3-way alliance

This is from today:

With MZ:
Spoiler :
2metraninja: hey MZ
MZprox: hi
2metraninja: hows things?
MZprox: nothing extra
2metraninja: :) it was interesting for me to read that you said we are not technically allies, yes, it was some form of joke, but it holds much truth most probably
Изпратено в 12:53, сряда
MZprox: For me alliance is a very long lasting (probably till the end) thing. It's not an alliance if it made for 20 turns or against a common enemy. it's only like a cooperation
2metraninja: I see, so it is only the use of terms that differ
because for me, allies can be temporary allies
like: we are allies until our common biggest threat is gone, in this case RB
MZprox: obviously when we have nap and fighting against a common foe you can say we are allies..
2metraninja: or: "we are allies until all other teams are gone"
MZprox: but for me it means we are fighting for a bigger common goal, making even altruistic acts to help the other (not just small things like money loans)
2metraninja: brothers in arms or brothers in fate is quite different from "allies against someone". the first thing implies that we just share one and the same unfortunate fate, where the latter thing means we are dedicated and we coordinate efforts for clear goal
MZprox: allies lose and win together.. and at this moment I think every civ has its own agenda
2metraninja: hmm, you said it very well
allies win or lose together
and this is how I was hoping our relations are right now when it comes to RB
Изпратено в 12:59, сряда
MZprox: foremost I will ahve to watch our civ interest, and if I make a promise I will try my best to hold myself to it. that's why it is hard for me to make promises, because I don't want to make irresponsible ones
Изпратено в 13:02, сряда
MZprox: just to recap: I promised that I will not let Egypt kill an other easy target and watch idle, so no nap with RB and I will interven if they attack azteca around t170.
Изпратено в 13:04, сряда
2metraninja: nothing about if they attack us while we are fighting with French on the other side of the world?
Изпратено в 13:05, сряда
2metraninja: what would you do in such situation?
MZprox: in that case we would probably attack Egypt
Изпратено в 13:07, сряда
MZprox: we certainly wouldn't let them making an easy backstab, however I can not make such promise like: we declare war on egypt in a certain turn or a certain event (except the one I told before).
2metraninja: what you think, this one http://www.topmodel.bg/photos/view/106689#.Ucq9lNi1uNg or this one http://www.topmodel.bg/photos/view/114410#.Ucq9s9i1uNg ?
MZprox: because we can't tell how the situation would look like then
they are lovely, why? :)
Изпратено в 13:11, сряда
2metraninja: I am trying to find low-budget model for shooting one catalog
the girl will have to ride bicycle, but not exactly some sport bicycles, most will be some city bikes and will be shot on the sea coast
MZprox: if i had too choose maybe the second
2metraninja: yep, she is real beauty, just dont know how she will stay in front of camera...
anyway :) wanted to cheer up the talks a bit, as it starts to get quite grim
Изпратено в 13:15, сряда
2metraninja: so, from what you are telling me now, I do understand that you feel quite safe from RB attack and you go from this assumption, right?
Изпратено в 13:17, сряда
MZprox: we can say so
Изпратено в 13:18, сряда
2metraninja: :) now I start to feel stupid, because what we got from ot4e was that everyone of us will have army and threaten RB and this way we all 3 secure our safety, where from what you say it turns out that it is not the case
Изпратено в 13:20, сряда
MZprox: you are not really in a situation where you need to be secured :)
2metraninja: lol, you think so?
why you think so?
you are confident we can easily defeat civ number 1 and civ number 2 at the same time?
:) thanks for the high opinion you have on me
I just wish I had the same confidence
MZprox: as I said it's all about promises while the future can not be foreseen
if you fight with te maya and rb moves their forces against you then we will attack them because obviously it's not in our interest to let the top2 kill you
2metraninja: :) is there a variant in the future
that
MZprox: a small chance that you make peace with maya, Egypt goes bankrupt and you take the position of No. ' badass... :p
no 1*
2metraninja: by the very same time you say: "leading from the presumption we do whatever is best for our own civ, right now it is best for us to tech infantries and artillery while you annihilate yourself with RB and French and then come and take all their land for our own nation"?
after we are dead, so you dont have to keep our NAP? :)
Изпратено в 13:29, сряда
MZprox: well.. it is an option.. unfortunately if we stay small we will probably won't have a chance whoever rsises victorious from your conflict :)
Изпратено в 13:31, сряда
2metraninja: :) why you keep talking about small, you are not much smaller than us
Изпратено в 13:32, сряда
MZprox: we are almost the smallest civ
Изпратено в 13:34, сряда
MZprox: we have cities with no food resource, or only a tundra deer.. those cities won't help us much raising armies
Изпратено в 13:35, сряда
2metraninja: :) but what will keep you safe from RB?
if you have so less potential to raise an army?
MZprox: because we wouldn't go down that easily as the inca.. we could draft 5 rifles a turn if necessary
we would still lose of course, but Rb wouldnt kill their winning chance by attacking us
Изпратено в 13:46, сряда
2metraninja: in my eyes, this was the whole idea of us giving our word to Ot4e that we will not extend NAP with RB - that we ALL 3 wont extend NAP, but will prepare armies and force RB to not be able to attack any of us and this way we secure each-other
Изпратено в 14:04, сряда
MZprox: what exactly want me to do? I did promise I will not extend the nap and prepare armies as much as i can
Изпратено в 14:10, сряда
2metraninja: just not signing NAP without getting assurances for mutual security from other sources is absurd situation
Изпратено в 14:11, сряда
MZprox: I think I always told you, several times that We will not make such a promise because we CAN'T. even you can't promise how your war with maya will go,
Изпратено в 14:13, сряда
2metraninja: yes, you are right that no one knows what will happen
Изпратено в 14:14, сряда
MZprox: i will have to leave soon, then i won't be here near chat for a while
2metraninja: when you will be online?
ot4e wanted 3-side chat
MZprox: i think onyl in the evening
2metraninja: ok then, lets try to have chat then
MZprox: ok, but i think I said what i can in the previous session
Изпратено в 14:22, сряда
2metraninja: we agreed to not extend NAP with RB with the clear condition that we ALL 3 must have standing army and invade RB if they prepare to invade any of us. and this was the thing we kept discussing ever since. today is the first time I hear about you giving no assurances about helping us if RB attack us
Изпратено в 14:35, сряда
2metraninja: this is how we secure each-other's safety and a reason to not extend NAP with RB
for me it is real surprise to hear that we wont have such safety
Изпратено в 14:37, сряда
2metraninja: I dont want you to tell me exact numbers or dates, but to give me your word you will act in the spirit of this mutual protection agreement
your word is good enough for me
MZprox: we believe that you have the potential to become stronger and more dangerous than RB. in that case it would be against our civ's interest to help you. And I was always carefull not to make irresponsible promises. I could promise that we will not allow RB to gain an easy victory against a weaker foe.
Изпратено в 14:39, сряда
MZprox: you can take it as a complement, but still you can't convince us otherwise :)
Изпратено в 14:40, сряда
MZprox: i could say something like: if you are at war with maya and rb attacks you we will come to your aid, but being in war can be quite different.. just techicly in war, on the brink of defeat/victory etc
Изпратено в 14:42, сряда
MZprox: i have to go now, I think a will be online about 8pm next
2metraninja: ok, lets see if we can meet then
but we must have solution to this isecure situation to us one way or another.
and it must be soon
Изпратено в 14:51, сряда
MZprox: alright, but i don't see your situation insecure
besides the fact that no one can predict the events
2metraninja: our situation IS insecure
Изпратено в 14:53, сряда
2metraninja: we are facing the possibility of military power number 1 hit us while we are busy fighting civ number 2 and there is you telling us that you cant promise you will lift a finger for us
unless you see we are dying
which of course will be too late for us you to do a thing
MZprox: Nah.. that's not what I said
Изпратено в 14:55, сряда
MZprox: i can't promise that we will imediately attack RB if they declare war on you.. at least not at the moment, but as 175 comes closer it is possible we can mek such a statement. I can promise you that we will not leave you alone against maya and RB .. assuming you have not won your war technically against maya by then
which is unlikely
2metraninja: but of course it is unlikely
our best hopes are that we smash Maya in the open and stabilize the front
we are not planning to wage serious war with Maya
why would we?
we cant win it and be ready on the RB border at t 175
Изпратено в 14:59, сряда
MZprox: Right now we are preparing to war, nothing will change our path (if we fail in stealing we will lose 3-4 turns, but hopefully it won't happen). Then we will act on the sentiment that we want to kkep the balance of powers. I think that's the best a civ in our position could do.. and i1m telling these things to you because I'm playing my cards more open. more open than you usually :)
Изпратено в 15:03, сряда
MZprox: now i really need to go :)
cya
 
This is from today:

With MZ:
Spoiler :


@2metra: I do not think you will gain ground with MZprox repeating your points even more times. He said what he decided to do, and it makes a lot of sense for his civ :(.

The most chilling part is that he is much more willing to help OT4E than us - but I must say that he is right again, this is what he should do :(.

I really think that fundamental mistake we are making here is to insist on putting us in desperate situation and then be disappointed that our allies are not that enthusiastic about helping us :( Even OT4E told us that he does not see how he can help us on defense. Meaning that if RB would attack us he would attack them on another flank - which would be helpful, but will also end up with him taking cities. But he will not send any reinforcements to us :(

Still do not understand why we "must" have a standing army on RB border :confused: The only thing it seems to gain us is that we now must beg our allies to save of us from consequences of doing so, which may be very dire :( And both our allies told us they would not help us (much) on defense. But we still kinda determined to orchestrate civ #1 and civ #2 fighting with us at he same time - it is almost as if we are trying to organize a dogpile against us :(
 
Things are as follow: I myself feel a bit cheated by MZ. As I promised Ot4e we wont sign NAP with RB and we promised each- other we will have army ready to attack RB. We were courting CP for ally against RB ever since we met him. And we spoke so many times, many of those talks I published here and I gave my word to not extend NAP with RB, just as Ot4e did not extended NAP with RB. Then Ot4e spoke with MZ and he said he managed to get MZ not extend NAP with RB too. Since then we spoke with MZ too many times and he told how much army he intend to have on the borders at t170. But now MZ claims he never promised to be full-scale ally to us, but take more on-the-fence position. But what we can do about him playing small tricks? Since we already promised Ot4e we wont extend NAP with RB and he did not extended too? Ot4e told me RB threatened him with terrible death if he dont sign NAP with them to t185. He refused. How we can now go and sign NAP with RB and leave CP in the open? If the team is not feeling this way, it is my own honor put on this and I will have to be worn off of any power from the team if we are to sign a NAP with RB now.

Yes, MZ played it dirty on us, but we cant do much about it at the moment.

About why we (and our allies and so-called-allies) should have standing army on RB borders, I explained it few times already with different words, if someone dont got it, I doubt I can explain it better than I did until now.
 
The purpose of Army on RB border.

When RB sees the Army coming to the border they will expect an attack, especially with no NAP and us refusing their attempts to get one. So then RB will have no choice but to expect a DoW and start drafting/whipping to prepare. This will harm their economy and advancement by forcing them to go full scale military prep instead of building economy. 3 Armies on the border will mean 3 times as much drafting/whipping... 3 times as much economic damage... This is the theory/plan.

Now I must admit, that I would prefer that the 3 of us, CP, Poly and CFC just invade and take whatever we can from RB, razing cities and crippling them permanently. WE will get some land, and they will still have to draft and slave like madmen, but at least this way they will be permanently damaged, rather than just boxed in and threatened.

Better still, MZ will not invade, he will probably just send a few pitiful troops to the border, hoping to not have to do any fighting... But then when he sees us and CP invading and taking lands, maybe he will want to join in and get some while RB back is turned.

In any case we should at least be prepared to invade if RB does not take the bait and start whipping, but instead just ignores us and cntinues focusing on economy.
 
Yes absolutely if RB decides that we're bluffing and fails to draft / whip an army, then we go in full steam. The problem here is that CP is sufficiently behind that RB can probably easily bat away anything they try to send in, so the bulk of the work would be on us. And unfortunately we're already having to expend the bulk of our military efforts on CivFr.

Hopefully the troops we built for our Spanish offensive, plus whatever troops we can whip out of ex-Zululand, will be sufficient to hold off CivFr. That will leave our core to grow economically and continue chipping away at RB's lead for the next 15 turns or so. Meanwhile, I will try my damndest to get RB suspicious that maybe our "war" with CivFr is a phony war and we're just using it to cover a military build-up aimed at them. This will keep them sweating and unsure. Are we going to cave and give them a NAP? Is this all for show and we're moving in with a huge army T175? Hopefully the in-fighting at RB is growing every day.

Around T165, we start whipping / drafting en masse.

At T170 RB's NAPs with CP and Poly expire. RB sees that our recent huge power spike and now they're really sweating.

If they attack anyone at the expiration of the NAPs, we need to make sure our army is large enough that we are not their chosen target. If they attack CP and / or Poly, that sucks, but we move in and cause some pain from their rear.

Sommerswerd's suggestion that the three of us DOW and raze RB cities is great, but I fear that our allies are too weak and we are too pre-occupied for this to work successfully. If we had been able to catch RB off guard, and all three of us were 100% committed to doing this as of 15 turns ago, then maybe, but at this point that is probably not possible...

All we need for us to come out ahead is to keep RB penned in, building 3 troops for every one we produce. We will be close enough at that point that the 3 vs 1 nature of our dogpile will allow us to pull ahead.

Poly is the real wrench in our plans here. They have let us know clearly that the moment RB loses initiative and we start to take the lead, they'll jump ship and help RB drag us down.

Our best case scenario is probaby that Poly declines to build any army (waiting for their rifles to come online), so RB DOW's them at T170 because they're the easiest target. And then they are tied to us till the end. And then they get their rifles and start causing havoc to RB's advance. And then CP and us move in and raze weakly defended cities. But all that coming together perfectly is not something we should bank on.
 
I read only first half of the last MZ chat... and honestly? I think you can change the title of this thread to "2-way alliance".

the way he behaves I would not expect from our ally in the future.

If anything he seems to me like some #$*!$(*!^$%*^ opportunist.
 
The problem here is that CP is sufficiently behind that RB can probably easily bat away anything they try to send in, so the bulk of the work would be on us. And unfortunately we're already having to expend the bulk of our military efforts on CivFr.
Not much CP is behind what we or RB can field. In 15-20 turns I hope RB will still not have rifles, so knights+catapults will be the most powerful combo anyone can field. And ot4e said he will whip well. Not sure if we will have enough army to even try attack on RB, but Ot4e wont fall easy either.
 
If the team is not feeling this way, it is my own honor put on this and I will have to be worn off of any power from the team if we are to sign a NAP with RB now.

I did not realized we have promised already to not extend our NAP with RB. But OT4E did not consult us or act against our wishes extending his NAPs with CivFr and the Germans, right? Looks like we would be better served by an agreement to coordinate or consult *all* our NAPs in our alliance in the future.
 
Short chat I had with 2metra recently:

YossarianLives
So what have our allies been saying recently? Anything?
2metraninja
:) they sound ready to fight
YossarianLives
Good!
2metraninja
but "ready to fight" means nothing in particular
YossarianLives
So Poly is turning down RB's NAP offer for sure, right?
What can UCiv do for us if they don't take out Starfall?
The good thing is RB wants desperately to have some peace and establish their new German cities
2metraninja
yes, both of them are turning down any NAP with RB for sure
and I am wondering what Uciv means by joining us if they dont want to raze the RB GT city
YossarianLives
Yeah,I wonder if they have something in mind
 
Top Bottom