Diplomacy with the Eagles

[Lanzelot]

Just send them the truth: that we had a deal "Rep for MA tech", but we broke it because their behavior was rude and unacceptable to us.
Any lies would not get us very far. (I think, it was already "borderline" to tell them we bought Literature at high cost just for the planned "MM - Lit" deal that never came about. Not a good way to build up a reputation...)

 

[templar_x]

wb Lanzelot.

i replied that way.

however, i do not see that the Eagles can be our judges, or anyone.

there is nothing in our dealings with them where *we* were officially the bad ones:
- Cyc spoiled info first when we met, and spoke a lot of nonsense he never apologized for.
- They broke the deal MM-Lit, whatever we may have said about Lit. (To them it must have looked like we paid CoL and Philo for it.) Whatever they are interpreting now, it was clear that this deal was settled for that moment, and not under the condition that another deal will happen.
- They are taking days to talk to our enemies between their posts to us.

Thinking about it, I probably do not trust them anymore either. Playing alone for now, and let the others make their experiences with each other, may be wiser now.

templar_x

 

[I. Larkin]

Post of t-x a bit obscure, but it is OK. If Cyc will ask again, Lanzelot may reply.

that we had a Preliminary agreed deal "Rep for MA tech", but we did not enter to it because their behavior was rude and unacceptable to us. We can't give very big credit before they return small one.
----------------------
Any lies would not get us very far. (I think, it was already "borderline" to tell them we bought Literature at high cost just for the planned "MM - Lit" deal that never came about. Not a good way to build up a reputation...)

In fact "steep price" was our risk of the agreement with Anarhos. Or our partially broken reputation.

Anyway, post of Cyc indicate 2 things:
1) They had some plan with Anarhos like I describe in post #161
2) They do not trust 100% to DK.

We may try to use it. We may offer Republic to Eagles alone and see reaction.

 

[Memento]

Playing alone for now, and let the others make their experiences with each other, may be wiser now.

all diplo is for the popo

 

[templar_x]

Ivan hit the nail with 1) and 2). it is obvious in my eyes, and even strange that Cyc lets us know so openly. because i do not believe that he MEANS to let us know. (Cycs language is strange to me anyways, where does he come from?)

honestly, it is none of the Eagles´ business why in detail we are having arguments with the Anarchie. we offered a deal where we pay first. obviously the Anarchie gives them a long story about it, but i think we should keep our info, whatever we want to say, short. they have no real "right" to ask for it in my eyes, and we should not again lt a one-sided diplo and arrogance like with the Anarchie develop.

they are talking WAY too long, i think we must assume that there is a conspiracy running that includes the Anarchie. maybe better to stay the only one with Republic. I could seriously imagine that the others will give Rep to Anarchie and argue that this is "due to fairness, because the KBH has not kept their deal with them". or sth like that. really, let us play alone and let the others learn to know each other. they will find out.

templar_x

 

[I. Larkin]

Cycs language is strange to me anyways, where does he come from?

Probably he is "native speaker"...

they have no real "right" to ask for it

Sure, but if we step by step come to "normal business" like we might had with Calis (Rep for MM) We may use in exchange to information of their relations with DK.

maybe better to stay the only one with Republic

I also have this feeling, but we must demonstrate that we are "open for good deasl".

Playing alone for now, and let the others make their experiences with each other, may be wiser now.
all diplo is for the popo

We must use opportunities to break in. Their alliance can not be solid. (Cyc, justanic and d7 in one pot: just imagine...).
First we may send a note to DK asking: "what about our proposal? We got some reply from Cyc, but it is not clear what they up to..."

 

[templar_x]

i agree with everything Ivan says.
we should show openess, but stay a bit private for now, and when the others find out that their partners are killing their nerves (like us with the Anarchie) we are there to be the better alternative.

t_x

 

[Memento]

but we must demonstrate that we are "open for good deasl".

i think the others must demonstrate it.

(Cyc, justanic and d7 in one pot: just imagine...).

frustation in all teams

 

[Lanzelot]

But nothing? Is this diplo craziness I am experiencing here normal in PBEM games? Then I know why i never went there. I really learn to appreciate the stubborness of the AI here.

Most of you are playing such games, is this normal to you (i mean the whole diplo situation altogether) or is it as mad as it seems to me?

templar_x

I've never experienced anything like this in my normal PBEM games. I play PBEM, because I like the richness of the diplo aspect, and in all games so far I had very good and fair diplo relations. Of course there are occasional "betrayals" or switching sides, but that's part of the game and usually not taken personal. (In fact, a certain player may be my fiercest enemy in one game, and my best friend in another game. These things don't carry over between different games. The only thing that I do carry over to other games is some kind of "general reputation". I.e. I know whom I can trust to always keep his deals, and with whom I need to be a bit careful and prepare for the case of a possible betrayal.)

Probably all 4 teams have the same problem: too many people with too many opinions and no team manages to find a clear consistent line...

 

[templar_x]

should we tell them now that of course our Rep-trade includes the clause that both of them are not obliged to trade the tech to anyone else? i mean, that should be clear due to their anti-continental agreement vs our turf. but what else should the Eagles and the Anarchie be talking about for so long?

or should we simply limit our offer to a certain point of time?

and i agree, we should directly address the Küche, whether they are aware that the Eagles are kind of negotiating for both of them, and that we cannot know since they never reply. would you do that, i you also agree, Lanzelot?

templar_x

 

[Lanzelot]

Probably he is "native speaker"...

(In fact he is.)

I agree with what you others already said: let's keep silent for now, we have wasted enough words (and time) already. If Eagles/Küche come up with a good deal for us, we take it, otherwise we play solo for some time.

But in this case we should not try to become tech leader. Let's rather do slipstream research and always research something that at least two others know already.
(For the next 8 turns, the remaining first tier techs should be good guesses. Then MM, when the other continent has it.)

 

[Lanzelot]

should we tell them now that of course our Rep-trade includes the clause that both of them are not obliged to trade the tech to anyone else? i mean, that should be clear due to their anti-continental agreement vs our turf. but what else should the Eagles and the Anarchie be talking about for so long?

or should we simply limit our offer to a certain point of time?

I think I could add a little explanation to your last post in the Eagles thread, giving a few more details about our Rep deal with the Anarchos as Cyc asked. (Because, to be honest: I did not quite understand what you have been trying to say in that post either... Must have been Austrian-English... )

and i agree, we should directly address the Küche, whether they are aware that the Eagles are kind of negotiating for both of them, and that we cannot know since they never reply. would you do that, i you also agree, Lanzelot?

templar_x

I can do that.

 

[templar_x]

You are wrong and Ivan was right: the post was "obscure", not Austrian-English. And Cyc whined over the post before that.

Of course i wrote it deliberately like that. I even changed it several times to say everything and nothing.

t_x

 

[templar_x]

I only now saw that Cyc answered again. His post is full of arrogance (as are many of his posts, with everyone).

I think we have 3 options:
+ ignore it
+ reply "We did not feel that we had a status that needs improvement. In fact, the only thing that ever really stood between our nations was that you cried for war the moment we had met, and spoiled information that was not supposed to be available to anyone, and never apologized for that."
+ reply "We have grown so tired of that kind of diplomacy already with the Anarchie that we for now will withdraw the offer to make such a beneficial trade. What you are doing here has little to do with diplomacy, or at least with diplomacy *with us*. Our nations may find together in a later era, when you have learnt a bit more about how this world and the real status of its inhabitants that you believe you know so well really are."

I like the third best, or just something like that. Like we said, let us withdraw for now and leave open that we will be open for talks when everyone becomes more sensible again.

templar_x

 

[I. Larkin]

The only sensible thing here is to ask Calis by E-mail what Cyc's post(s) mean? And how it is related to "previous negotiation" (with Calis)? And what do you (Calis) think about our proposal?

 

[Lanzelot]

Of course i wrote it deliberately like that. I even changed it several times to say everything and nothing.

t_x

Honestly, I must say I agree completely with Cyc here. Obviously the Anarchos told them something about that we broke a Rep-deal we had with them. So naturally the Eagles are trying to hear "our side of the story", so they can decide, whether they can trust us. (Also, their earlier experience with us, where we almost agreed to an alliance and then retreated at the last moment, was not exactly trust-inspiring either.) And what do they get? This "obscure" wishy-washy answer that says nothing. In fact it rather looks like we indeed did something bad and are trying to hide it. If I were in their place, I wouldn't do business with us either...

I knew that such a reaction like Cyc's was coming, that's why I, once I read your post, offered to "improve" that post and give the requested details. Well, I guess now it's too late.

Honestly, this is not my kind of diplomacy. I like clear and open facts, and I can't understand, why we need to obscure anything. Do whatever you like, but believe me: the way we behave in this game, we will never find a friend. So far we managed to annoy the Anarchos as well as the Eagles team.

 

[templar_x]

Really, make up your mind! Before you Left for holiday you Said something totally different. But there is a Pattern: every Time you seem to make a Tough decision in the Team, the Day After you seem to Change your mind and want to go back into Love and Peace Mode and are Fully understanding the other's Point of View.

It should be obvious by now that i do Not esteem your Concept As diplomacy at all. Whatever the others are doing, No matter who is right or Strong or wrong or weak, always Mr nice Guy May Be your character but is surely No diplomacy. In fact, i believe that us Never haing Said stop, so far and No step further, Killed our Chances more than anything Else. If you always smile Whatever the others Throw at you, they will always dEmand more, and Even Claim you are the aggressor when u finally refuse to Gift them our Capital. Exactly what we are seeing here. And After we got the Anarchie there you want to repeat it with the eagles????

Well then, go ahead. You like Cycs Diplo and reasoning? I hate it, He Sounds like d7.
We Said we rather pull back, so Why should i have offered Details??? We offered a deal where we Pay in Advance, so where is the Logic that we have to strip our criminal Records??? And Why don't you finally want to Tell Anyone what is bis Business and what is an unfair Demand?

Of course i realize, from those VERY BAD ( since we are talkng about it) posts at the Anarchie Forum, that this in fact is Not Diplo u are Making here but trying to Save your sp Honor and Reputation. Sorry, but this is incredible in a Team Game. Going there and saying, well Yes our Team was mean, but He and He were against it anyway. And Even if you did Not mean to say that, No One can understand that differently.
And Even here incosistence: our line was that they Broke the Deals and Diplo. And we are right. Sure they Become technical now, and try to Cover their threats with formal breaches by us, but you don't emphasize what incredible Nonsense their Arguments are, but work on separating a sp's Reputation from the Team Reputation. That is the worst Argument that you could have raised against our Case!!!!!!! Cant you See that?

Enough, this is too frustrating. You can Be the Diplo Imperator from now on, i No Longer Care.

T_x

 

[Memento]

but trying to Save your sp Honor and Reputation. Sorry, but this is incredible in a Team Game.Going there and saying, well Yes our Team was mean, but He and He were against it anyway. And Even if you did Not mean to say that, No One can understand that differently.
And Even here incosistence: our line was that they Broke the Deals and Diplo. And we are right. Sure they Become technical now, and try to Cover their threats with formal breaches by us, but you don't emphasize what incredible Nonsense their Arguments are, but work on separating a sp's Reputation from the Team Reputation.

I don´t think that Lanzelot will save his Reputation, i think it was more my reputation.
(meant nice, but not necessary. )

Obviously the Anarchos told them something about that we broke a Rep-deal we had with them. So naturally the Eagles are trying to hear "our side of the story", so they can decide, whether they can trust us.

I see the same as templar. if they don´t trust us, they must make their own experiences with d7 & co. It is not our task to refute anarchos story.

 

[templar_x]

I don´t think that Lanzelot will save his Reputation, i think it was more my reputation.
(meant nice, but not necessary. )

yours, his. that is why i kept that sentence neutral. i assume both, but both is a) not ok in a team game (sorry, you have to stick with the rest of us ego shooters ) and b) diplomatically stupid, as contradictory to what we just said.

templar_x

 

[templar_x]

we still should reply, my proposal:

We did not feel that we had a status that needs improvement. If that is what you had wanted to ask for (you did not, you asked about "the Republic trade"), we would have replied that we do not see what our controversies with the Anarchie have to do with the current trade.

Firstly, the trade we are talking about has us give our contribution first, to gain your contributions mostly in the future (for one part immediately, for another in the rather distant future). So if you are actually asking a reputation question, you should in our eyes explain why you think that you need that information. Again, not that there is anything to hide, but since we are not looking for a judge there are not reasons to lay everything open neither.

Secondly, in case we talk about reputation from former deals between our tribes we are surprised to hear exactly you sound so critical. In fact, the only thing that ever really stood between our nations was that you cried for war the moment we had met, and spoiled information that was not supposed to be available to anyone, and never apologized for that. We did not bring that up again, and *Calis* did apologize for it. The only other thing is that you were delivering very technical arguments to why a certainly intended MM-Lit deal should not be executed. That was between Eagles and KBH! So if we are not bringing this up, please really, explain it to us, why would we have to justify any of our deals with the Anarchie? - You can expect us to have our version of the story of the KBH-Anarchie relationship, but if from such a, for you, abstract reason you want to abstain from trading, that is ok for us if you find that is a good reason. Just let us know. And if you want to engage with the Anarchie in further negotiations yourself, then we are convinced that you will find our all by yourself very soon, why what we esteem a useful diplomacy did not work out with them.

or sth like that. someone can change whatever he wants, but we should once get something posted. if we doubt the real chances of a true deal currently anyway, this is a good chance to politely state how we are seeing diplomacy on an even level.

templar_x