Cavaleiros Embassy & Intelligence

[damnrunner]

Agreed, but how would we go about making a deal with them to do this?

Who ever gets myst 1st would logically get to choose. We will know if they get myst 1st as we then would see a decrease in its beaker cost. They can do teh same with us which means neither side can cheat.

We both have high enough tech rates so that even if a team that got myst 2nd could possibly out tech the 1st civ. This uncertainty is the incentive to share information. Of course if one side wants to be a bastard they could lie - but then they had better be very confident that they can beat the other civ.

 

[Kaleb]

We can say the following:

We are willing to start our information sharing by telling you what the first 3 technologies we researched were. If you agree to this, reply to this message with your first 3 techs and then we shall do likewise. After this we can share the rest of our tech tree with each other.

Furthermore: Are you willing to share information on your non-strategic resources? It may be useful to see what kind of trades may be made available by Sailing.

Are you willing to coordinate with us the researching of religion-techs?

Would you prefer to tech Alphabet first and then trade it with us for another tech, or vice-versa?

 

[Kaleb]

We will know if they get myst 1st as we then would see a decrease in its beaker cost.

I'm not sure about this, none of the techs we have or the techs that are available have changed in their cost. Does that effect only come in once Alphabet is available?

 

[Sommerswerd]

We are willing to start our information sharing by telling you what the first 3 technologies we researched were. If you agree to this, reply to this message with your first 3 techs and then we shall do likewise. After this we can share the rest of our tech tree with each other.

Furthermore: Are you willing to share information on your non-strategic resources? It may be useful to see what kind of trades may be made available by Sailing.

Are you willing to coordinate with us the researching of religion-techs?

Would you prefer to tech Alphabet first and then trade it with us for another tech, or vice-versa?

I like these ideas, but I would change the following:

As far as the tech showing goes, we should ask them if they agree, and if they agree, then we should disclose our first 3 techs first, in a show of good faith. Once they disclose their first three to us, then we can ask them to show their whole tech tree in a show of good faith since we told them our techs first in a show of good faith.

The other stuff sounds great. Can folks agree on Kaleb's idea so we can start tech trading and religion getting right away before we waste turns researching something Cavalieros already have?

What would we trade for Alphabet? Maybe Iron working?

 

[donsig]

The letter is already sent.

I've been away from the computer all day. Thanks for sending the letter Provo. How did you send it? It would be wise to use our team gmail account to send official correspondence as we'd all have access to a record of what was sent.

 

[Sommerswerd]

By who? Are we going to have an official spokesperson or no?

Yea, sending the letter over IM was a little bizzare, but it's done... so one less thing to do. We should have some sort of standard procedure for official comuniques going forward

I've been away from the computer all day. Thanks for sending the letter Provo. How did you send it? It would be wise to use our team gmail account to send official correspondence as we'd all have access to a record of what was sent.

That is a good idea... I agree with this.

 

[Kaleb]

I agree too. Oyzar's IM is oystein1986@hotmail.com not sure if he uses that for email too though.

I'll ask him to email our team email account for official discourse

 

[cav scout]

Yea, sending the letter over IM was a little bizzare, but it's done...

I think it worked out good. If we ever need to send disinformation, mixed messages or feign disunity we can have Provo contact Oyzar through this "back channel."

Of course right now we should be best of friends with Team Cav and avoid any non-official communication.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think it worked out good. If we ever need to send disinformation, mixed messages or feign disunity we can have Provo contact Oyzar through this "back channel."

Wow... Cav you are deliciously diabolical

 

[CommandoBob]

I just sent this PM to sulla on email addresses.

Dear sulla,

Could I get you to create a new thread (stickied) for the teams to post their email information?

I would, but I don't want anyone to read too much into the fact that Team Kazakhstan started the thread. You're neutral, and such a thread is an administrative kind of thing anyway, so it would seem proper coming from you.

Sincerely yours,

Art Parry
aka CommandoBob

 

[Kaleb]

So are we ok with sending our message? We need to do this quickly, Cav are probably holding back on their turn because of this very point

 

[Sommerswerd]

So are we ok with sending our message? We need to do this quickly, Cav are probably holding back on their turn because of this very point

I would prefer the changes I reccomended, but I am OK with sending the message either way... we need to get a religion and start tech trading ASAP

 

[Indiansmoke]

I agree with Commando Bob...chatting diplo is to be avoided. Everything should be done by formal letters, compiled in theses forums and agreed before sent.

I checked the chat loggs and although nothing was revealed by Provo...there is a sentence that gave away something small "us meeting so early" Provo said.

It is not early at all...we are late meeting anyone..Cavaleiros might have met 1 or 2 other civs already.

If I was Oyzar I would conclude that we have met noone else yet...

Small things like this, cannot be avoided in chat loggs...

 

[Provolution]

I gave away nothing, that was a spurious analysis. However, I agree chat-diplomacy needs to be restricted, I am the first to support that. Yet, we need to have this backdoor to work out various agreements, or our response time and diplomatic development will be to slow. So, give me a mandate, and we can bring something in a letter. But the more anal we make them with a tight and formalistic diplomacy, the more wary, paranoid and plotting Cavaleiros will become.

 

[Indiansmoke]

I gave away nothing, that was a spurious analysis. However, I agree chat-diplomacy needs to be restricted, I am the first to support that. Yet, we need to have this backdoor to work out various agreements, or our response time and diplomatic development will be to slow. So, give me a mandate, and we can bring something in a letter. But the more anal we make them with a tight and formalistic diplomacy, the more wary, paranoid and plotting Cavaleiros will become.

Completely agree...chatting for specific purpose is encouraged...if we send a letter to someone asking for a tech trade for example...chatting to speed that trade up is good...but only for specific reasons.

 

[Provolution]

Good we agree on that Indiansmoke

 

[Provolution]

Shall I put this forward to Oyzar, he is wanting me to respond to him?

Cavaleiros-Kazakhstan Intelligence Sharing Treaty of 2240 BC, "The First CavKaz Treaty"

We are willing to start our information sharing by telling you what the first 3 technologies we researched were, in return for telling us the first 3 technologies you researched. If you agree to this proposal, please state so clearly, and we will provide you the list of our first three technologies as a token of good will. Following this procedure, we can share the rest of our tech tree with each other, in the same sequence as before mentioned.

Furthermore: Are you willing to share information on your non-strategic resources? It may be useful to see what kind of trades may be made available by Sailing.

Are you willing to coordinate with us the researching of religion-techs?

Would you prefer to tech Alphabet first and then trade it with us for another tech, or vice-versa?

 

[Indiansmoke]

Wait a bit lets think on this...


remember they donot know yet if we are currently going for religion or not...no need to reveal it before we tech mystisism at least.


Now about Alphabet....a trade Alphabet for monarcy would be ideal..they have the same cost anyway....so I would focus on asking them this specific question.

 

[Provolution]

I do not like to place them questions that will dictate our internal strategy discussions, we have a solid group here that wants Code of Laws as part of our core strategy. I feel that asking them this question is forcing our arm in changing strategy to a monarchy-centric one, as opposed to other strategies.

Besides, I would like to have our scouting work boat figure out something more along that coast.

I suggest we go along with the first three techs question as originally proposed, as it keeps Mysticism directly out of the debate. We may withhold the entire tech tree if we see there is a risk, or if a religion is discovered the next 2 turns (pottery research period).

 

[Provolution]

Oyzar and Cavaleiros got to us before we got to them:

Spoiler :

oyzar sier:
oyzar sier:
good morning
Mars sier:
morning
we are having a vote on the proposal we make
oyzar sier:
Can you share any info with me yet?
Mars sier:
Not until the vote is concluded
oyzar sier:

Mars sier:
I saw you withholded the save?
oyzar sier:
anyways i have a proposal, you guys don't have myst(and hence none of the religious techs), while you do have ah and hunting that we don't have hence i propose that you guys go writing -> alpha(after you finish pottery ofc) while we go priesthood -> monarchy then arrange a deal so we all can get use of early herditary rule(as well as early ability to trade techs?
we would also be interested in at very least a NAP
Mars sier:
We are some 15 active players, and they clearly stated they wanted this internal round on how to proceed
I will post this up for them
oyzar sier:
since this requires both of us skipping some rather important early techs it would obviously have to be pretty straight beelines...
where exactly in the world are you again?
Mars sier:
right now in London
oyzar sier:
when is the vote concluded?
Mars sier:
like Kaleb
oyzar sier:
oh, so it is actually like 12 for you now
Mars sier:
yes
oyzar sier:
but normally you are in the states right?
Mars sier:
yes
but I work around
oyzar sier:
any chance you'll finish the vote before say 2 pm your time?
Mars sier:
in 2 hours?
no chance
oyzar sier:

Mars sier:
we need to consider the west coast guys
oyzar sier:
you've had well over a day already
Mars sier:
its a big decision what we do now
and we are not holding the save
oyzar sier:
at least you should be able to tell me if you are interested in a nap / closer cooperation etc...
Mars sier:
I said within 48 h
NAP and closer cooperation is certain
that is positive
oyzar sier:
i know, but that doesn't stop me from being impatient
Mars sier:
so its complicated this very second
but a vote will handle it
oyzar sier:
well obviously the trading influences everything else...
but that doesn't mean that trading isn't the strongest mechanic around when it is enabled....
you are researching pottery now right?
(i am not 100% sure on that)
Mars sier:
I cannot answer any questions on in-game issues, until we got that vote
oyzar sier:
anyways even if as you say we are the two strongest teams atm(which i am not certian of as sancta is pretty well off too), there isn't really a way for 2 teams to beat 3(unless you have more land between the 2 people than the other 3 have obviously), hence even if we chose to cooperate closely we should look for a 3rd party to complete a power triangle
Mars sier:
I can agree to that
as a person
oyzar sier:
good
Mars sier:
Even if we are the two strongest teams, the other teams do have early UUs and UBs
oyzar sier:
if you are researching writing that would be damn good(but as i said i think it is pottery), since we have pottery already...
holkans and immortals? i don't think the game will come to a stage where they are dangerous to anyone but barbs
and none of the UB's are actually early...
Mars sier:
Ball Court is
relatively
oyzar sier:
I guess, but it isn't amazing since it is post monarchy in a time line most probably
Mars sier:
Apothecary is more mid-game
oyzar sier:
you do agree that monarchy is the most important early game economic tech right?
Mars sier:
depending on the map, I may lean to agree
oyzar sier:
apothecary and stock exchange are very close together
Mars sier:
but the map decides most of the time
oyzar sier:
sure
Mars sier:
so monarchy is your priority?
oyzar sier:
probably
you have seen some of my other games right?
like C&C?
Mars sier:
no
oyzar sier:
well in C&C i got monarchy as my first classical era tech
well before math/alpha/iw
most of the time you don't have enough happiness for monarchy not to be the very best tech around
Mars sier:
But obviously you got a stronger maritime focus than we do, you have less landmass and so on
oyzar sier:
i don't see what the maritime focus got to do with anything...
Mars sier:
being, sending a work boat as a scout (a novel concept to me) was clever
oyzar sier:
we had more landmass last i checked i think
but at any rate i don't htink it matters much
workboats are among the best scouts for finding people at this stage of the game...
they don't die to barbs
Mars sier:
we should have known...
what about water-barbs then?
oyzar sier:
they don't apaear for many millenia yet
Mars sier:
how many turns for the water barbs?
oyzar sier:
it depends on when people get sailing
in normal play against the AI they always get sailing early so they tend to pop up rather early
but on this map against humans, i don't know
i might be able to tell later though, if you decide to work closely with us that is
Mars sier:
LOL
I wish I had a broader mandate, then I could disclose more
but we can surely agree to a non-aggression treaty
but we need a timer with it
oyzar sier:
axes, spears, swords etc all depends on when humans researchs the various techs
Mars sier:
can you give us a proposed timespan?
oyzar sier:
"until there is any major shift in the game, for example caused by the elimination of one team"
as a start
Mars sier:
major shift needs to be defined
in more detail
oyzar sier:
obviously
Mars sier:
it has to be a series of defined circumstances
oyzar sier:
putting a strict time limit on it if we actually plan to work together(as in tech alliance) seems silly...
Mars sier:
I can agree to that, breeds paranoia, like in the ongoing conflict in the middle east
oyzar sier:
elimination of one team or clear dominance of a team or a break in any of our arranged deals?
though i guess the last part is rather silly
since we certainly aren't planning to break any deals
Mars sier:
it should be written though
oyzar sier:
we are writing now
tell you what, you can come up with what you think if fair as a definition of major shift in the game and we'll say if we have any changes to it?
oh and another note, before any of us get writing, we might have to decleare war on you to let the workboat pass through but i trust we are both professional enough to understand that this is not actually war, just a matter of game mechanics
Mars sier:
indeed, you want a short interim war there, I can see that
oyzar sier:
well it is not actually a war, just that open borders aren't avilable yet
i suppose that if we agree to this nap etc we'll also agree to be trading partners with open borders at least?
I feel we have progressed a fair bit in this second discussion
even if you aren't actually allowed to say anything yet
you do have fishing/ag/wheel/hunting/ah/mining/bw already right?
Mars sier:
Even if I wanted to, I could not reply on specific techs we got

I will warn against some tendencies to anal, over-caution, since that will backfire. In a decision loop like this, the fastest decisionmaking team sets the agenda. Now we need to respond to this, as we haven't gotten about with the other.