The Global Foyer

We need to have a chat with both CDZ and Amazon pretty soon to see their intentions. If we leave it like that they will propably ally with each other an dleave us out!

The more I think about it, the only option that makes sense, and is possible, is to aaly with CDZ and Maverics as Amazon, quatronia & sirious seems an already forged alliance!

We must act quickly before they get CDZ in the alliance as well.

Maybe you should establish contact ASAP with cdz and maverics leaders on chat? Emails is gonna be pretty slow to get a counteralliance going, and cdz is prolly gonna want to see some life out of us

We are still waiting for replies from CDZ and Amazons (The envoy to CDZ was sent on July 2. - so that's 4 days without a reply - while the envoy to Amazons was sent on July 1., aka 5 days without a reply!).

How would you like me to proceed, Your Majesty? Send PM to Silentconfusion of the Amazons and Robi of CDZ, and inquire about the status of their replies? Or something more direct?

I agree with Cataphract that emails might simply be too slow at this point of time, so if I am to send PM's to either of these diplomats, I would also like to ask for an IM contact with them if you so allow, Your Majesty.

We haven't met the Mavericks yet, Cataphract, so by the rules of the game we are prohibited from contacting them as of yet.

Can you chat with CDZ Sir Caledron and I will chat with Amazon?

Try and be open with them in the chat and let them understand that we genuinely are looking for an alliance that will benefit both our nations.

I've sent a PM to Robi D and asked him for the possibility of establishing IM Contact

It seems we are too late

Latest letter from CDZ

I thought so...

OK so we know now that 4 teams are in alliance.

Which leaves us and maverics out.

At least we need to ally with maverics and then see if we can slowly pull CDZ out of the alliance,

To do that we need to know the specifics of the alliance (how long it is for etc)...so we need a carefully crafted letter to CDZ saying that we understand their choice and we keep no hard feelings and say that we still hope to cooperate sometime in the future with them.

A four-way alliance like this cannot possibly work in the long run - at some point it should implode. The main problem at this point of the game is that if they are really cooperating, then we're going to be FAR behind in Tech very quickly.

I will work on creating a draft for such a letter, Your Majesty - the first draft should be ready tonight. At this point I feel somewhat as if I have failed you and Merlot - but I will not let that impend my work, and will continue to do my very best!

Caledorn said:

I will work on creating a draft for such a letter, Your Majesty - the first draft should be ready tonight. At this point I feel somewhat as if I have failed you and Merlot - but I will not let that impend my work, and will continue to do my very best!

Click to expand...

There is no reason to feel like that, there was nothing you could have done!

We are not giving up this game, I have seen situations reversed before so I think no matter how the odds are now against us we still can give it a shot!

Sir Caledorn, in the West Tower you asked help for underhanded tricks and dishonesty. If his Majesty believes that it is a viable route for us to take, I can try to help you in that. Although I do not have much experience on what kind of stuff really works in MP Civilization, I have experience in a board game called Diplomacy, where backstabbing, misleading, trickstery and general dishonesty are par for the course.

However, as I stated in the West Tower, I believe our best bet is trying to make the alliance seem a raw deal for someone. This does not require much dishonesty. On the contrary, when we have consolidated our position on the mainland, I believe we should be frank about us messing up our target's game on purpose until they change sides.

Right, i think we have to rely on patience. There almost always is internal pressure within any ''coalition'', we have to maintain friendly relations where possible and chip away at the cracks hoping for our chances later.

In the end we decided to go with a multi-nation alliance which will unfortunately preclude any high level deals with Merlot, however we do hope to maintain friendly relations into the future.

Click to expand...

Note the CDZ diplomats carefully left some breathing room in this missive, maybe they are thinking ahead for future ''if'' scenarios and also, the way this is worded i think they might be agreeable to some degree of tech trading, if it is an advantages deal to them.

I would rather fight a coalition than be part of one!-Napoleon

By the way, it wasnt me that said we should use dishonesty, i was quoting someone elses post.

Aivoturso said:

Sir Caledorn, in the West Tower you asked help for underhanded tricks and dishonesty. If his Majesty believes that it is a viable route for us to take, I can try to help you in that. Although I do not have much experience on what kind of stuff really works in MP Civilization, I have experience in a board game called Diplomacy, where backstabbing, misleading, trickstery and general dishonesty are par for the course.

However, as I stated in the West Tower, I believe our best bet is trying to make the alliance seem a raw deal for someone. This does not require much dishonesty. On the contrary, when we have consolidated our position on the mainland, I believe we should be frank about us messing up our target's game on purpose until they change sides.

Click to expand...

I don't see how this can work to be honest. I have never seen it working before...if the alliance is strong anything that you say will be discusssed and eventually turned against you.

What we must do is try to find REAL cracks or possible cracks and seed them in their minds, I am sure there will be some, we just have to keep looking and they will appear.

Aivoturso said:

Sir Caledorn, in the West Tower you asked help for underhanded tricks and dishonesty. If his Majesty believes that it is a viable route for us to take, I can try to help you in that. Although I do not have much experience on what kind of stuff really works in MP Civilization, I have experience in a board game called Diplomacy, where backstabbing, misleading, trickstery and general dishonesty are par for the course.

However, as I stated in the West Tower, I believe our best bet is trying to make the alliance seem a raw deal for someone. This does not require much dishonesty. On the contrary, when we have consolidated our position on the mainland, I believe we should be frank about us messing up our target's game on purpose until they change sides.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, Diplomacy. That is a most excellent board game that it's been ages since I last played. Yes - with the current diplomacy-situation, there seems to be little option but focus heavily on how to deal with it. And that means that we're going to have to work together with ideas and propositions on how to proceed, so your help (and everyone else's) will be more than welcome! From what I've seen of His Majesty, he is encouraging us heavily to dip in with our thoughts and ideas.

I'm eagerly awaiting to see what His Majesty thinks about messing up our targets game. The thought is sound - but the risks are also great, since we risk a war with 3 or 4 other nations all at once by doing so...

Cataphract887 said:

Right, i think we have to rely on patience. There almost always is internal pressure within any ''coalition'', we have to maintain friendly relations where possible and chip away at the cracks hoping for our chances later.

Note the CDZ diplomats carefully left some breathing room in this missive, maybe they are thinking ahead for future ''if'' scenarios and also, the way this is worded i think they might be agreeable to some degree of tech trading, if it is an advantages deal to them.

Click to expand...

Patience is good - but while we wait, someone else gains the upper hand. And in this case the thing we definitely will be backwards on is technology, if this multi-national alliance means the participants are freely exchanging techs. I think that, if we are going to be patient, we also need to be proactively patient - as in, we need to do something to try to undermine their alliance in some way. At some point, we will be so out-teched that even if the alliance breaks apart, we will just be a minor nuiscance any of the participants can freely crush if they wish to - and that is what worries me the most about playing the waiting-game.

I also noticed the carefully engineered breating room the CDZ diplomats left in their missive. The problem though is, if the alliance they are in means free exchange of tech between the participants, I hardly think we will have any tech they need very soon. Also, it will mean that if we trade a technology to them, we are actually trading it to 2 or 3 other nations as well in the deal...

Indiansmoke said:

There is no reason to feel like that, there was nothing you could have done!

We are not giving up this game, I have seen situations reversed before so I think no matter how the odds are now against us we still can give it a shot!

Click to expand...

Thank you for saying that! I'm definitely not giving up here, even though I feel a bit miffed at the time being.

Caledorn said:

I'm eagerly awaiting to see what His Majesty thinks about messing up our targets game. The thought is sound - but the risks are also great, since we risk a war with 3 or 4 other nations all at once by doing so...

Click to expand...

Honestly, in this kind of map, I don't think it is any worse to be in war against 4 nations than it is to be left out of 4 party tech alliance. It is true that an aggressive gameplay can cause some animosity towards us, but if every nation is in this to win, petty grudges should be overcome. Though I must admit that we are playing with human beigns and humans are notoriously good in keeping grudges

I haven't logged into the game for a bit...

We have not met mavericks yet correct? Can we even contact them?

If they are opposite of us on the map, then warring is going to be difficult. I say this because we will both be fighting on both sides against a team that doesn't have to watch its back.

IMO, we need to sew some seeds of dissent into the 4 way, and try to convince 1 of the 2 teams near us that that they will soon be the "odd man out" in the 4 way scenario, not an easy task to be sure.

Aivoturso said:

I have experience in a board game called Diplomacy, where backstabbing, misleading, trickstery and general dishonesty are par for the course.

Click to expand...

Ironically enough, i'm playing against my friends in Diplomacy this Sunday. Italy for the win!

But, I believe this alliance can only have negative connotations for us.

We are now flanked on both sides by opposition. We must seek to break them up ASAP.

Teaming up with the Mavericks, who should at least be sympathetic to our position, could also help.

For this task, we should get the workboat moving with all due haste.

Ronnie1 said:

If they are opposite of us on the map, then warring is going to be difficult. I say this because we will both be fighting on both sides against a team that doesn't have to watch its back.

Click to expand...

Yes, they are on opposite side of us. Warring will be very difficult indeed, but personally I'd rather risk an all out war now, than wait for our enemies to have Knights when our best counter for those would still be the Holkan.