Team Free Embassy

good point zyxy. Navigation is going to be a target for everyone, anyway, on this map.

Seems to me being able to trade for luxes will be fairly important.
 
Ok – whew. There's quite a scattering of opinions here.

I think we jumped the gun by trying to draft a letter.
First things first – we need to decide what kind of relationship we want with FREE in the Middle Ages.

I see 3 distinct options, and following is my analysis of each.

Exclusive Alliance
We create and sign a MAAP II type agreement where we trade only with eachother unless explicitly approved by the other team.
Pros:
  • Guaranteed to essentially double our research
  • Creates a natural ally in case we are attacked
  • Locks up the only other scientific civ in our camp, denying our rivals access to Bonus Era techs and the cheap library/university advantage
  • We can plan efficiently and avoid potential duplication – achieving mutual goals much faster.
Cons:
  • Essentially eliminates the chance to earn goodwill by trading with others
  • For better or worse, ties our fortunes to FREE in the near-to-medium term
  • Potentially neutralizes our diplomacy advantage IF we get the Torch
  • Worst case scenario: world turns into a 3 vs 2 power structure with us in the 2 camp.
Analogy = Marriage
Upside = We're stronger together than we are alone
Risk = We don't get to 'play the field' and may miss some golden relationships


Limited Cooperation
We agree to continue trading with FREE but drop the exclusive language and open up the deal to unilateral modification by either side. Meaning, if either side can trade for a tech outside the agreement, they're free to do so, and then the FREE/Council cooperative agreement is adjusted accordingly… no approval from the other side is necessary.
Pros:
  • We can potentially improve relations with other teams by making deals
  • IF we get the Torch, we'll be in a unique position to profit from this freedom to trade much more than team FREE.
  • We still maintain a framework with FREE to help focus goals and efforts better.
  • Best case scenario: We can more than double our research by trading the same tech multiple times
Cons:
  • FREE is likely to be less-than-pleased with this deal, and may view it as undesirable middle ground. Put another way, they may want all or nothing, rather than go along with something that we've only agreed to stick with until we find a better option.
  • Without some kind of exclusivity, most teams (not just FREE) will certainly be hesitant to trade with us, recognizing that since we have more contacts, we will likely profit far beyond them on each deal. Each deal we sign could very likely have its own individual exclusive deal attached to it.
  • We're likely to progress to the Middle Ages must faster then every other team (except FREE), and may not have any other good trading options anyway. Therefore, pursuing an open trading arrangement may only upset FREE without getting us any benefit anyway.
  • Trading around with all the non-scientific civs potentially squanders the big advantage of our scientific trait and could make our goal of a builder-type victory much harder.
  • Worst Case Scenario: We end up totally locked out of trading as the world develops and 2 vs 2 vs 1 power structure with us being the only team with no ally/partner… and hence ending up on the kill list.
Analogy = Casual Dating
Upside = We have a good friend, but are free to shop around
Risk = Hades hath no fury like a woman scorned


Friendly Neighbors
We tell FREE that it was fun while it lasted – but now we just want to trade with them on a tech-by-tech basis, where each deal is negotiated independently.
Pros:
  • Total freedom to find the best deals we can – hopefully fueled by the Torch
  • Best case scenario: We can more the double our research by trading the same tech multiple times without risk of offending anyone because we haven't promised anything
Cons:
  • All the cons of "Limited Cooperation" are magnified
  • We're pretty much on our own in the world
  • Risk of being left without any partners at all is very severe
Analogy = Swingers
Upside = We are flexible to go anywhere the wind blows
Downside = Dying alone in the rain, friendless, penniless, and so very very alone.


Now – it's probably obvious that I'm a family man ;) – I really believe that for all the downsides, we're still far better off to have a strong exclusive alliance than we are trying to shop around.
If someone feels like I've misrepresented one of our options here…or if there's a 4th way I'm not seeing… please speak up.
I think we need to settle the relationship question with FREE before we start discussing MAAP II specifics, or we'll never get anywhere.

One final note: the temptation is going to be to make the " Limited Cooperation" option more palatable to FREE… but let me just point out that due to the structure of the Middle Age tech tree, there's really no way to trade with other teams without canceling a planned trade with FREE – unless we're trading for the option techs that almost no-one ever wants. Limited Cooperation might have worked better in the Ancient Age, and could potentially work in Modern Times… but it's just not very workable in the Middle or Industrial eras.

Discussion?
 
Very nice analysis!

IMO the last option is not a very good choice. Too risky, too cumbersome to make a deal for every tech.

I'm undecided on the other two. The "family man" option seems least risky, except that we may be creating the unstoppable civ. Moreover, I am worried about relations. If FREE and us get ahead of the other three in tech, we will create a triple alliance against us. I would prefer to find a way to have two friends...

I agree that it's hard to conceive that we would be able to obtain MA techs in the "Limited Cooperation" scenario. Unless a few other teams have an alliance or develop one, we will almost certainly be way ahead of them.
But, one way to benefit from "Limited Cooperation" would be selling techs for cash to third parties, to fuel our own research. We might make it palatable to FREE by simply not bringing up the point of trading. Maybe they're not interested in a non-trading clause either.
In this situation, there's no need for a clause on "unilateral changes" because we never obtain techs from third parties. So perhaps this is the fourth scenario you were looking for: the less limited cooperation :).
 
@zyxy - The ""Marriage with a Mistress" option? :lol: how very European of you! ;)

Actually, that's quite clever, and just might work. Depends on how close of attention FREE is paying.
I'd be willing to try that, and just count on the fact that an established agreement for who gets which techs will naturally stop FREE from extra trading.
I have 2 reservations though.
1) Would we be ok with it if FREE also figures this out, and also tries to sell techs to other nations? (Because we'd better be!)
2) There's a small but real chance that FREE will figure out what we're doing and may be upset. Are we prepared to offer them some of our gold profit to smooth things over if that happens?​

Finally, while I'm willing to try this "neglect to mention anything about exclusivity" strategy – if FREE catches it and requests us to add that to the treaty, I don't think we should fight them. It'll be great if we can get away with the ability to sell techs… but a full Alliance with FREE is still our best choice even without that ability, imo.

zyxy said:
If FREE and us get ahead of the other three in tech, we will create a triple alliance against us.
True, but it would be an alliance of the technologically backward against the superior. In an Island map, that's even more significant. Let them waste their gold and shields trying to land their outdated forces on our shares and secure them against a superior counter-attack. We'll just continue to pull even further ahead.

zyxy said:
The "family man" option seems least risky, except that we may be creating the unstoppable civ.
Well, I think this is true, except in the short term FREE will be the unstoppable Civ (and therefore a good one to have as an Ally) – but in the long term, I think WE become that unstoppable Civ. Remember, the agricultural trait will only decline in relative power as the game goes on while our Commercial trait will continually become more powerful. I think we could win a space race against FREE, for example.
 
Man - when I miss a couple of days it takes hours to catch back up!!

If it were up to me, I would push to stay married. The other teams (with the exception of Saber) should be conisderably behind us, making straight tech for tech trades unrealistic. Tech for gold would likely be agreed to by the other ally, then we both get to split the cash. It's win-win.

As for a mistress, I think Saber is the only one that makes any sense. In any 3 vs. 2 scenario, it will be Saber doing the research, with the other 2 financing Saber's economy. We must not alienate Saber.

I would prefer to see a lump sum compensation of a fixed amount of gold (120?...180?) for Polytheism. Other arrangements are cumbersome and may come across as greedy. For that matter, I would even be satisfied with 90 gold, in the interests of getting a simple deal done quicker.
 
One thing to note is that while the other teams will know that we're ahead, they won't know just how far, unless we make it slip in some way (building a wonder for instance).
 
Man - when I miss a couple of days it takes hours to catch back up!!
I don't dare to leave you guys alone for some time. Happened to me at SGotm sometimes - a real threat in my team Spooks (and ancestors) :mischief:
If it were up to me, I would push to stay married. The other teams (with the exception of Saber) should be conisderably behind us, making straight tech for tech trades unrealistic. Tech for gold would likely be agreed to by the other ally, then we both get to split the cash. It's win-win.
This also sounds best to me, but I'd like some modification, for example th eparty who does the deal gets 2/3 of the profit or alike.
How do you share the benefit of a luxury? :confused:
After 14 turns we trade it to FREE? :lol:
One thing to note is that while the other teams will know that we're ahead, they won't know just how far, unless we make it slip in some way (building a wonder for instance).
:woohoo: This reminds me of the very first games when I was researching The Wheel or alike and some rival suddenly built some IA wonders :eek: :lol:
Would be quite a deja-vu for some people :D
 
I would prefer marriage to any of the other options. While we have gotten through the scary part, we aren't safe and at some point, someone will get astronomy and be able to attack us.

I'd really like to be have muskets if not rifles by then.
 
I'm also inclined towards the marriage, though I think that's not a very good analogy. We're not really saying we will not trade with anyone else we're saying we won't trade with anyone else unless our partner okays the deal. That concept doesn't quite translate into the marriage analogy. (Marriage with permission to have a mistress?)

Anyway, moving right along, our long term strategy is to remain close to FREE until we're both secure and then we race them to victory. We're betting we can launch a spaceship before they can. Part of this strategy is to leave the other three teams in our scientific dust. The only tech trading I'd do with anyone other than FREE would be for the sole purpose of propping another team up to preserve a balance of power. MAAP II should be concerned only with tech trades - not lux trades or map trades, etc.

Near term, we decided to try to build the Great Lighthouse as a defensive move to forestall any other teams from invading us (or FREE) while we build our strength. It would be nice to build it and squeak a little profit out of the contact advantage it brings but that's not our reason for building it. I think reaching out and settling as many of those islands as we can is a better bonus from the torch.

How fast we move along the tech tree is not as important as how fast we move along it compared to BABE, GONG and SABER. (And also compared to FREE - we don't want to be falling behind them!)

We also have to remember there are three scientific civs. We do not want to see FREE and SABER getting married now, do we? We should get FREE to the altar before they meet SABER and decide we're not such a great catch after all. (Who knows, maybe size does matter.)
 
That concept doesn't quite translate into the marriage analogy. (Marriage with permission to have a mistress?)
Well of course that is not the avareag case (and slightly insane?) but marriages like that take place (in Europe :D ) - but in most cases with "mistresses" for both partners. It's called Open Marriage. :old:
Near term, we decided to try to build the Great Lighthouse as a defensive move to forestall any other teams from invading us (or FREE) while we build our strength. It would be nice to build it and squeak a little profit out of the contact advantage it brings but that's not our reason for building it. I think reaching out and settling as many of those islands as we can is a better bonus from the torch.
Well - that quickly things can change... :(

I guess missing the GLH changes our whole startegy.
How fast we move along the tech tree is not as important as how fast we move along it compared to BABE, GONG and SABER. (And also compared to FREE - we don't want to be falling behind them!)

We also have to remember there are three scientific civs. We do not want to see FREE and SABER getting married now, do we? We should get FREE to the altar before they meet SABER and decide we're not such a great catch after all. (Who knows, maybe size does matter.)
It would mean that FREE will be waiting for SABER - or pushing them without much (instant) gain...
But we have to be aware of these oportunities. :shifty:
 
Well, a FREE marriage looks pretty good right about now since we don't have to worry about the contact and trade advantage.
 
:mad: When I first read this I was thinking about the second option during maap bridge and the first option during maap 2. That way we could use our Lighthouse advantage during the time before astronomy, and tie ourselves to free after that.

But there's also a lot to say for the first option all the time. We don't want free to tie themselves to SABER.

But still, if we get the lighthouse I don't think Free will even meet SABER untill astronomy, and that's when the maap bridge ends right? If it doesn't, we could even make it that way.

edit: Oh crap, babe built the lighthouse... I don't think I have anything more to say than that.... :mad::mad: :mad:
 
Losing another race to BABE is indeed frustrating. We do need to get a message to FREE soon. Should we tell FREE (and SABER) what we know about the shape of the world and lay of the land? Our next message to FREE should certainly contain some thoughts and questions for FREE about how much to include or exclude SABER in our alliance. Also, right now feudalism may be more important to both us and FREE than getting to education.
 
In the new situation the "marriage" option looks the best indeed. Either that, or the "marriage with mistress" option, but then we should probably tell FREE that we want to allow selling tech to third parties. I don't know how much we would benefit from it, though. SABER will certainly not pay more than a third of full price or so.

We could even share the spoils I think.

Now that BABE got the Torch, we may want to include Chivalry and Navigation. (That would also simplify the balancing problem).
 
Ok – I think we've pretty much settled this.
Marriage it is. By consensus of The Council.

I do think we should include mention of possibly selling techs to others and splitting the gold. I'll be posting a chat here shortly where Dutchfire suggested the idea of buying knowledge from us for gold.

I'll start drafting a note for review later today.
:salute:
 
Alright, based on the recent consensus, here's the letter I propose sending to FREE asap as a precursor to a MAAP II agreement.
-----------------
Dear FREE Allies,

The end of this age draws near, and it's time for us to set the stage for a glorious new era.

Our current MAAP treaty ends when we swap our Era Bonus techs, and the guaranteed peace moves into the "15 turns notice" phase. We hope you remain excited about building on our foundation of friendship and moving forward into even closer cooperation and alliance.

We have 4 points that we believe need to be addressed in the short term.

#1 – A Bridge
Based on our work on Polytheism, we estimate that we will enter the Middle Ages on turn 95. Since The Council is researching the last tech needed to advance to the Middle Ages, we will be the first to enter the new age. Unfortunately, game mechanics prevent us from sending our bonus era tech on the same turn as we send Polytheism. Therefore FREE will enter the MA as soon as they get the save, and could possibly draw the same bonus tech as The Council.
This makes it very difficult to craft a balanced MAAP II proposal until we know what each of our Bonus Techs will be.

We'd therefore like to propose a very broad agreement, called The MAAP Bridge to cover the turns immediately following the advancement to the new era. This Bridge treaty will be quickly replaced by a full MAAP II agreement once we both know what our Bonus Techs are.

As the Scientific Civs in this game, we hope you'll agree that getting our Alliance to Education rapidly is a top goal. Since The Council will be suffering from a revolt to Republic immediately after the era advancement, team FREE will already be in Republic, and team FREE currently has a wide lead in Population and Score – we therefore propose that whatever the outcome of our Bonus techs, Team FREE should immediately start on the Monotheism, Theology, Education path. The Council will work on the bottom Feudalism/Engineering part of the tech tree while the MAAP II agreement is formalized.

#2 – Balancing Polytheism
We also need to reach an agreement on how to handle the Polytheism imbalance as we leave the Ancient Age. We appreciate your offer of ½ your GPT post-republic, but since we're very near the era advancement, and since the imbalance is 360 beakers, we think it would probably be best to just agree to a fixed gold payment amount. What would you think of just 1 gold for every 2 beakers? That'd be 180 gold. (we'd be happy to allow you to pay that off over time if you choose this option)
A second option would be to evaluate a way to repay the beaker amount in the MAAP II agreement, and may or may not be possible based on what Bonus Techs we both get and what priorities in research we jointly set. We're willing to postpone a decision on balancing out the 360 beakers until after the era advancement, as long as you agree that this imbalance will be made right.

#3 – Peace in our Time!
We'd also like to advocate extending the "guaranteed peace" clause into the Bridge Treaty so that we're both covered until the full MAAP II agreement can be reached.

#4 – Taking Saber's Money
Finally, it's come to our attention that we may have the opportunity to sell a technology or two to Saber. Given the rise of BABE as the biggest threat to world peace (with their Super Galleys and Mounted Warriors) – we believe all 3 scientific Civs (You, Saber, and Us) are under the biggest threat. If BABE were able to conquer any of us, they will almost certainly become unstoppable. Hopefully our big tech advantage will provide us some measure of safety – but Saber, we believe, is in real danger. Therefore, we think giving them some minor help by selling some techs would be profitable for our alliance, but also a safety hedge against Babe. What do you think?

We know there's a lot here, but how does all that sound?
Let us know your reaction on each of these 4 points, and we'll be happy to work up some more formal documents for signing.

All the best,
General_W, speaking with the voice of The Council

--------------------

How is that looking?
 
Looking really good! My comments:

  • I wouldn't mention that the peace treaty changes status. This sounds ominous, like we're thinking of attacking them. The phrasing under item #3 is more positive and hence much better IMO.
  • We actually will enter the MA on turn 94, if I calculate correctly.
  • Let's please not mention their lead in score and pop. We don't need to supply many reasons why they should go the upper branch, just one good reason is enough. Our anarchy will do.
  • If we prefer that they repay Poly in beakers (and I do), then I would start with that option. If they don't want this option, then a gold payment is ok too, but it can of course not be dragged out over time - time value of money and all that. Let's say it has to be payed within 10 turns of receiving the tech, that's quite reasonable.
  • concerning item #4, perhaps rename it to "selling techs to SABER" or so? We may need to form a triple alliance after all...
  • FREE will alsmost certainly want to know how the gains of a tech sale will be split. We should perhaps prepare them that prices will be low (maybe 1/3 of full price or so, SABER will almost certainly not pay 1/2). Do we want to share equally with FREE? Or do we want a fee? That will be hard to sell. Do we want them to propose a division? Or is there some non-monetary compensation we can ask for?
  • Do we want to include a mutual protection (monetary aid in case of BABE attack)?
 
zyxy said:
I wouldn't mention that the peace treaty changes status. This sounds ominous, like we're thinking of attacking them. The phrasing under item #3 is more positive and hence much better IMO.
* We actually will enter the MA on turn 94, if I calculate correctly.
Ok - I'll make that change. And good catch on the turn.

zyxy said:
Let's please not mention their lead in score and pop. We don't need to supply many reasons why they should go the upper branch, just one good reason is enough. Our anarchy will do.
My reason for bringing it up was to remind FREE that they can afford to be generous with us. Afterall, they have nearly double our population! :wow:

zyxy said:
If we prefer that they repay Poly in beakers (and I do), then I would start with that option. If they don't want this option, then a gold payment is ok too, but it can of course not be dragged out over time - time value of money and all that. Let's say it has to be payed within 10 turns of receiving the tech, that's quite reasonable.
I agree with all that and will make those changes in the next version.

zyxy said:
Do we want to share equally with FREE? Or do we want a fee? That will be hard to sell. Do we want them to propose a division? Or is there some non-monetary compensation we can ask for?
I think it's still to early for that. There's a lot in this letter already, let's see if they even like the idea, then go from there. That's my prefrence anyway.

zyxy said:
Do we want to include a mutual protection (monetary aid in case of BABE attack)?
also a good idea, but better left for the MAAP II agreement, imo.
 
With losing the Lighthouse, we *definitely* need to be married to Free - both of us do. SoZ, assuming we get it, will help us a lot. between them and a set of swords and hopefully soon MDI, we will be tough.
 
Ok – here's version 2 of the letter. I'd really like to send this in the next 24 hours. So please comment if there's anything you want changed!

Spoiler :

Dear FREE Allies,

The end of this age draws near, and it's time for us to set the stage for a glorious new era.

We hope you remain excited about building on our foundation of friendship and moving forward into even closer cooperation and alliance.

We have 4 points that we believe need to be addressed in the short term.

#1 – A Bridge
Based on our work on Polytheism, we estimate that we will enter the Middle Ages on turn 94. Since The Council is researching the last tech needed to advance to the Middle Ages, we will be the first to enter the new age. Unfortunately, game mechanics prevent us from sending our bonus era tech on the same turn as we send Polytheism. Therefore FREE will enter the MA as soon as they get the save, and could possibly draw the same bonus tech as The Council.
This makes it very difficult to craft a balanced MAAP II proposal until we know what each of our Bonus Techs will be.

We'd therefore like to propose a very broad agreement, called The MAAP Bridge to cover the turns immediately following the advancement to the new era. This Bridge treaty will be quickly replaced by a full MAAP II agreement once we both know what our Bonus Techs are.

As the Scientific Civs in this game, we hope you'll agree that getting our Alliance to Education rapidly is a top goal. Since The Council will be suffering from a revolt to Republic immediately after the era advancement, team FREE will already be in Republic, and team FREE currently has a lead in Population and Score – we therefore propose that whatever the outcome of our Bonus techs, Team FREE should immediately start on the Monotheism, Theology, Education path. The Council will work on the bottom Feudalism/Engineering part of the tech tree while the MAAP II agreement is formalized.

#2 – Balancing Polytheism
We also need to reach an agreement on how to handle the Polytheism imbalance as we leave the Ancient Age. We appreciate your offer of ½ your GPT post-republic, but since we're very near the era advancement, and since the imbalance is 360 beakers, we think it would probably be best to just agree to a different arrangement.
We have 2 ideas:
1) Evaluate a way to repay the beaker amount in the MAAP II agreement, which may or may not be possible based on what Bonus Techs we both get and what priorities in research we jointly set. If we go this route, we hope you'd agree to an upward revision of Polytheism's value, with the understanding that beakers are relatively more expensive in the Ancient Era when everyone is in despotism and is short on libraries.
2) Option two would be a fixed gold payment amount. We'd be willing to accept something like 1 gold for every 2 beakers? That'd be 180 gold. (also, we'd be happy to allow you to pay that off over 10 turns or so if you choose this option)

We're willing to postpone a decision on balancing out the 360 beakers until after the era advancement, as long as you agree that this imbalance will be made right.

#3 – Peace in our Time!
We'd also like to advocate extending the "guaranteed peace" clause into the Bridge Treaty so that we're both covered until the full MAAP II agreement can be reached.

#4 – Selling Technology to Saber
Finally, it's come to our attention that we may have the opportunity to sell a technology or two to Saber. Given the rise of BABE as the biggest threat to world peace (with their Super Galleys and Mounted Warriors) – we believe all 3 scientific Civs (You, Saber, and Us) are under the biggest threat. If BABE were able to conquer any of us, they will almost certainly become unstoppable. Hopefully our big tech advantage will provide us some measure of safety – but Saber, we believe, is in real danger. Therefore, we think giving them some minor help by selling some techs would be profitable for our alliance, but also a safety hedge against Babe. It hopefully goes without saying that we'd share any gold profit with you. What do you think?

We know there's a lot here, but how does all that sound?
Let us know your reaction on each of these 4 points, and we'll be happy to work up some more formal documents for signing.

All the best,
General_W, speaking with the voice of The Council


Hopefully we're all liking that!
Please offer feedback so I can send this off before too long.
:salute:

EDIT: in a nod to zyxy's concerns, I have toned down "wide lead in population..." to just "lead in population..."
 
Top Bottom