Discussion in 'The Knights’ Brotherhood' started by Lanzelot, Feb 26, 2011.
Well, that may explain to Anarhos why we did this turn so long.
it is easier than that. d7 brought up in the Alliance thread that we should offer Lit for MM to the Eagles. I told them that this is exactly what i am doing now and that the negotiations are running.
I wrote that in an email. Sorry if this sounded like too harsh a reproach. However, I do really believe that you guys who already played such a game, and especially you Lanzelot as the most experienced PBEM-player, should really have talked the majority OUT OF THIS deal.
It kills all our strategic decision making. We can only accept practically everything they want, or break that deal. Point it out to me if there is a real third way.
Looking back at it, we should really have never signed this EVEN BEFORE we had an alliance with them. Even within an alliance this deal seems extreme.
What you are talking about??
Between us we agreed that it is fake deal and we will break it at the moment we want.
Or I misunderstood something?
Did you see this discussion I had with d7? http://civforum.de/showthread.php?p=4149567#post4149567
Our economy´s output is nearly 50% stronger than theirs.
I understand that they feel that their expansion strategy is superior to ours and that we might not be worthy to be their ally...
This is what I've been telling you for a while now: it will be much easier to win an endgame against the Anarchos than against the Eagles... ==> Anarchos are the perfect alliance partner!
Ha-ha - ha.
It will take ages, while they come to MA. Also they never meet our research rate. We never get gpt back, because of their poor economy.
Ivan may be right: http://www.civforum.de/showpost.php?p=4150160&postcount=20
And not everyone might have noticed, that they now are planning to "go slow" towards the MA. Just a reminder who see the good in everything: this is when we finally get paid for giving them the most important tech in this game, to which they are not an inch closer than the Küche.
I am not sure what this should tell me. Seriously. I may be starting to believe they are really good allies.
But this surely is a side effect of the drugs I am taking against my cold. I will think about that tomorrow.
Dunno what the Eagles are taking a time out for, if they have so much time on their account left.
You know, I start thinking, that it might be better not to give Republic to them.
[Things depend on negotiation with Eagles]. Just take Lit for CoL and Phylo. Accumulate cash and strike.
2 palaces stronger then one, but it is true when both players good enough.
But I will think more tomorrow...
i am reading through our diplo to put together my proposal for our proposal...
then i read all of d7´s stupid claims and posts, and then this: http://www.civforum.de/showpost.php?p=4103253&postcount=21
this is a pure blackmailing strategy they are following! i really really really cannot see how any of us still can believe they are the ideal partner.
in fact, i see the serious threat that they find just any stupid reason that we "betrayed" them when we e.g. did not say g´mornin' friendly enough, and they do not give us the MA tech or even attack us! d7 is saying it HIMSELF!
ok, that was my rant. if you only want to see the good in everything all the time, you are in danger to miss the most important part...
did you realize that they intend to found ANOTHER CHANNEL TOWN, except the town by the fish they already founded now???
you can derive that clearly from the 2nd chat! they probably want to have OUR channel position there as well.
when we had discussed this, it was clear to me that their position will be 1n of the lake. now they want to settle on our side - no way.
either way, they are wasting the fish north of that area.
his post is from 9th april. long time ago.
sorry, i cannot seem to follow your logic today...
in a game that is set up to last years, the deals, discussions and proposals from last month do not mean anything???
we should really try to have our discussions a bit more based on facts here. or else i have to take down the seriousness i put into my analyses one or two notches.
not much has changed in the situation from last month. in the meantime they only have offered us a land tile calculation WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THEIR LANDS, NOR OUR LANDS!!! in real life, this would add fraud to the blackmailing accusation in a trial.
around 9th april we have bad conservations with anarchos. we had some misunderstandings and mental reservation on both sides at this time.
u don´t know if d7 have the same opions now.
on 9th april i didn´t wanted an an alliance with anarchos and now i change my opinion.
I noticed you did. But this did not change any FACTS about the relationship of Anarchie and us. Only your OPINION about it has changed.
We need to differ between these things.
Most of what looks positive now is the simple fact that I WENT OVER TO THEIR FORUM AND POSTED SOME NICE COMMENTS. And to those they replied, sometimes, as if we were good old or happy new friends.
By content, little has changed. And the little that has, like them settling just anywhere north of the lake, or researching just anything they want, is more than a counterweight for a few nice words in my books and on my account.
Yes, the facts have not changed since last month. And the facts as I see them still are:
The Anarchos are
good enough to give us a serious advantage over the other continent
not good enough to be a serious threat later on (when their Hoplite has expired).
What d7 says or thinks or whether he changed his opinions compared to a month ago is completely irrelevant... You are putting much too much emotions into this. You still want to "punish" them for hurting your feelings, and this is always a bad advisor. Especially if the time is not yet ripe for that. And it looks like this blurs your strategic eye.
I do hope, we did not wait too long now. We should have finalized&signed that alliance deal a week ago, when we had a very nice atmosphere because of the chats. Now we have again delayed everything so much that suspicions might again rise (good that we had the Caffee and a view nice posts like the foreign information and the exchange about speeding up Rep/Lit and allowing them their cheap-tech shots).
And don't make the Eagles stronger than they are. Without Rep they won't have the necessary production/commerce for producing/upgrading both, defensive units and enough navy to hinder our war against the Küche. And if they already have a DoW from the Anarchos, they will think more than twice before declaring on us... and if they do, we take the welcome WH and first concentrate on eliminating them together with the Anarchos, and keep peace with the Küche. There are many possibilities here, which depend on the situation and will have to be improvised. But general strategy tells me that two early Republics must be much stronger than two nations which had 20 turns more despotism (and also a longer anarchy due to their more towns at the point of revolution).
In any case, there is not much risk here. Once we have reached the MA, we can still decide what to do. The advantage over the other continent is still there, even if we decide not to attack there. And once we have appropriate weapons, we can still decide whether we want to try an attack on the anarchos (if that appears easier than an invasion on the other continent). From a position of strength, there are many options, and we'll have the luxury of picking the one that looks most promising.
But in the way that you propose, there is a high risk that we won't even achieve that position of strength!
- Rep is known early to 3 out of 4 and the risk is high that it'll find it's way to the Küche as well. And if not, it might be bad for us as well, as the Küche will be the weakest civ in the game, and it's obvious, who will benefit most from that...
- Our "double-play" is likely to be discovered by one of the betrayed partners, and we might easily end up getting neither the MA tech from the Anarchos nor the one from the Eagles...
Too many parameters that we don't have under control. I still maintain that taking the tight cooperation with the Anarchos is the best strategic option we have, and it will lead to a clear advantage over at least two other nations in this world. How we want to convert that advantage can still be decided when we get to that point.
There's a slight risk that the Anarchos want to cheat us and not give their MA tech, but in this case we get WH and can afford to grind them down in a slow war, paying one (or both) of the other nations with techs for helping us against the "agressor".
For once, Lanzelot, I have to answer you clearly:
To put it plain, it is a joke when you say that *I* am reacting emotional and my view is blurry. And given that I obviously can still count, and put this ability to good use for the sake of the team, scratching together numbers and posting evaluations of *every* strategy that I can think of, both of which I have not seen from you yet, so to get a view on what is REALLY possible and what is not, I honestly expect you to take that back and eventually calm yourself again.
Since I have not seen your timelines, your figures, your shield counts on any strategic path you have suggested, you obviously and repeatedly confuse "who someone likes" with his ability to make a strategic analysis. Since you yourself are so pre-determined that we should ally with the Anarchie (under the strangest conditions I have ever heard of), you have been so blinded that you even already for several occasions acted against the majority, thinking that "you are right" at heart.
I do not believe that you are right, but I always listened to your arguments (even though they seem quite repetitive). I even had your back when you had surpassed the majority´s wish, because I granted you the straightforwardness of your thinking and actions. Which does not mean that I approve of it.
However, now you are posting the ultimate killer argument, calling someone who advocates another opinion "emotional", which is simply cheap and way under your standard. I must say, despite all my sympathy for you personally, that you are more and more acting obsessive over your diplomatic approach.
As for the functioning of the further game as a team, I would therefore suggest that firstly we will have another vote on how to proceed after we get a reply from the Eagles. Between then and our Republic "gift" we need to get our then set strategy into action. Secondly I ask you Lanzelot to clearly state whether you can make sure no one here may confuse you, as our emissary with the Anarchos, with their advocate.
btw, just to let you know. until tomorrow i should be able to have another proposal together for the Anarchie, if anyone except me wants to try to get another deal with them, in case we want to.
I noticed that Ulrich did not reply to my comments at all, also write very little recently in
Embassy Anarchie - Brotherhood forum. Discussion about situation goes on German, and to be honest nothing important discussed there.
Important decisions come via PMs Lanzelot - d7. Needless to say that I consider this as "out of spirit of team game".
At the same time "formal staff" about agreement BH-AN still hidden (at least for me).
As I wrote, no English version of Alliance agreement exists, and in spite of we are going to give Republic soon there is no any trace that WE know how we will coexist with Anarhos during this period. Although I and t-x sure that they will not be friendly (or useful) for us, it is still big probability that Eagles decline our offer and we must rely on Anarhos as a research partner.
No matter what they say (I ignore this rubbish) their actions and intentions are not good (or at least not good for us). Remember, they promised MM for CoL, then they change their mind and offer Lit, after they promised to research Math and took Masonry but start saying about "slow down" research and research something else... Where the contract for that??
They still did not reply about on what basis we can trade with another continent. When we will get gpt payment for technology we researched for them. Will they pay for our maps. They carry out aggressive settlement.
I must say (and hope that majority will support me) that before we manage to create joined research plan they should not get Philo and CoL for Lit, and before we create a document how we coexists during AA they will not get Republic. If Alliance will be good enough for us it will be no need to "betray them". If it will be "slightly not good" we will slightly cheating. If it will be 100% rubbish we either will not sign it or sign and ignore it providing "stories".
I hope timescale clear now...
EDIT: Cross-posted with t-x. Basically I agree what he wrote.
All this belongs into the "General Strategy" thread, so I will continue the discussion over there.
Separate names with a comma.