Team Info and Contacts - Templars

[ruff_hi]

I dunno about taking this offline.

I am happy for Ruff to continue this charade, but please post the messages here as well.

What I mean is that I will take it from pm's to email, post here but that the team doesn't have to get involved in wordsmithing each reply. I'd just rip something off (that says nothing) and Aidun and I can play email tennis.

[Swiss Pauli]

How about:

Sir Aidun,

You didn't spell it out exactly, but we think we have worked out what you're hinting at: the only way Templars could form a buffer between RB and Imperio would be to control Cape Town. We will not give up this or any other city to either you or Imperio. This is a firm statement, so please get the idea out of your minds. Other concessions are on the table, such as resources, cooperation agreements and techs, but we will not cede any of our cities.

We will listen to any offers as long as they do not involve giving cities away. If there are no circumstances in which you will agree peace without gaining a city, then our negotiations may be at an end.

As an aide, would you interested in working on a solution to the real 'Prisoners' Dilemma' we find ourselves in: only one team can win the game, but can you find a solution that would allow all three of our teams to work together to give the overall victory to one team of the three, and yet enable the other two to share the credit for this victory?

I don't think it's worth bringing up the Italy in the new world point, and I introduced the last part in an attempt to get Aidun thinking about something useful, rather than the silly froth he's been coming up with thus far.

[ruff_hi]

my version ...

Sir Aidun,

Let me just take a few minutes to talk about communication. The best communicators are those people that can pass a message that they listener can understand. The art, then, is to help the listener understand what you are saying. It is not about how long, complicated or pretty an argument you can make. Sometimes the clearest message is the simplest ...

For example: High school student A says something to High school student B. High school student B simply flipped High school student A the bird. Perfectly simple communication and High school student A has a full understanding of the message.

Bringing this concept to our communication ... members of Team RB have discussed a 'communication game' with you. Our combined messages will total 100 words. If you use 99, we use 1. If you use 50, we use 50. I am not to sure how that will work, but it is aimed at concentrate your communications by asking that you express the concepts clearly and with less fluff.

While you haven't spelt out the 'diplo game' that you are talking about, our communication with Imperio allow us to deduce that you are asking for Cape Town. Imperio was much clearer in their request ...

"Give us Cape Town for peace"

... and that was weeks ago. Imperio have moved on and started to really share possible options while Team RB and Templars are still struggling to work out what each other is talking about. We urge you to be explicit.

Re: Would I have been on your team, I would be doing everything I can to win the demogame. The war with the Templars and Imperio would be an obstacle to the fulfilment of that ambition and so I would want it to be solved. To that end I would, paradoxically, be dependent on those other teams. Even though my team would be stronger than those other two teams independently or even stronger than their accumulated power, I would still be dependent.

The Templars and on the other hand are in no position to have a shot at winning the game and have accordingly different ambitions. Compared to RB, the Templars are relatively weak, however, because RB is dependent on both the Templars and Imperio, paradoxically, the Templars are in a strong negotiating position. Even though they are relatively weak, they can make high demands from your team.

Team RB thinks that you are overestimating your ability and underestimating ours.

Finally - lets communicate via team emails as performance at poly is dreadful.

Regards,

Ruff for Team RB

[TAD]

If Aidun's opinion carries any weight with Templars they won't make peace, as he recognises the reality that making peace with us will allow us to go after Imperio with our flank secured, and then to come after Templars when the time is right for us.

Aidun is looking for a comprehensive settlement ('they won't agree to any solution, unless Imperio is onboard, because they understandably don't want to betray their ally'), and it's hard to see how a white peace would change the strategic outlook in anyone's favour except our own, but I think it would be worth suggesting, if only to see the reaction from Imperio and Templars.

Well, the only thing we can offer the Templars then is a benevolent vassalage under our team.

We do not want to give up cities, so a 3-way-deal is out. We can only persuade the 3rd guy on the wagon to join us, the 1st guy, instead of the 2nd guy by making a better offer and honouring it.

Am I wrong when I say anything else is a waste of time?

[ruff_hi]

oh oh oh ... here is an idea spurred by Aidun mention of the prisoner's dilemma ...

how about we play the 'cop' and offer the prisoner's dilemma to both Templars and Imperio. Basically, the first team to join us will get benefits while the other team will eliminated.

[mostly-harmless]

oh oh oh ... here is an idea spurred by Aidun mention of the prisoner's dilemma ...

how about we play the 'cop' and offer the prisoner's dilemma to both Templars and Imperio. Basically, the first team to join us will get benefits while the other team will eliminated.

Won't work, as they both believe their alliance can take us on.

Things will get really interesting if PAL denies the Guild trade with Banana, but trades Guilds from Imperio for Nationalism.

mh

[Swiss Pauli]

@ TAD - That's almost right, but Aidun has to get Imperio to be our vassal as well...and the the key is for them to come to that conclusion themselves and offer it to us, rather than us telling them what to do (and sounding arrogant)

@ ruff - that's exactly what I'm proposing that Aidun does on behalf of both Imperio and Templars: i.e. that Templars and Imperio take the lesser punishment of being our vassals and being party to a win, rather than betray each other and lose.

In any event, it should keep him entertained for a while...

@ mh - I think Aidun realises after the smackdown Templars got so far that their alliance won't defeat us. He's stating only that the alliance will maintain a stalemate while PAL runs away with the game.

[Dreylin]

Urgh, my eyes started bleeding about two paragraphs in to that message from Aidun.

My thoughts are that if they absolutely have to have "a city" for peace, that I'm perfectly happy for us to build a Settler, march it into that Southern Jungle Area - which they should have claimed already - found a city and then give it to them. Let them invest all the Worker turn into it ... if we were feeling incredibly generous, we could even throw in a Worker to get them started.

[Sullla]

You wrote that you feel that I am playing a game with you to see what offer you can make to my team. I must admit that I am indeed playing a game with you, although not the game you seem to suspect me of. The game I'm trying to play is a diplomacy sub-game of this demogame our teams participate in. It has its own rules and mechanics which have no relationship to the rules of the demogame itself. The rules of the diplomacy sub-game are, however, founded on interests that rise from actions and situations in the demogame itself. I'll try to explain here.

When I wrote my previous letters I was concerned that you would misunderstand, but it is difficult to anticipate on that. However, understand this very well: this diplomacy sub-game I cannot play on my own, I need you to play it with me. As they say: it takes two to tango. That implies that in a way I am dependent on you: as high as my demands may be, they can be only so high as what you are prepared to pay. I cannot overcharge you for that would make you slam the door in my face and we would both be worse off than if we kept talking. That is why I share this with you - so that you do not completely mistrust me and at least keep the door a little bit opened so that we may talk. In that respect I should thank you that you leave me room to explain despite your or your team's opposition.

This is the biggest pile of bullsh*t I've seen in months, and I work in academia, so I know all about steaming piles of bull getting passed off as deep insights.

Out of the messages above, I like sooooo's the best. (I've been saying that a lot recently! Sorry to be monotonous. ) Swiss Pauli's is also very good, but I personally like the 19th century Italy reference, since I suggested it. Ruff, I don't want to send ANYTHING to Templars that might make things more complicated than they already are. So to sum that up, I'd like to see something along the lines of the sooooo/Swiss message, with a reminder that "hey, you guys declared war on us, remember?" Something like:

Sir Aidun,

You didn't spell it out exactly, but we think we have worked out what templars are after: Cape Town. We will not give this or any other city up to either you or Imperio. This is a firm statement, so please get the idea out of your minds. Other concessions are on the table, such as resources, cooperation agreements and techs, but you cannot have any of our cities out of principle. While your team was attempting to build wonders and founding religions, we were building settlers and workers. One member of our team has likened you to Italy arriving in the new world in the 19th century and demanding an equal share of the continent. Remember that your team declared war on us and pillaged our territory - in an area that Templars had previously told us we were free to settle - and thus we will not trade away in diplomacy what we have defended with force of arms.

We will listen to any offers (honestly we will, just state them no matter how silly you think they are) as long as they do not involve giving cities away. If there are no circumstances in which you will agree peace without gaining a city, then our negotiations may be at an end.

Just throwing out some thoughts.

[Swiss Pauli]

Whilst I like the turn of phrase about Italy, I don't think it actually gets us anywhere. He knows he's being cheeky and so do we, so let's turn him down, firmly but politely. And we really shouldn't describe their offers as potentially 'silly' as that's really patronising.

Finally, we shouldn't say 'you cannot have any of our cities out of principle'; it makes us look closed-minded and inflexible (this may be the case, but we should never appear as such). Keep our objections pragmatic ('the deal's not good enough') and we can keep the dialogue going for as long as it suits us.

[ruff_hi]

just sent this to Aidun ...

Aidun,

Lets take this discussion / exchange to email (please use the Team RB email address: teamrealmsbeyond@gmail.com) so that we can avoid the down time caused by the currently poor apolyton performance.

Ruff

[Sullla]

Finally, we shouldn't say 'you cannot have any of our cities out of principle'; it makes us look closed-minded and inflexible (this may be the case, but we should never appear as such). Keep our objections pragmatic ('the deal's not good enough') and we can keep the dialogue going for as long as it suits us.

I disagree on this. With Templars, "keep the dialogue going for as long as it suits us" means that we will end up talking forever and never achieving anything. We have a better chance of coming to an agreement by telling them "we are not giving up any of our cities" and starting out negotiating from that position. Otherwise, we keep going in the endless Templar dance of circular negotiations that go nowhere.

I mean, look at the message we were just sent. LOOK at that steaming pile of bull. Does this sound like a team that is firmly planted in reality? Aidun is off in some kind of lala land of his own imagining. This is one situation where humoring the other team is NOT to our advantage. We need to bring them back to some serious, pragmatic negotiating to move forward.

Unless everyone actually enjoys receiving messages about "trying to play a diplomacy sub-game of this demogame"? I mean, aside from the unintentional comedic value.

[sooooo]

Well I like the message in Sullla's post, but could that be because it's based on my own draft?

[T-hawk]

There is one nugget of information in there: They can play kingmaker and they know it.

I don't know what we can offer to convince them to kingmake in our favor, though.

[sunrise089]

I'll be interested to see in 50 turns where this "Templars can play Kingmaker" talk has gone. I will revel in the irony if it went down alongside the ruins of their cities.

I don't care what we send, but support the "stop taking about RB giving away cities" line.