An opportunity?

[DeepO]

I think it's fine, however, don't show that we aren't even considering to talk seriously. We can simply stall them for while, building up forces.

the only reason why I think they might go for it, is if they prepare for more troops to be sent to us. E.g. the Eastern coast could use 1 or 2 galleys more of immortals. We are building 4 units each turn (slightly more, even, with rushing), they can build 4-5 warriors each turn (3 cities building a warrior a turn, one at a warrior each two turns. Some more smaller cities that can build once every 4 turns). If they still have the cash, this would mean more immortals to send in, and I think they're hesitating that 11 immortals will be enough to attack a walled hill city that is defended with at least 2 pikes. So those 2 turns could also give some regrouping time to them.

I fully expect that 1 turn into the talks, if we stall them or not, they will advance again. But that's okay, it maens 4 more units to defend with, and 2 galleys closer to their landing point.

However, there is one problem: if GoW declares war on us, and sells Feud to Vox, we are facing pikes soon. Further, it would also give time to GoW to regroup troops, and next invasion force might be better coordinated (violating the Sea ROP we have, e.g.), and with pikes on board. This makes it a bit risky to agree to it.

DeepO

[Velociryx]

Could be....but how busy can GoW keep us, with all of two units? Seems like we're in a position to make *much* better use of the time than they are....I'm thinking that those two turns essentially represents the status quo, plus about 8 units, which will put us in the ballpark of having a comparably sized force.

Couple turns after that, we surpass them and start getting garrisons back in our exposed cities, and the window of opportunity closes for good.

Dunno....it's possible, I'll admit.

-=Vel=-

[Shiber]

Of course, it's possible that Vox has moved some units adjacent to Monsoon. No doubt, we will have to destroy those - otherwise, Vox will have the opportunity to violate the cease-fire agreement later (something we all know they are capable of doing).
Should we discover that they have indeed moved towards Monsoon, IMHO we will have to destroy their forces, regardless of any cease-fire agreements that we may sign. I suggest that if things turn out to be this way, we tell Vox that we take no chances, and we intend to destroy those units as well. However, if we reach some sort of a peace agreement later, we assure them that we will pay back the majority of the cost of the units that we've destroyed.

[DeepO]

Oh, and yes, our power graph, plus our rise in Mil adv is scary, for more then one team. We could play this out to other teams (e.g. GoW), telling that only now are we getting up to speed producing units, as we needed to finish a few other buildings first.

Of course, our mil advisor is just as biased as Vox's was beforehand: we have 2 galleys, and have upgraded nearly everything to the max. We currently have less units, and less attacking power then GoW, even if we are "stronger" to them.

DeepO

[Harovan]

A short cease fire would be clearly to our advantage and I would vote for it. But there can't be peace between us and Vox anymore. There is no reason left to trust them, they have to go. Vox delenda est. Vox and RP delenda sunt.

[Velociryx]

Regarding Pikes, and Vox's technological status:

Even IF this happens, it's a short term problem, at best. Their native research is scant compared to ours, and the only way they can keep up is by feeding off of other people's table scraps. Eventually, the other civs would come to see this as more of a liability (having to continuously "feed" another civ techs, because they cannot research them themselves (and they would lack the money to pay a good price for them, if they want to keep upgrading their warriors to Immortals and spears to pikes), and that'd be the kiss of death (no more gimmies from other civs, at which point, our own tech abilities would blow them off the map).

-=Vel=-

[DeepO]

Shiber: good point. If they advanced their units before offering us to stop their forces, we can't accept. If there are forces near Monsoon, they're dead (or at least we'll try to kill them), talk or no talk.

But they haven't heared about the 'stop forces so we can talk' yet, it was a proposal of us, which hasn't been sent to them.

GoW: it doesn't represent a problem, as we could face the same threat from GoW whether Vox attacks or not. From their side, there is no change, they would be best of to wait until they have a reasonable invasion force anyway. But I think it's something we shouldn't lose out of sight

BTW, this thread must be our fastest growing thread, I face about 2-3 crossposts each time I post something

DeepO

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Vox delenda est. Vox and RP delenda sunt.

Make that Vox et RP delenda sunt, and I couldn't agree more

DeepO

[DeepO]

Vel, there is no Vox native research, nor will there be from now on. They are dead last in research ability, even in the middle of their GA.

However, other teams do well when feeding them the table scraps, as you put it, more then one team sees benefit in trying to keep us small. RP for sure, and they could have talked about anyone into trying to get us out of the game asap.

BTW, I also don't buy it that ND and RP have no communication channels left, and their nearly simultanous messages that they don't talk anymore makes me very wary of another ruse.

DeepO

[alva]

[Wacky-thought]
Did their iron disappear?

[Velociryx]

Well, if you guys are open to it, my proposal will be (this is how I'll word it to them):

IF the Voxians want to talk about possible peaceful resolutions to our current situation, then they must agree to a 2-turn ceasefire (2-turns is long enough to discuss the options and demands of both sides, without allowing us enough time to really build much more than we currently have, force-wise)*

Any units that are currently adjacent to cities ARE subject to attack, but if these units pull back one tile, the ceasefire will be in effect regarding those units as well.

On the second turn of the Cease-Fire agreement, if both parties agree, we can extend it. If one party disagrees, the cease-fire ends.

Howzzat?

-=Vel=-

* This is a little white lie, 'tis true....

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by alva
[Wacky-thought]
Did their iron disappear?

You might be on to something there, mate.

[DeepO]

It's a start, Vel. Don't we need to make demands to war compensation

No, really, isn't it necessary to tell something about what we hope to achieve? Something like "we would hope that we can reach peace, however, given the situation, that might not be easy".

I agree with Alva this can be a test, so we don't want to appear weakly to them, but also not overpowerful.

Oh, and as to your white lie: I wouldn't worry about that, as we would only gain an extra 10% forces each turn. With a bit of stretching the truth, that won't mean much... and we can expect them to bring more troops as well, meaning that the ratio stays about the same. The real gain for us would be that we can get those new pikes to fortify, instead of defending unfortified. We might even take advantage of this and move our forces back onto A9, if we want to

DeepO

[alva]

Shouldn't we hear what they propose first?

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Velociryx
IF the Voxians want to talk about possible peaceful resolutions to our current situation, then they must agree to a 2-turn ceasefire (2-turns is long enough to discuss the options and demands of both sides, without allowing us enough time to really build much more than we currently have, force-wise)*

Any units that are currently adjacent to cities ARE subject to attack, but if these units pull back one tile, the ceasefire will be in effect regarding those units as well.

On the second turn of the Cease-Fire agreement, if both parties agree, we can extend it. If one party disagrees, the cease-fire ends.

I like it, BUT.... we should open our save before we say this to them. I think it would be wise to see what the latest situation is first.