An opportunity?

[Dominae]

Point 4 in Nathan's idea (the one about Vox helping us in any future war not against Vox) will be the most difficult for them to swallow. Without a guarantee that they have anything to gain from this, they would be a pawn in our schemes. Again, I'm betting the team as a whole would prefer to weaken us than continue in such a state.

Opening up their private forums is unecessary. It just makes us look like we're trying to control everything. They're a team, leave them that at least.

And this "untrustworthiness" is utter bullcrap: once two teams go to war, they throw all "trust" out the window. You can bet Vox distrusts us as much as we distrust them. We have no right to make demands based on our their previous breach of trust. We're making demands because we're more powerful. Masking this behind any other pretense is arrogant.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Having a Voxian observer in our forums would be especially problematic in regard to outside perceptions. A GS observer or two in Vox's forum could be explained as necessary to help monitor compliance with the peace treaty given Vox's proven untrustworthiness, so while it could draw some fire, it would not pose the same level of danger as if both teams had observers in each other's forums.

[alva]

Can we cramp a "son of Grog"(scout) in there somewhere?

[Theseus]

Okay, no Vox observers then. And having a GS observer might be construed as, I dunno, dangerous or something.

Is there some way to use the fact that Trip is already an observer? Hans "Trip" Blix?

[Aeson]

Once you're done, just tell me your nickname and I'll authorize you to #GatheringStorm.

I've registered Aeson... lemme in?

[alva]

Trip must remain neutral IMO.

I'm not sure about the observer thing either, the forum are private and should remain as such IMHO.

[nbarclay]

I view Point 4 as an important part of what makes leaving Vox alive instead of taking all of their territory worthwhile for us. We could add something about the possibility of our purchasing any territory Vox conquers in such a campaign, either with other territory more valuable to Vox or with some other form of compensation, though.

Regarding the issue of trustworthiness, a civ that declares war using an elaborate deception is a lot more dangerous to keep around than a civ that just declares war with no deception involved. In the latter case, there is reason for hope that with a peace agreement in place, the team will be willing to abide by it. In the former, a peace treaty is only worth the combination of military power and mutual advantage available to back it up at any given time.

Nathan

[Aeson]

I'd rather not have Vox's help in a war on BOB. It makes it all the easier to get us into a 3 on 1. Vox, in that timeframe, isn't going to be much if any help, and will be a major diplomatic pitfall.

If we mention an alliance (of any sort) to Vox, assume everyone 'knows' we have an alliance with Vox.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by nbarclay
Regarding the issue of trustworthiness, a civ that declares war using an elaborate deception is a lot more dangerous to keep around than a civ that just declares war with no deception involved. In the latter case, there is reason for hope that with a peace agreement in place, the team will be willing to abide by it. In the former, a peace treaty is only worth the combination of military power and mutual advantage available to back it up at any given time.

I'm not saying that we should trust them. I'm saying that making demands and expecting Vox to abide by them because we do not trust Vox will not work. Vox does not really care if we trust them or not, and we're just assuming we're trusted because we think we have such a clean record.

What this means is that we're going to have a tough time selling our idea that we had to put an "observer" in the Vox private forum because "they cannot be trusted". In light of our already average reputation, this is sure to cause some backlash.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

If we prefer, we could leave out the possibility of a future alliance for the moment and hope we can negotiate something mutually beneficial when the time comes. (Edit: If the situation warrants such an alliance.)

[Theseus]

Okay, no observers then... sort of irrelevant anyway, I just liked the RL parallel.

So, if Vox does come back with interest in a ceasefire, is this the sort of peace proposal we are leaning towards?

[notyoueither]

I am available this evening and tomorrow afternoon. Let me know.

[nbarclay]

The big question is, would peace on such terms be better for us than conquering our continent? I don't think it would be honorable to offer a peace treaty if we're just planning to go back and conquer Vox in a little while anyhow, nor would Vox accept a peace agreement without an assurance of reasonably long-term peace unless their thinking caps are on backward.

Nathan

[Dominae]

The only reason it makes sense for us to offer a cease-fire at this point is so that we can mount a better defense/offense at a later time. We're not really planning to call the whole war off (are we?).

I personally see nothing dishonorable in signing a cease-fire while planning to continue hostilities when it expires. We just have to make sure the treaty looks something like: "Gathering Storm and Vox agree not to attack each other for x turns", and nothing more.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Since the foreign advisor from SP isn't here, let me say what he would: "They would never accept that deal."

If you were Vox, would you even consider a peace treaty that left GS free to attack with knights after another twenty turns or so? Especially if it meant giving up cities and territory?