Diplo for Team BABE

[PrinceMyshkin]

jb, this has me laughing out loud. If the world thinks going to war with galleys full of one 1 or 2 defense units making landings on islands is going to work, this game just might be in the bag. Really surprising. Even just a glance at the last MTDG, I kept thinking 20-shield horsemen = 30-shield MW in the open field, what is up with those pikes. It was the tech lead and being prepared to take advantage of it that was most impressive on MIA. I thought anybody could ride horses on rails followed by bombers. Maybe I'm missing something, but...idk.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

And after all the talk of tech swapping, are we still set on bagging the GLib?

This really is a good question. Maybe the world would do just as well without it. How can we know some other team will not build it? And if a science team builds it, wouldn't that make even more of problem?

I apologize for commenting so hastily above, small conflicts with limited goals might be good ideas. But the costs of all-out aggression this early would only lead to falling even further behind in tech. What is the Babes explanation for not wanting a peaceful means to enable their GA, then?

Very nice work as well, jb.

 

[Daghdha]

Building on Babes concern about sci civs leaving us in the "duts" is a good thing. We're in on that, right? IMHO a treaty would focus on:
1. Long term peace
2. Guaratees of sharing vital rescources (iron/horses)
3. How to keep up with the tech pace
4. Beer for babes

I still think it's agood idea for us to go for the GLib, get MM and squirt out suicidals. If we get the contacts having the Glib we could invite Babes on the benefits. We're the only on in GA? so I think we will get it....

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

It is something that could use more discussion, Daghie. So here's some questions I have.

1. How can we trade vital resources if we are putting off the time to Navigation?

2. Also, if as I suspect the Pyramids will ensure we have higher pop. indefinitely, I wouldn't expect too much trouble in keeping up in tech pace. I think the only concern is losing out on some of the science team's free tech and having to research known techs for ourselves, right?

3. Is long term peace really team Babes goal?

4. How much time can we expect to have to gain a lead in the MA? Will we just finish one or two techs only to have the science teams get them for free?

 

[killercane]

Well concern with science teams is BS imo, MIA won last time because they received AN ENTIRE FREAKING CONTINENT AND HUNDREDS OF CITIZENS with minimal losses.

That being said, BABE is making me paranoid. I told JB last night they need to come up with a better deal soon. I think they are trying to downplay Monarchy; its a good deal for them, esp. without Republic. Since they know Korea, they can get math from them and we can then buy math off of them, which is a big win for them and good for us.

If they wont agree to a long term peace deal soon then we better start building some units. If we can leave curraghs on the various mid ocean docking points that would give us quite a bit of early warning of a fleet.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

I think I agree that concern about science teams free tech isn't really a problem, especially since we want peaceful relations with all teams really. Its been something I've been talking about, and apologize if focus was put into what's really of minor importance, if any. And thanks for the reminder that its always population that leads to power.

I do find it surprising that they don't think much of what we have to offer. Besides a sentinel net of curraghs, how many should we send to seek contacts for ourselves?

Units shouldn't be a problem. But, we should minimize disruption from our plans for growth, I think. Can peace deals be broken?

We do want some deal, I think, but not at the cost of commiting us to aggression, right?

Also, thanks again RF for bringing "The Evolution of Cooperation" by Robert Axelrod to the teams attention. I found an article on wikipedia about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation. The team should find it interesting.

 

[jb1964]

What is the Babes explanation for not wanting a peaceful means to enable their GA, then?

An excellent point and we should put that question to Whomper.
I should have said, "OK, so you're getting Monarchy from some other source or when should we expect the MW landing?"

Can peace deals be broken?

I have not read the rules but I don't think even the most dastardly among us would break a peace deal in this game. Some things need to be sacred.
[Edit: From the Rules thread - "Most importantly: allow breaking of in-game treaties. It's your reputation. The admins don't care what happens to it." So, if one team wants to backstab another they can certainly do that. Once. ]

We do want some deal, I think, but not at the cost of commiting us to aggression, right?

I wasn't serious about attacking anyone at the end of my thread w/ Whomp. He made the suggestion (GS landings) just to see my reaction and I took the conversation up a notch to see his. Unfortunately I lost my IM connection, again, at that point and don't know if he ever saw that comment. It might be wise to build on his thought of our using GS's... maybe give him the impression that, although few in number, we have enough to make another team miserable. That is, once we discover if we have iron. If they think we have GS's running about they will never land MW's on our shore.

Given our city density on the coasts it wouldn't be too difficult to simply deny the Babes the ability to land.

Prince, it's not that I think Babe is going to drop off 20 MW's to destroy us it's that at this point I think 2 or 4 swords dropped off anywhere on our lands could be a real pain in the butt.

Let me put it this way, if you could land 4 swords (or MW's) on our shores at this point, when your military advisor tells you that we're weak, would you do it?

Babe's upside: they could get just about anything out of us they wanted or wreck a couple of cities before we rushed and gathered enough archers to deal with the problem. The long lasting setback to us, at first thought, would not be small but also not unrecoverable.

Downside, at most you'll cause some havok and have earned yourself an enemy for the rest of the game. Albeit, a weak, culture crazed enemy.

 

[Daghdha]

They downplay monarchy because that's their job haggling for a good deal. That doesn't mean we have to accept that downplay.
Sentinel boats, as well as explorers, are well adviced methinks. This is a wet game by the looks of it.
Babes BS'ing to get the best out of a deal shouldn't make us paranoid. On the other hand, a decent stack of units is always good to have just in case.
We have expanded nicely and the pyramids will add to that. Maybe it's time train some mean guys.

 

[jb1964]

Babe had better come back w/ a deal this evening or I'll pester Whomp relentlessly on IM.

And I agree w/ Daghie, a few mean guys about the shoreline would help towards reducing our stress level.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

First, let me apologize very much to any team members I've offended with hasty comment above. I regretted it the second I posted. I simply have no business making comments on a game with so little information to go on. I don't know if I even should be forgiven for that, but I hope so.

Let me put it this way, if you could land 4 swords (or MW's) on our shores at this point, when your military advisor tells you that we're weak, would you do it?

Not a chance. I would never declare war for any gain or advantage of oppurtunity in a game dealing with humans. For ai's I make exceptions. If war is to come it will be defensive or none at all. If you haven't taken a look at the link I provided summarizing the article RF brought up, I recommend it. It summarizes pretty well how I approach these games.

I have not read the rules but I don't think even the most dastardly among us would break a peace deal in this game. Some things need to be sacred.
[Edit: From the Rules thread - "Most importantly: allow breaking of in-game treaties. It's your reputation. The admins don't care what happens to it." So, if one team wants to backstab another they can certainly do that. Once. ]

If there is no chance peace will be broken, then we have more than enough time to prepare for any "pain in the butt" even a stack of 20 MW's. If they do want to backstab us and ruin their reputation, imo, it is they who will pay more than us in the long run. If that galley makes a move to our shores on the next turn it's their best oppurtunity to hurt us, so we'll have to see what we can do about that just in case they might see an opportunity. But, in anarchy? Or are they just total liars?

I already mentioned a plan for one turn vet-warriors at Paradise City some turns ago. I think we can proceed with that and see if we get iron in two turns and decide then on builds and troop placement. With a sentinel net of curraghs and the dense build we have we should be able to rush at least archers ready to strike any landing on the island. If we get lucky we might even sink one of their galleys.

I think the main thing these guys might be interested in is causing fear and paranoia to disrupt a teams plans, as we may already have seen in the case of the Council, so any defense plans should be made with the idea of causing minimal disruption. We are about to build our last settlers and some cities can turn production to defense, but I recommend we not go overboard.

We may be weak in military, atm, but they would be underestimating our power if they really want to declare war. I did like the way our power graph looked, didn't you? We should still seek a deal with the Babes, but I suggest we do not sign agreements that will lead to us becoming aggressors.

Babe's upside: they could get just about anything out of us they wanted or wreck a couple of cities before we rushed and gathered enough archers to deal with the problem. The long lasting setback to us, at first thought, would not be small but also not unrecoverable

They already don't seem to want what we have, so....

EDIT: sorry, crosspost, and I see we pretty much agree

 

[jb1964]

No offense taken. If what I say sounds goofy it's because I shoot from the hip and it probably is. But like any discussion I have w/ my wife, I can usually find a deeper, if obscure, meaning that makes me sound less impulsive. And after 20 years I'm pretty good at backtracking.

Challenging the ideas is why we have this forum. Keep it coming.

Back to the Babes...
I don't think we want them circumnavigating our lands. We'll see what the did w/ the galley shortly and if it moved towards our shores then we need to ask them to return to thier own poluted, uncultured waters.

However, before we insult them I would like a response from Whomp as to the opportunity for a deal.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

I love goofy! And can definitely relate to that.

I don't think we want them circumnavigating our lands. We'll see what the did w/ the galley shortly and if it moved towards our shores then we need to ask them to return to thier own poluted, uncultured waters.

I agree with this. Looking at the map I posted in the log, it appears they can't quite reach our borders next turn, but could certainly take a look. I would think they would want to go west to bag another contact, so if they go north....

Thanks for reminding me of the rules thread, I'm going to read that again. Can we ask them to turn around when they aren't in our borders? We could probably ask why they don't meet someone else?

If they did approach we might need to get at least a couple warriors ready to take a swing if they're crazy enough to land, don't you think? We've already got one due at Paradise City next turn.

However, before we insult them I would like a response from Whomp as to the opportunity for a deal.

We don't want to insult anyone, so keep us informed. I noticed in the diplo communications kc mentioned IW in one. If he hasn't already corrected that, it's a good idea to tell them it's in two, we don't want them to think we were misleading them, just an honest mistake.

 

[jb1964]

We don't want to insult anyone, so keep us informed. I noticed in the diplo communications kc mentioned IW in one. If he hasn't already corrected that, it's a good idea to tell them it's in two, we don't want them to think we were misleading them, just an honest mistake.

Normally we wouldn't want to insult anyone but w/ Whomp I make an exception. You see, I'm a Cubs fan and he likes the Chicago White Sox. I started our conversation off last night pointing out that my Cubs have a 0.1% better winning percentage than his Sox. He liked it. The bottom line is Whomp's a pal and I'm not sure I could bring myself to truely insult him or his dog. But his baseball team is fair game.

Don't worry, I'm obnoxious but not stupid. (No comments please.)

Time to see if the Babes have sent us a letter....

 

[Daghdha]

I'm sure they will seek permission before entering our waters. Question is, how do we respond? Access to our shores is a piece in working out a deal.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

If it could help in working out a deal we might want to think about it.

No news from diplo must mean the Babes are working out a deal for math from the Council. I think they might be including us on the list of teams (everybody?) to keep down the tech pace. I think we should play the turn when it arrives and see where they sent their galley. I'll look to increase security and seek contacts. We really need a deal before next turn, since we have to set our research and they probably don't want us to do math. Maybe the world could use a good Library.

(Man, my brain turns to french fry salad without sleep.)

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

We've just gotten the save and I don't think we want to wait too long to pass it along. I'll wait until ~11 AM EST (GMT-5) for news of any developments and any ideas when and how to proceed.

(And get a bit more sleep to be at my best.)

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

Reviewing this again.
1. We can have currency in 5-turns if they get math from Korea giving both teams 3-chances at huts.
2. If none of us pop construction in 5-turns, we can have it in 9-turns.
3. In my opinion any team starting war first will lose the game despite any gains, as will any team tied to such a policy.

4. Also possible, but perhaps left off table is we can have any MA tech in 13-turns and/or good chances at completing GLibrary if either team can pop construction.

Hope some of this might help move diplo forward in near future. Please advise if delaying the turn is desirable. We have until ~12:00PM EST (GMT-5) to start taking the turn.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

Alright, I think it's time to see what happened. Expect a turn report in a couple of hours. This will help give a clearer picture of what we might expect. I'll post no more opinions after the report to allow the diplo team and the rest of the Gongers to decide what the best course of actions are. I will respond to any questions posted to me directly. I will always advise well in advance if I feel I am not capable of doing my best for the team. Events have turned out much differently than we expected, but things are not as bad as they seem.

 

[killercane]

BABE popped poly from a hut (according to them, they may have traded). Im talking to Whomp and Robi D now. It is a possibility that they have known another team for a while. Ill try to get that out of him.

 

[PrinceMyshkin]

Thx, kc. Initial report is no sight of Babe galley. Turn expected to take some time.