6 player 2-a-day, thread III

[jshelr]

I wasn't threatening anything or asking for anything. Sabre wants to restore the DMZ aspect of those forested tiles before my arty begins to kick the stuffing out of Tilberg. It's ok with me to do so in the fail-safe manner outlined above.

[Andydog]

So please explain exactly how the presence of my regular pike is 'destabilising long standing agreements' concerning the forrested tiles?

And while you're at it, please explain how your second sentence above isn't a threat.

[jshelr]

It's not a threat -- it contains a description of Sabre's desire for safety, which is based on his understanding of the current state of technology in the game. It also indicates that the Maya are willing to satisfy the Dutch desire for safety. The Maya had a long standing agreement with the Dutch not to use that area for military purposes.

The friendly Byz unit in the area is not a party to that agreement, and, with the RoP and the road that the Dutch are building, you can put every unit you own next to my city in one turn and actually attack with the 3-movers.

So, if we don't return to the status quo ante, all bets are off and we have to consider pre-emptive action. Sabre likely would rather not be involved in that outcome. We would rather not as well.

I trust that this explanation of American english translates into English english well enough to be regarded as an exact explanation.

[sabrewolf]

to clarify some things:

the dutch only moved their workers into the DMZ after the mayan had done so a turn earlier. should the mayan workers withdraw WITHOUT building a road, the dutch workers will do the same. the dutch orders were merely a reaction to the mayan ones.

a general DMZ proposal and gentleman's agreement has been sent to the mayan and will be published here should the mayan ruler agree to it.

concerning the byzantine unit inside the DMZ: it is used for scouting and patrol purposes only and emits no danger at all. it has however been asked to exit the tilburgian woods.

[jshelr]

Sabre has proposed this reasonable agreement.

A) the DMZ, comprised of the 7 land tiles along our border is to be empty of all units at the end of each person's turn.

B) should one or more units end their turn in the DMZ this is considered a preparation for war. in such a case, the violator has to declare war by cancelling the peace treaty after which he is allowed to do whatever he pleases.

We can live with that, although we caution that declaring war and shooting first are not the same thing. We proposed a stronger version that would require an attacker actually to shoot first.

This post should be considered as the Maya signing the agreement, if one more item is added

C) The Dutch have to declare war if they conclude a turn with no unit occupying the fort near Tilberg.

I think (C) is likely ok since the only reason for the Dutch to leave the fort is to let the Byz go through.

If Sabre decides to agree and moves his units out on his turn, we will move our units out as promised on our turn and silence will decend on the peaceful forest floor Obviously, the Dutch have to leave the fort this turn to let the Byz out.

[sabrewolf]

edit: after careful thought, the dutch cannot agree to maya's condition C as this is a clear exploitation of this game's mechanics.

having the hill tile blocked by a dutch unit means that - should the mayan decide attack tilburg - the byzantine people could not help. the mayan could position there units in turn n+1 and attack in turn n+2 while the dutch could only remove their hill unit in n+2 (having their turn before the mayan) and the byzantine could earliest arrive in n+3.

as condition C is clearly an intention of delaying any potential byzantine help and is therefore intended as a clearly maya-favouring point, we cannot accept this term. we are willing to allow you the term C which was originally proposed in our correspondence. the original proposal was the following:

A) the DMZ, comprised of the 7 land tiles along our border is to be empty of all units at the end of each person's turn (that allows peeking with cavalry).
B) should one or more units end their turn in the DMZ this is considered a preparation for war. especially if these units include units which enable an attack in the next turn (considered dangerous): workers, cavalry, artillery, radar artillery, modern armour. in such a case, the violator has to declare war by cancelling the peace treaty after which he is allowed to do whatever he pleases.

optionally, we can add something like this that legitimise your medinfs:
C) units that do not fall under the category of immediate danger (see list in point B) and have an attack value of not over 4 can roam freely within the forest tiles. however a maximum of 1 unit per bordering tile (max. 3 dutch units in the DMZ and 4 mayan units)

also, removing the workers can only be done after the mayan do. for two reasons:
1) the mayans were the first to move workers into the DMZ, therefore should be the first to move them out
2) as the mayan turn is immediately after the dutch turn, the mayans can react faster to a betrayal than the dutch can.


having the later/last turn in PBEMs is enough advantage on its own, the dutch people cannot accept further advantage adding up together with the facts or the mayan being no. 1 in every major economic area, having the largest army and the most advanced technology as well as having a very loyal and servant vassal state.

[sabrewolf]

note: the byzantine and dutch have not formally declared an MPP because neither informally an MPP exists. the byzantine realm is still recovering from their empire-shattering war against the extinct iroquois and have made it clear that -although it is possible- they cannot guarantee their assistance should the mayans commence and agressor-war.

[sabrewolf]

an now a grammatical question:

the use of 'a' and 'an' is clear when using full words. but what about abbreviations? MPP for example would be pronounced "em pe pe" so an 'an' would make sence. otoh 'M' is a consonant...

[jshelr]

optional: no one will complain when you use "an" MPP. However, I suspect the NYTimes style book will say to use "a" MPP.

If I were making a speech, I would likely say "an" MPP. If I were writing a memo, probably "a" MPP.

I see your problem. I move into the DMZ and declare war. But you can't get out of the Bzy way in time for them to help on the next turn.

What we want to prohibit is the introduction of Byz workers or Byz three movers into the DMZ to accomplish the same thing that Dutch workers or 3-movers could. The Byz must also sign the agreement. Or, we need your assurance that you will declare war if the Byz move into the DMZ through your fort.

Without some mechanism that excludes the Byz from the DMZ on the same basis that the Dutch are excluded, the Mayan's find the agreement one-sided and dangerous.

[sabrewolf]

thanks for the grammar lesson. i guess it is the same as saying "it's" and writing "it is" (i tend to use spoken language in text )

concerning the DMZ, i now understand your worries! i propose that we remove your option C) and get the byzantines to sign this treaty too to clear your doubts.

i am pretty sure that arabia is not pleased with this agreement, but then... they were trying to get us fighting all along, right?

[jshelr]

You may be right about the Arabians. However, they are busy with the final details of designing their new modern armor and likely won't worry about it too much.

[Rommel2D]

This might need to be moved to the main thread...

[sabrewolf]

rommel: what main thread?

if you mean our "declare war before you enter the enemy territory" proposal, then i can tell you that i brought it up a few months ago in the original rules&etiquette thread. iirc it was dismissed after someone said that the war happiness would apply even if you declare war as long as the enemy was within your lands.

shall i bring it up again?

[sabrewolf]

jshelr:

check my old posts concerning the approaching arabian invasion:
- tanks in 490bc: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...89#post3243289
- MA in 10ad: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...29#post3143429

i guess my estimates were a bit wrong

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
rommel: what main thread?

if you mean our "declare war before you enter the enemy territory" proposal, then i can tell you that i brought it up a few months ago in the original rules&etiquette thread. iirc it was dismissed after someone said that the war happiness would apply even if you declare war as long as the enemy was within your lands.

Sorry, I meant main forum. The over-the-table diplomacy had made for an interesting read.

I think Trip was the one who made that claim, but never supported it with evidence. Alexman and I both tested this and saw war happiness going to the attacked civ, regardless of unit positioning, IIRC. In other words, it is a PBEM mini-exploit.

Everyone should be aware of this and act accordingly. If we do another Iron Civer before C4 comes out, we might want to address this, but for now just go with what we have... :-/