A More Binding Peace with Gamecatcher?

Do you aprove this treaty?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Yes, but with slightly different terms (post below)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 14 93.3%

  • Total voters
    15

Octavian X

is not a pipe.
Joined
Jan 11, 2002
Messages
5,428
Location
deceiving people with images
Since there is the danger for early conflict with GC's warrior on our iron, I propose a deal that would keep them at peace with us for a little while. Please read the agreement and wait a day or two to discuss before voting.

In the interest of peace, security, and greater friendship between the Gamecatcher Alliance and the Empire of Fanatikou, the two respective nations shall agree to a full, binding, and mutual peace. Neither nation shall declare a state of war upon the other, nor shall the troops belonging to either nation violate the borders of the other.

This peace treat will stay in effect for a period of twenty turns. When the treaty expires, both nations may agree to renew the agreement for another twenty turns.
 
This sounds good to me. It will give us more time to build cities and recruit troops. But will GCA approve of this?
 
I'm not sure they'll approve and if they do I think they'll still attack the iron city. This war has been brewing since day one.
 
I do not like this for two reasons.

Right now, GC is soiling their pants with fear over when we are going to attack them. Giving them this peace treaty will remove their fears for 20 turns. I do not want that. I want them to be very scared of us.

If we sign this treaty, and we are ready to attack at the end of 20 turns, we will not renew right? That my friends will announce our attack. Let me give you a real life example.

All throughout WWI, the Allies would use artillery to bomb the hell out of German positions, and when they were done bombing, they would stop the guns and send the troops in. Whenever the artillery stopped, the Germans knew something was coming and they were always ready for it, and would massacre the Allies. The Allies kept doing this until the Canadian attack on Vimy Ridge(April 9th 1917). The British and the French had each tried and failed to take this ridge costing them more than 150 000 lives, but the Canadians used a handfull of new techniques, and one of them was to not stop the guns while the troops crossed through 'No-mans land'. That way the Canadians completely surprissed the Germans, and captured a Strategic point, and the Canadians were the only ones to complete their objectives during the Battle of Arras. So let us all be like Canadians. We should not announce our arrival by signing this, then by not renewing it before we attack.
 
Great point, Goonie. It makes perfect sense in my eyes. Gamecatcher doesn't want peace. They want war, so why should we pretend that everything is peachy. It's not. I think the Defense Department will dealing with Gamecatcher soon. We aren't getting anywhere with them, so I think we should start drawing up some war plans. Their actions are threatening and they should be dealt a blow to the head, but we need the others as allies to make sure we have the upper hand.

If the people still want to try a peaceful means than we should tell them to remove the warrior first, then we will discuss a stronger peace. If they remove it, then I am willing to negotiate.
 
But, who says the GC is planning something right now? How do we know that we'll be able to hold that iron city for more than 20 turns? They might get off without fear, but so would we.
 
I voted NO also. I don't see how we could even consider a long term peace agreement with these arrogant bullies. Let the cards fall where they may.
 
I also voted no (just now) cause of Goonie point and that I don't trust them.
 
no for reasons goonie said.
 
Originally posted by Goonie
Right now, GC is soiling their pants with fear over when we are going to attack them.
No offense, but this point is laughable. I seriously doubt that they are quaking in fear of us at this point. From the scoreboard, I think it's safe to say that they have at least one more city than we do and our military is close to equal in size with each other.

The only advantage that we may have would be access to iron and horses, which they may not have (we can't really be sure). However, as they do not need iron for their UU, they may not feel the need to have it, more likely just the need to deprive us of it.

If this is indeed true, then our best hope for victory against GCA comes before the onset of Chivalry and our respective UUs, when we can recruit more powerful units (ie. Swordsmen & Horsemen) than they can.

I vote no on this deal not because I want them to keep being afraid of us, but because such a deal would play right into their hands.

I would much rather see us recruit some archers out of Zhi Gang to forcibly remove the GCA warrior from our iron if need be, than see us sign this deal with them. Besides, once we establish that city, they will either be forced to leave the mountain, or essentially commit an act of war by remaining fortified within our borders, so ultimately, they will be the ones who decide if war shall exist between our two nations as they are and always have been the agressor between our peoples.
 
No offense, but this point is laughable. I seriously doubt that they are quaking in fear of us at this point. From the scoreboard, I think it's safe to say that they have at least one more city than we do and our military is close to equal in size with each other.

It is called exagerating in a time of need to rally support or as some like to call it, propaganda.
 
I see. Judging by the results of this poll, I would say your propoganda worked like a charm. :goodjob:

My concern is that we rush into this fight too soon, before we're ready. We must proceed according to plan. Establish our city, connect the horses, connect the iron, upgrade warriors to swords and then march on BoP.

Let GCA expedite this process at their own peril.
 
FortyJ, I agree completely with biding our time. We must stick to the plan.
 
Top Bottom