The REAL Turn 42

[DeepO]

Nathan, you're doing a good job as their ambassador, in seeing it from their perspective, trying to convince us of their right, but don't exagerate either. Of course I can understand that their deal with us suddenly went worse then they expected, but that's not our fault. It's their miscalculation, they agreed to it, and whether Lux has given them all the candy they want or not, they simply have to go through with the original deal.

Already they're conceived as instable, if they also back out of deals because they feel another deal can be better, it will erode the trust in them even further. You said it to JM, I hope he understood our side of things too.

I agree on the joint research, but if we are going to put in more beakers, and more experience, it has to be on our terms. That means, if we tell them they need to stop on mysticism (no matter how far they are advanced in it), and start on philosphy, they have to agree to do it. I will not agree to play the game at their terms, only because we need to get out of this position. If they recognise more talent in our team, good, then listen if we say something that will be good to both of us. JM said he doesn't want to be our vasal, he doesn't need to, but if we are going to take Vox into consideration, they better start doing the same with us... and this goes beyond building trust.

DeepO

[Dominae]

Originally posted by nbarclay
On the other hand, the agreement was predicated on the idea of each side contributing things of equal value to the exchange. When Vox got another offer from Lux (or however it happened) the value of Alphabet suddenly went down dramatically. Suddenly, the deal went from something equal to something that would clearly favor us.

I must disagree. The whole point of a binding agreement (I assume this is what we had) is that you cannot just back out whenever you feel like it.

Vox: "Ok, we'll let's trade techs A, B for C, D; oh, I'm sorry, we can now buy tech B for a lot cheaper than what you're asking for. Sorry you got gipped."

GS: "Let's be lifelong trading partners."

If they want to make deals with strings attached, they must declare so up front. Reneging on a deal without notice is not exactly the kind of behaviour I'm looking for in a team we're building a partnership with.

Nathan your example of the child and his/her medicine is right on, but not for the reasons you think. As adults, we understand that it is a good idea for the child to take his medicine (the candy is just, well, candy). Giving in to what children want is not always a good idea because they're immature. Similarly with agreements: consenting adults understand that agreements are typically binding. Vox's reaction to our agreement demonstrates that they are opportunistic above all. Their willingness to break agreements demonstrates that they're just as egocentric as the child in your example.

Edit: Cross-posted with DeepO, who said the same thing as me, only nicer.


Dominae

[Theseus]

Nathan, can we back off from the long-term diplo planning for a bit? Whether the 3-partner tech consortium or a lifelong relationship with Vox, the recent and near-term volatility of the game prevent us from effective long-term discussions (as evidenced by the Vox debate).

Let's stick with the basics for now:

* Get all the tech we can, and try to guide Vox' research.

* Get contacts ASAP; this may be through Vox, but it may require Mapmaking sooner rather than later.

* Execute our REX; personally, I say let Vox build where ever they want, as we are the dominant civ... I'd avoid any diplo agreements on this issue... I'd rather LET them build as indicated on your map than APPROVE same.

* Prepare an appropriate defense, and consider a more aggressive posture re both Vox and LI.

Keep the diplo agreements short and focused on the relatively near-term.

[nbarclay]

I'm not sure how much we can separate short-term and long-term. The main reason Vox is so unstable is that they're scared (with good reason, I might add), and as long as they remain scared, they are likely to remain unstable. If I were Vox and didn't have a commitment to lasting peace from GS (maybe not permanent, but at least for a long time to come), I'd be out looking for allies willing to help me take out GS should a decent opportunity arise. (Although I'm a bit skeptical regarding their chances of finding any.)

Regarding REXing, I get a fairly strong impression that Vox is after acknowledged borders. Also note that without acknowledged borders, their logical move would be to claim the most and best land they can with a limited number of settlers, whereas my suggested build pattern is designed to make the best possible use of a limited amount of land. The city build patterns resulting from the two different philosophies could be radically different, and if they get caught without enough cities, that's likely to cause trouble.

Nathan

[Arrian]

Wow, that was a lot to read (all the activity from friday afternoon until now). If I've got this right, they tried to back out of our tech deal.

Interestingly enough, I had the same sort of situation occur in a PBEM game. I had agreed to trade for the Alphabet, and subsequently met the (AI) Greeks. I did make a brief attempt at renegotiation, before coming to my senses and going through with the original deal.

So, I understand their unhappiness at the way things panned out, but they had better damn well hand over Ironworking RIGHT NOW.

They're scared of us. Fine, based on our relative power, I understand that. But they should also be scared of stiffing us!

Re: expansion. I do not like the idea of volunteering to limit ourselves. We went with the granary so that we could have a successful REX phase. That was the point, right?

-Arrian

[DeepO]

Further, I doubt that the second granary is going to do us a lot of good if we limit ourselves...

DeepO

[DeepO]

I just checked the border screenie, and I agree on this... maybe we can give Vox another tile, so that they end up on #12 (with immediate access to the fish), that doesn't matter to us apart from running the risk of losing a iron source.

I'm not sure we have to make this final (and formal), but if we both agree on this proposal, there will be a lot less pressure, and that's good. One main advantage is that they get an idea on how close we expect their cities to be, it is cramped, but it is just what we're using too.

DeepO

[nbarclay]

I sent Jon Miller a PM asking if the chat can be moved an hour earlier for the benefit of our European contingent. I'll let you know when he answers, but I figure some advance warning that it might happen won't hurt.

[nbarclay]

Jon agreed to the time change. The chat will be at 7:00 p.m. Apolyton/U.S. Eastern time (midnight GMT).

[Theseus]

Re borders:

How is saying "build wherever you want, we'll do the same" scary to Vox?

[Harovan]

Turn arrived.

Vox is offering IW for Alphabet and already has accepted the deal. We accept too, and have IW now.

[Harovan]

We have iron near Hurricane and in the northwestern end of the Spinebreakers. Vox has iron at the mountain with the barbarian encampment.

[Theseus]

Woohoo!!!

All the more reason... let Vox build wherever they want.

Screenshot, por favor.

[Harovan]

Turn played and sent. Set Writing to 100% Grog got us 25 gold from the barbs, although failed to get promoted. Vox killed the running barb with Rodney. All else as described. We own 88 gold now.

This was a good turn. Screenies (zoom, f11, power) soon.

[Harovan]

Team Scores:

74 (+1) Gathering Storm
85 (+1) Demogyptica
70 (+1) Glory of War
81 (+1) Role Play
65 (+0) Vox Controli
65 (+1) Lux Invicta
89 (+2) Legoland

Screenshots sent. Btw, the negotiations for an alliance are going in the #voxcontroli chatroom, if fact you want to be there, Theseus.