Team Free Embassy

That's a good point… but as you mentioned, it seem really unlikely to happen. No one wants to fight a two front war. Naval invasions are hard enough as it is. If our ally can help by sending some boats over (very difficult and costly without the great lighthouse) then that would be wonderful… but I think it should be left informal.
It can't be informal, if he sends the boats, they should attack (not just block) - that requires a declaration. I did not mean BABE will declare.
I want to cover the situation that an ally declares and thinks he can stop his payments because he's at war also. That would be not justified imo, he would certainly not suffer a counter attack too soon.
 
Well – I think I see what you're getting at…

For example, BABE sails past Saber's coast with 5-10 galley, and says to Saber "don't worry, we're headed for The Council" – in that case, you'd want Saber not only to warn us, but also to attack BABE?

First of all, even though BABE found us via Saber's coast, I'll be really surprised if the invasion actually comes via that route. (unless there's just no other path through the sea).

Secondly, even if BABE does come at us via Saber's route, I'd be surprised if Saber was willing to attack them as they sail by. If Saber shoots first, BABE will probably just decide to drop their little invasion party off right on Saber's coast rather than keep sailing and getting sniped at. In which case, we don't need to worry about Saber paying us gold, because we'll be paying THEM gold… and we'll be happy to do it, because they basically threw themselves under a bus for us!

The only other possibility is that BABE will come at either of us directly – in which case there's no opportunity for meddling with the invasion force, and no need for extra clauses in the treaty.

As the treaty stands, being at war with BABE doesn't affect either the giving or receiving of gold payments. Only an "invasion" allows gold to start flowing.
If we're both invaded… then yeah, no gpt is necessary. But as we all agree, that's not very likely.

Did I misunderstand your point/miss something here?
 
Then I guess we should include that if any of our teams sees a happy babe invasion fleet passing by they are obliged to attack that!

But wouldn't these unlikely situations just clutter up the whole thing? :crazyeye:
 
Very inspired ideas on the wonder compensations!

Generally looks good to me, but I agree with donsig that we should wait for FREE's reply, especially concerning the wonders. I think we should keep in mind that we cannot hope (or even afford) to build everything. My preferred list looks like:
1) Sistine's
2) Newton
3) Cops
4) Smith (to kick off our GA).
But we may not be able to build more than the first two, especially if we're dragged into a war...

I think we can afford to be magnanimous and simply let FREE have Bach's, which they apparently like.

Btw, 50 gpt from FREE + 20 gpt from SABER amounts to 70 gpt total.

Real military aid in war (in the form of troops in each other's lands) can be given from Astronomy on, I think.

Navigation would enable lux deals - do we want to include this tech? Of course the same is enabled by Magnetism, but this comes a few techs later.
 
Ok, but how long do we wait for FREE?

We sent them our initial proposal on Selling Tech to Saber, Wonders, and Maps on May 30th. They responded 2 days later on June 1st with this:
Spoiler :

Dear Friends in The Council,

Just a brief note. Empiremaker is unavailable this weekend and asked me to repond.

We have no objections to the SABER trade.

We hope you get this before playing your Turn 95.

We'll get back to you on the other items, since they are not turn-sensitive.

Sincerely yours,

Art Parry
aka CommandoBob

Let FREEdom ring,
Let the white dove sing...


Going by my timeline, we then sent our note updating them on BABE 3 days later on June 4th.

We've now gone 4 days with no word. Which isn't that bad, but I just don't want us to delay our official response on the MAAP II treaty for TOO long.

Do we give them another 2 or 3 days, and then send something?

If we haven't heard back from them at that point, do we modify the proposal to revert to our original idea, and just add some stuff dealing with the non-required techs?

zyxy said:
My preferred list looks like:
1) Sistine's
2) Newton
3) Cops
4) Smith (to kick off our GA).
But we may not be able to build more than the first two,
I agree with that totally – and that's why I wrote the treaty to get us our top two. Couldn't see a way to also get us Copernicus without angering the vocal "fairness party" of The Council ;)
Maybe FREE won't care about Copernicus, and will be happy to trade us the rights in exchange for balancing polytheism?
Or – maybe we should make a note on the balancing polytheism section that if FREE chooses to give up Copernicus for Balance sake, we'll not only recon their debt paid, but we'll also give them clear rights to JS Bach, as long as they can get music without throwing off the MAAP unacceptably?
I'll go ahead and add that language below… but what do you all think of that idea?

Re: Nav/Magnetism enabling Trading Luxes and Direct Military aid – I think all of that should be left out of this treaty and dealt with later. Luxury Trading is one of the few things we will be able to do with other nations (like Saber?) without having to get permission from FREE. Maybe it won't matter, but it will be nice to have some options when the time comes. Also, by the time we are able to send military aid overseas, we're going to be pretty safe with our killer artillery. We may not WANT any deals forcing us to help FREE in that manner. But if we do want to help them, we don't need a treaty for that.

I missed this comment from Donsig earlier…
Donsig said:
As for compensation for poly, let's give them the options of their map, a surplus lux for 20 or 40 turns or 200 gold.
I've gone ahead and raised the gold amount to 200, but I don't think the surplus Lux idea is necessarily that great, since we can't get it till at least Navigation or Astronomy. If The Council thinks we should drop the "trade for Copernicus" item in favor of the Lux, I won't put up a fight. Or I guess we could always just give FREE four options! :crazyeye:

Here’s a spoiler with Version 2.1:
Spoiler :

Dear FREE allies,

At long last, our response to your proposal for the Middle Ages!
We'd like to suggest going beyond just a tech arrangement, and do a full treaty including peace, foreign relations, etc… and call it the MAAP II agreement.
Hopefully you're open to that idea.

Following is our proposal for the MAAP II:

I. Peace
  • FREE and The Council agree to extended the period of guaranteed peace with each other through the middle ages.
  • The "15 turns notice of intent to cancel" clause of our long-standing peace treaty may not be activated until after the swap of our Industrial Era Bonus techs.

II. Mutually Assured Advancement Plan - II
  • FREE and The Council agree to continue to cooperate to get into the Industrial Era as rapidly as possible.
  • Both teams agree to not execute a "slow burn" in getting technologies slower in favor of stockpiling gold, unless explicitly approved by the other team.
  • Both teams pledge to do their level best to not undermine the alliance in rapid advancement of knowledge.
  • The following MAAP II agreement may only be modified by joint agreement of the teams.
  • The MAAP II naturally expires after the exchange of our Bonus Industrial Era technologies, but both teams hereby express a desire to continue to work together on a MAAP III agreement for the Industrial Era.

The MAAP II
Code:
[U]FREE[/U]                                  [U]The Council[/U]
				Polytheism Imbalance (720)
Monotheism (1080)               	Invention (1320)
Theology (1200)                  	Gunpowder (1440)
Education (1320)                 	Chemistry (1800)
Astronomy (1680)                	Metallurgy (1920)
Physics (1920)                     	Magnetism (2040)
Banking (1560)                  	Military Tradition (1920)
Theory of Gravity (2040)

[B]Total 10,800                        	11,160[/B]
* Exchange IA bonus techs without regard to beaker value

III. Optional Techs and Their Wonders
  • There are several wonders in the Industrial Era that are attached to techs not covered by the MAAP II agreement. They are: Knights Templar (Chivalry), JS Bach (Music), Shakespeare's theatre (Free Artistry), Smith's Trading Co (Economics), and Magellan's Voyage (Navigation).
  • If either team would like to build one of these wonders, they must first notify the other team and get their approval that the tech can be gained without unreasonably slowing down the coordination on getting Physics, on unreasonably slowing the advance to the IA. If the tech can be gained without unacceptably slowing things down for either team, then…
  • For Knights Templar or Smith's Trading Co., the team getting the wonder will supply the tech (Chivalry or Economics) without charge or expected compensation in beakers in exchange for building the wonder unchallenged.
  • For JS Bach, the team building the wonder will agree to give one of their surplus luxury resources for free for 40 turns in exchange for non-competition.
  • For Shakespeare's Theatre, only democracy need be shared in exchange for non-competition.
  • For Magellan's Voyage, the team that builds the wonder agrees to turn over their world map ONE time at the request of the other team (this request can not be made later than when Replaceable Parts is learned by either team) in exchange for non-competition. The traded world map may not be subsequently traded away without the permission of the other team.

IV. Required Technology Wonders
  • There are several wonders in the Industrial Era that are attached to techs that ARE covered by the MAAP II agreement. They are: Sun Tzu's Art of War (Feudalism), Sistine Chapel (Monotheism), Leonardo's Workshop (Invention), Copernicus' Observatory (Astronomy), and Newton's University (Theory of Gravity).
  • Both teams agree to just assign the "rights" to each wonder to either side. These "rights to build" may be traded away to the other team in any negotiations that may come up.
  • Team FREE shall have the right to build: Sun Tzu's Art of War, Copernicus' Observatory, & all remaining AA wonders
  • The Council shall have the right to build: Leo's Workshop, Newton's University, & the Sistine Chapel

V. Balancing the MAAP II Techs
  • Seeing as how the MAAP II tech plan leaves The Council with a heavier load, team FREE therefore agrees to one of the following 3 options to make up the beaker imbalance.
  • Option 1 – FREE trades their world map in exchange for balancing the beakers. The map will be delivered at the request of The Council, but the request must be made before or at the time of the discovery of Physics.
  • Option 2 – FREE trades away their "right to build" Copernicus' Observatory (to help further balance this option, The Council would wave their right to any compensation if FREE can manage an acceptable tech deviation to build JS Bach's Cathedral or Shakespeare's Theatre under the terms of Article III )
  • Option 3 – FREE agrees to pay 200 gold.

VI. Defense Against All
  • If either team is attacked in the next 40 turns, the team that hasn’t been attacked will provide 50 gold per turn to the besieged team for the duration of the invasion, or up to 750 gold total (15 turns), whichever is less.
  • If either team is attacked, both teams will be relieved of their obligations to continue research at top speed on the MAAP plan, in recognition of the enhanced need for gold. When the invasion is over, normal obligations will resume – but both teams pledge to be generous towards the other if the MAAP needs to be adjusted after the invasion due to setbacks from the fighting
  • For purposes of the DAA, an “invasion” will be defined as any enemy units on shore, or waiting immediately off-shore, with war being officially declared and actual fighting starting within 5 turns
  • Each team will immediately notify the other of any sightings of enemy ships with their (approximate) locations and heading. Each team will also notify the other if any foreign team begins making aggressive demands or sends other signals as a possible prelude to war.
  • As a defense against other's catching us in our technology lead, both teams agree to not trade, sell, or otherwise transfer any technology to foreign teams without the express permission of the other ally.
 
I'd rather have Copernicus than an extra lux for a limited period of time.

On the tech split, it doesn't seem all that unlikely that we'll be done with Chemistry before they finish Astronomy. So possibly it would be better to have them research Physics before Banking while we do Metallurgy, so that we can then go back to Magnetism. There's bound to be some short periods of waiting for at least one of us, but I think what I've said here makes for the least wait.
 
I think Paul#42 was talking about a scenario where BABE attacks us and then FREE declares war on BABE and argues that now they don't have to sent us any gold because we're both at war and both entitled to payments (which would wash). I think the General is not seeing that because he's focused on the invasion definition (a mere declaration of war does not entitle one to receive gold under the treaty - there must be an invasion, too). But the definition of invasion is clunkly - fighting must start in 5 turns. So does that mean gold payments start in five turns? Does it mean a refund is due if fighting doesn't start in 5 turns? This has to be made clearer.

As for poly comp - what is it we want? Do we want to settle for gold? DO we want to settle for Copernicus? Let's decide what we want and ask for it. Gold can even be ignored as an option if we dont want it - or it can be the sole option if that's all we want.

I would still go with our counter proposal and not even mention the other wonders. If the others are all optional, well, we're not planning on researching optional techs under MAAP II so let's leave it out and try to get rights to Copernicus and Newton. If they give a counter-counter-proposal we can come back the General's great ideas in this draft. We can go even further and put all wonders on the table and attach compensation to them. If neither of us wants to pay the price for exclusive rights, well, we can just race each other to build 'em.

As for the free luxes, well, I realize they'll be a long time coming but figured they'd be even more valuable later since we'd have markets. I'm of ocurse assuming here that both us and FREE survive that long. I guess it's a toss-up between waiting for a future benefit and getting gold now for an army.

Finally, I agree we should make DAA 50gpt. We could afford to send that to them if they're attacked and they should bea ble to do the same. Slowing research under those conditions (a BABE invasion) is well worth the survival of our alliance.

I'd rather have Copernicus than an extra lux for a limited period of time.

So would I - but I'd also rather have both. Remember, they did not originally ask for Copernicus - maybe we can get it without giving anything up. It is worth negotiating for.
 
Niklas said:
possibly it would be better to have them [FREE] research Physics before Banking
That makes sense, and I've gone ahead and made that change above!
:salute:


Now, here is my point-by-point response to Donsig

I think Paul#42 was talking about a scenario where BABE attacks us and then FREE declares war on BABE and argues that now they don't have to sent us any gold because we're both at war and both entitled to payments (which would wash). I think the General is not seeing that because he's focused on the invasion definition (a mere declaration of war does not entitle one to receive gold under the treaty - there must be an invasion, too). But the definition of invasion is clunkly - fighting must start in 5 turns. So does that mean gold payments start in five turns? Does it mean a refund is due if fighting doesn't start in 5 turns? This has to be made clearer.

Good summary, but I'd ask that if you want it more clear, that you should then propose some wording.
As we've discussed in the past, it's pretty much impossible to craft treaty text that won't allow for abuse. If FREE or Saber don't want to pay us any gold when we're under attack, then they won't, and there's nothing we can do about it. It won't matter how "perfect" the treaty is, without good faith on both sides, it's totally irrelevant. There will always be an excuse to not pay if they don't want to pay.
Personally, I think the current wording is even more clear than necessary. Gold payments start with an "invasion" – and an invasion starts when there are units that have landed or are immediately off-shore. The "fighting starting in 5 turns" is just in there to prevent someone from trying to collect gold if a fleet is just sailing by. If that's the case, the gold paid out can be refunded, I'm sure. It seems profoundly unlikely that a whole invasion force will show up on one of our coasts just to wave hello and then sail on. But if desired, I suppose the "5 turns" clause could just be deleted.


As for poly comp - what is it we want? Do we want to settle for gold? DO we want to settle for Copernicus? Let's decide what we want and ask for it. Gold can even be ignored as an option if we dont want it - or it can be the sole option if that's all we want.

I agree that Copernicus is the most desirable payment from FREE, followed by the gold, then last of all their map. But that's just my opinion. I'm hesitant to just demand Copernicus, as it doesn't logically follow that we should get to build that wonder in exchange for 360 beakers. But again, I'm ok with narrowing FREE's option if that's what The Council wants.

I would still go with our counter proposal and not even mention the other wonders. If the others are all optional, well, we're not planning on researching optional techs under MAAP II so let's leave it out and try to get rights to Copernicus and Newton. If they give a counter-counter-proposal we can come back the General's great ideas in this draft. We can go even further and put all wonders on the table and attach compensation to them. If neither of us wants to pay the price for exclusive rights, well, we can just race each other to build 'em.

Well, the problem is that our original proposal to FREE put all of the optional wonders (except one) on FREE's side, and all the required wonders (except one) on our side. If we leave out the option wonders, then our proposal will read – FREE get's Sun Tzu, We get all the rest. :lol:
Spoiler Original Proposal :

Here's our suggested division of the MA wonders…

Team FREE
  • Sun Tzu
  • Smith's Trading
  • Magellan's Voyage
  • JS Bach's Cathedral
  • Shakespeare's Theatre

The Council
  • Leo's Workshop
  • Copernicus Observatory
  • Sistine Chapel
  • Newton's University
  • Knight's Templar

What do you think? We're certainly open to negotiation on this.

If we don't hear back from FREE on the wonders, I think we have to either A) re-propose the above totally unfair split with some language clarifying how to handle the research on the optional techs OR B)go with my new proposal, ala version 2.1

As for the free luxes, well, I realize they'll be a long time coming but figured they'd be even more valuable later since we'd have markets. I'm of ocurse assuming here that both us and FREE survive that long. I guess it's a toss-up between waiting for a future benefit and getting gold now for an army.

That's true… but there's a good chance we'll be able to trade with FREE without requiring them to do so. Therefore, it would be better to get a benefit we can't get through other means. (Like 200 gold, or dibs on Copernicus)

Finally, I agree we should make DAA 50gpt. We could afford to send that to them if they're attacked and they should bea ble to do the same. Slowing research under those conditions (a BABE invasion) is well worth the survival of our alliance.
Agreed, and already done in version 2.1



Am I making any sense? :)
 
You make some sense General. :)

I would just delete the phrase about fighting starting in 5 turns.

I wasn't suggesting we change our counter-proposal to exclude the optional techs. I'm suggesting we do not change our counter-proposal at all. We made it and haven't heard back from FREE. We should assume their silence means a) they are fine with the proposal or b) they don't like it and are still working up a counter-counter-proposal. Under a or b there is no reason to change what we've put on the table. IF they put something different on the table then we can accept it or put something else on the table oursleves. Maybe for some reason they don't want Copernicus - let's wait and see what they say and not assume our current proposal is unsatisfactory to them. Not agreeing on a wonder allocation merely means we might end up competing against each other for a wonder or two.

As for the poly comp I'm currently leaning towards gold since we're talking about upgrading some warriors to beef up our military power rating. If we don't want their map then let's not give them that option and for now just ask for 200g. If the wonder allocation doesn't get accepted then we can put in the option about us getting the rights to Copernicus as a second option.
 
Donsig said:
I'm suggesting we do not change our counter-proposal at all.
Right – but that doesn't solve the problem of what to do with the optional techs.
(Which is why I changed it in the first place… I certainly agree that our original proposal on splitting wonders was grossly in our favor, and therefore good :)! The problem came when trying to figure out how to handle the MA research if FREE started diverting off to get the techs for their wonders. We couldn't very well complain that they needed to stick to our tech path… because then we'd just in effect be saying, "1 wonder for you, 3 for us.")

If FREE doesn't respond in the next couple days and we decide to re-propose our original wonder split – we MUST address how the optional techs that FREE will require are going to be handled.
I see 3 options:
A) FREE is given express permission to deviate to pick up the needed knowledge whenever they would like. We'll just wait and stockpile gold if it happens to slow us down. The optional techs are FREE's to do with as they please…meaning trade/sell it to us or anyone else if they'd like on any terms of their choosing. (As we can't require FREE to give us those techs, when we're not giving them any beakers back in exchange for it. )

B) We add all of the optional techs evenly to both sides of our MAAP II research plan. Slowing both of us down tremendously on our way to the IA and requiring The Council to research techs that ultimately don't help us very much, if at all.

C) We add just two of the optional techs to the MAAP II research plan, one on each side – for the two wonders that FREE is most interested in. This still slows us down, potentially has The Council researching a wasted tech that does us no good (Music?). It also deletes two items from FREE's "right to build" list, and makes it look even less fair than it is in the first place. (FREE getting 3 wonders to our 5)

You can see why none of those options appeal to me.
Hence the new method proposed above.

As always, I'd be delighted to hear a fourth way! :)
 
Which is why I changed it in the first place… I certainly agree that our original proposal on splitting wonders was grossly in our favor, and therefore good :)! The problem came when trying to figure out how to handle the MA research if FREE started diverting off to get the techs for their wonders. We couldn't very well complain that they needed to stick to our tech path… because then we'd just in effect be saying, "1 wonder for you, 3 for us."

Whaddya mean we can't complain if they go off and start researching optional techs? MAAP II clearly states we're both supposed to be forging ahead with research to get us both to the IA ASAP. Researching optional techs doesn't get us there any quicker and is therefore arguably against the treaty.

Saying we won't compete against them in building a wonder is not the same thing as saying we agree to let them research an optional tech willy nilly. If they want to build Bachs or Magellans, fine. We'll agree not to build those. Period. How they get the pre-reqs for those wonders is their problem not ours.

I'm beginning to think we shouldn't even mess with allocating wonders. If we don't include that in MAAP II then we can build whichever wonders we want - all we have to do is beat them to the punch.

An alternative is to attach some value to each wonder as compensation for not competing for it (as in the General's current proposal for the optional techs). Either team can claim a wonder. The other team can then accept the treaty compensation and forfeit building rights to that wonder or they can decline that and the two teams can race to the wonder (or renoegotiate that wonder outside MAAP II). We do the same for optional tech enabled wonders with the additional proviso that the non-declaring team can say no, researching that optional tech slows MAAP II down too much. That could then also be negotiated outside MAAP II if a team really, really wants Bachs or Magellans.

Yet another alternative would be to simply ask them which wonders they want to build and tell then which ones we want. We can then negotiate the ones we both want or just agree to race for them.
 
Anyone else want to weigh in on this slug match between Donsig and I? :lol:

I still see value in dividing up the wonders, and I think it would be a shame to let it go into a free-for-all. It’s just likely to cause tension and bad feelings, I think.
So whatever we decide, I’d like there to be SOME kind of clear agreement on who has the rights to which wonders.

Making them all optional with some kind of a price tag (ala my suggestions for the Optional Tech wonders) is interesting – but I’m afraid I exhausted my creativity just balancing those. I’m not sure I could think up a way to balance Sun Tzu, Sistine, Leo’s etc…

So yeah, I still think we need to create some kind of division.

Anyone?
 
After some thinking I agree with donsig that researching optional techs should really be discouraged. We want to forge ahead, not wait behind for the others to catch up. Plus there are the racing conditions for physics that would be messed up if one team went optional.

I do think we should have a division, but I think going optional should be a lot more discouraged.
 
After some thinking I agree with donsig that researching optional techs should really be discouraged. We want to forge ahead, not wait behind for the others to catch up. Plus there are the racing conditions for physics that would be messed up if one team went optional.

I do think we should have a division, but I think going optional should be a lot more discouraged.

Agree with Niklas, I think we should point out to them (in a friendly and helpful manner) that many of the wonders they listed require researching optional techs and that, upon reflection, we feel it is best to forego these techs in favour of reaching industrial ASAP, whetever wonders come with required techs can be divided between us.
 
Yup.

As fast as possible up the tech tree.
 
Jo. H'Watchas and sailing guided by the stars are our most important "wonders". :agree:
 
I still see value in dividing up the wonders, and I think it would be a shame to let it go into a free-for-all. It’s just likely to cause tension and bad feelings, I think.

I see great value in dividing them up as well. I think we will get there but might need extra round or two of negotiations, that's all. We're really operating in the dark here not knowing for sure which wonders FREE wants to build. If we had a reply from them this would be much easier. We're basically replying to FREE's tech division of tech and wonders. Let's send what we have with our original counter-proposal in place of General W's wonder allocation ideas. We can submit it to FREE with a note saying The Council is struggling with this. We've tried to incorporate their tech division (with a slight change for something - physics?) and the wonder allocation. But we can't figure out how our alliance is going to charge full speed ahead to the IA if we stop and research optional techs. Let's just ask them point blank if they have decided which (optional tech) wonders they'd like to build and if they'd be willing to share that information so we can craft a treaty we're both happy with.

I think we should send something very soon and just realize what we send is not going to be the final version of MAAP II.

Agree with Niklas, I think we should point out to them (in a friendly and helpful manner) that many of the wonders they listed require researching optional techs and that, upon reflection, we feel it is best to forego these techs in favour of reaching industrial ASAP, whetever wonders come with required techs can be divided between us.

But let's not go too far in that division yet. They haven't expressed interest in Copernicus yet so let's not just put it on their side to make a fair treaty. Maybe they really don't want it and we can have the rights to it (and Newton's) for nothing. The bottom line for me is let's not give them Copernicus or Newton's unless they ask for it - and if they do, then we negotiate the matter.
 
do these wonders have to be created in the Middle ages? Or are we just creating a MAAP the divides how these wonders will be divided?
 
I agree we need to settle the tech division pretty soon. Apart from the optionals, there seems to be consensus on that already.

The wonder division is not at all time-critical, so it can wait a bit longer. We have made a proposal to FREE, it is a bit strange to make another proposal before they replied to the previous one.

And let's remember that FREE mentioned Sun Tzu, Leonardo's Workshop, Magellan's Voyage, and Smith's as the "five" most important wonders. I would be happy to grant them at least the first three, and I am not too concerned about the fourth either - it's only really useful to kick off our GA. So I don't see why we would have to compensate them for having Cops on our side. Essentially we are giving them what they want, so this is not grossly in our favor.

So in short, I would ask for gold for Poly, and claim Cops, Newton and Sistine's, possibly also Smith's.

FREE can get Leo's, ST, and Magellan's. That's 3 of the 4 they wanted; the first 2 are generally highly valued and come with required techs. They can get the remaining ones too IMO, but they all require optional techs, so should be discouraged. If they make a fuss, we can part with Smith's as well. Building 4 wonders is a bit of a stretch anyway.

I agree that optional techs except MilTrad should be discouraged, especially those towards democracy.
 
I can live with that solution zyxy! Giving up Leo's certainly opens up some options for new balance.

And then you vote for just sticking with the 200 gold? If we're going to just put Copernicus on our side, then I like narrowing that down also.

I'll have a re-write to post here a bit later. :thumbsup:
 
Top Bottom