we should not take this lightly. I'm guessing they've obtained a Conscript or two and are attemtping to misinform us.

Though they may seriously need some time to mull over the proposals, I believe we should push the Warrior issue immediately, and the others within 3-5 turns. Call me impatient, but they could at least tell us "no thank you for now" to our proposals.

Dominae

**nbarclay** · January 3, 2003, 04:51

Originally posted by Dominae
I also Wonder why they told us what their initial build queue was. If we discover that they're lying about their actual troop distribution, we should not take this lightly. I'm guessing they've obtained a Conscript or two and are attemtping to misinform us.

Looking at it another way, three warriors is about as much as a civ would normally be expected to have at this point, especially considering the gold penalty for having more with just one city. So they may have been trying to impress us with the idea that they have a respectable early-game military and that the two warriors we found aren't their only ones. Too bad they don't know about the odd circumstances that led to our using chops to build two extra early warriors

.

Not that I would rule out the possibility of misdirection (did he quote anything from their Book of Spearmen?), but it is quite possible that they simply miscalculated how strong a force we would view three warriors as being.

Nathan

**Dominae** · January 3, 2003, 06:15

I hope I'm not offending anyone by saying this, but I get the impression that the Voxians may not be a very challenging team for us to deal with. Of course, this makes me doubly wary, as they may up to something. However, I'm guessing we should not have too much trouble convincing them a tech partnership is their best chance at continued success, once our empire blossoms faster than theirs.

Dominae

**Conqueror** · January 3, 2003, 06:29

Originally posted by Dominae
I hope I'm not offending anyone by saying this, but I get the impression that the Voxians may not be a very challenging team for us to deal with. Of course, this makes me doubly wary, as they may up to something. However, I'm guessing we should not have too much trouble convincing them a tech partnership is their best chance at continued success, once our empire blossoms faster than theirs.

They may also be bluffing, that build queue and all might just be some well planned diversion. Dissident and Eli are both rather good PBEM players, i'm in a few PBEM games with them and would not underestimate their MP playing skills.

IMO the worst mistake we can make is to underestimate the enemy. Trusting our team and our playing skills is always good, but still

**DeepO** · January 3, 2003, 06:51

Bah, the 3 warriors I already predicted before getting the message, so I think we can trust this. I'm even doubting that Thadeus is guarding their capital, it could very well be on the lookout nearby. But you can be sure they're building some more troops right now, possibly barracks, or possibly a spear.

I agree we don't need to underestimate them, but then again, I don't particularly trust them either. If their cities wouldn't be so far so that corruption would make them useless, I would prefer an early rush. Now, let's see if we can trade with them.

Oh, and guys, don't be too impatient: we can reach decisions in 2 days time but only because there is always one of our large group online to discuss things, if you only have a few members the timing will certainly slow down. We really need to give them at least 3 days before we can expect a full answer. If they're faster: good, if they're not it's still ok. Don't pressure them too hard if you don't get a reply for a day.

DeepO

**Shiber** · January 3, 2003, 09:21

I'm guessing that Eli and Dissident are the major players in Vox who call most of the shots. Does anyone here have any valuable PBEM experience with these two that he'd like to share?

**Harovan** · January 3, 2003, 09:59

I'm playing a PBEM with Dissidents participation, but we haven't met yet, so that I can't say anything.

**alva** · January 3, 2003, 12:04

If they're faster: good, if they're not it's still ok. Don't pressure them too hard if you don't get a reply for a day.

Sure, no problem, but a I would expect a small note back saying,"need more time, will halt* warriors, expect the same from you"

* not even talking about returning to the bottleneck here, just halting until/while they discuss the other points of the proposal.

**DeepO** · January 3, 2003, 12:17

Ah, there is a difference between politeness and efficiency, I agree they could send a message like that. But again, they will probably need time to decide if they are going to stop their exploration, so even that in itself would be something to wait for... patience...

DeepO

Announcement

Dimplo Scholia: - Vox Controli - comments

Dimplo Scholia: - Vox Controli - comments

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment