Daghdha
Absent Minded
I will try to keep this brief but will likely fail 
When going to table, what do we want? I do not mean "pieces" here like chamnix, but what do we want to build as a big picture? At the moment I see three options (fill me in):
1. We go for an honest co-op with MIA. We decide wether to trick others or not based on this alliance. We share as much as possible with MIA so to focus on our shared continent as a power house. We then direct that power overseas in a joint campaign and duke it out v/s MIA when TNT/Nuts are ditched. This scenario is built on mutual trust. For now trust is a weak thing which was demonstrated clearly in our meeting. We should think up ways of showing our trust in them but also how to make them do the same. The sooner this can be accompished, the bigger advantage we will have towards others. If we dance around long enough, TNT and Nuts will (maybe) leave us behind copying our strat. If KISS and MIA can agree on how to handle Nuts and TNT, we will be huge. I would be reluctant to spell this scenario out for them but wait some to get them propose it themselves. I think we have pointed in a direction already.
2. We will two-time anyone when we feel appropriate. This is the bad guy way and will rely solely on military power. Opponents will soon enough turn against us and question is how we can become so stong that they don't dogpile us. They will be tempted to ally against us, especially when they notice we focus on arms. In this scenario the greek connection will maintain the greedy flavour.
3. Wing it. We have no long term strat, but take it as it comes. This is a flexible and possibly laid back style that suits anarchists but I don't think it will hold over time.
Please add more options and then let's vote on it. I think it will make it a lot more easy to handle contacts if this is somewhat clear within KISS.
Theese scenarios/strats can of course be layed out in much more detail but the reason for me babbling about it is I think we would gain on deciding which way to go in general. I favour the first one as you might have guessed
.
I agree w Whomps when it comes to "how to win". I want us to be dependable and fair and back that up with strenght (cliché alarm
). Not devious dealbreakers, short changeing neighbours and bickering about gold pieces. Everybody knows that, in the end, hell will break loose and friends will turn to foes, but I believe that can be done in different ways.
If we show trust in MIA and they fool us, I will fight for revenge until game over and I will feel great about our team, no matter the outcome. If they don't fool us, I believe we will win this game.
When we meet the Greeks nxt time I propose we demonstrate trust in them first and foremost. If that is a success future neg's will go much smoother and the continent will start ticking nicely. I'm not sure about how this should be done (I'm but a mere blind rat remember
). Is it dog gone stupid to gift them one small town for one turn and then have them gifting it back the next? What else can we come up with that could facilitate this trust buissness?
I also propose we assign smaller groups of Kissers to work out the following:
-Mutual research plan. I would set Bugsy and Pentium as chairmen of this board.
-Mutual plan on how to handle future (soon to be) contacts w Nuts/TNT. This assumes they speak straight and true about not having met any yet.
-Agreement on how to handle the rex era. We want free hands in settling all over the place and they know we will out-rex them. Can we sooth their worries about that w/o giving away our edge?
-A proposal to MIA on how to handle future negotiations regarding logistics, participants etc. Barbu, gma?
Bummer...I'm an anarchist pushing for "dicussion-groups", pathetic indeed.
I just want to add that pretending to be a big plan maker is loads of fun but still just pretending. In RL I'm not at all like this.....trust me....please
When going to table, what do we want? I do not mean "pieces" here like chamnix, but what do we want to build as a big picture? At the moment I see three options (fill me in):
1. We go for an honest co-op with MIA. We decide wether to trick others or not based on this alliance. We share as much as possible with MIA so to focus on our shared continent as a power house. We then direct that power overseas in a joint campaign and duke it out v/s MIA when TNT/Nuts are ditched. This scenario is built on mutual trust. For now trust is a weak thing which was demonstrated clearly in our meeting. We should think up ways of showing our trust in them but also how to make them do the same. The sooner this can be accompished, the bigger advantage we will have towards others. If we dance around long enough, TNT and Nuts will (maybe) leave us behind copying our strat. If KISS and MIA can agree on how to handle Nuts and TNT, we will be huge. I would be reluctant to spell this scenario out for them but wait some to get them propose it themselves. I think we have pointed in a direction already.
2. We will two-time anyone when we feel appropriate. This is the bad guy way and will rely solely on military power. Opponents will soon enough turn against us and question is how we can become so stong that they don't dogpile us. They will be tempted to ally against us, especially when they notice we focus on arms. In this scenario the greek connection will maintain the greedy flavour.
3. Wing it. We have no long term strat, but take it as it comes. This is a flexible and possibly laid back style that suits anarchists but I don't think it will hold over time.
Please add more options and then let's vote on it. I think it will make it a lot more easy to handle contacts if this is somewhat clear within KISS.
Theese scenarios/strats can of course be layed out in much more detail but the reason for me babbling about it is I think we would gain on deciding which way to go in general. I favour the first one as you might have guessed
.I agree w Whomps when it comes to "how to win". I want us to be dependable and fair and back that up with strenght (cliché alarm
). Not devious dealbreakers, short changeing neighbours and bickering about gold pieces. Everybody knows that, in the end, hell will break loose and friends will turn to foes, but I believe that can be done in different ways.If we show trust in MIA and they fool us, I will fight for revenge until game over and I will feel great about our team, no matter the outcome. If they don't fool us, I believe we will win this game.
When we meet the Greeks nxt time I propose we demonstrate trust in them first and foremost. If that is a success future neg's will go much smoother and the continent will start ticking nicely. I'm not sure about how this should be done (I'm but a mere blind rat remember
). Is it dog gone stupid to gift them one small town for one turn and then have them gifting it back the next? What else can we come up with that could facilitate this trust buissness?I also propose we assign smaller groups of Kissers to work out the following:
-Mutual research plan. I would set Bugsy and Pentium as chairmen of this board.
-Mutual plan on how to handle future (soon to be) contacts w Nuts/TNT. This assumes they speak straight and true about not having met any yet.
-Agreement on how to handle the rex era. We want free hands in settling all over the place and they know we will out-rex them. Can we sooth their worries about that w/o giving away our edge?
-A proposal to MIA on how to handle future negotiations regarding logistics, participants etc. Barbu, gma?
Bummer...I'm an anarchist pushing for "dicussion-groups", pathetic indeed.
I just want to add that pretending to be a big plan maker is loads of fun but still just pretending. In RL I'm not at all like this.....trust me....please
Are you guys nuts? I don't think that we need to prove our trust to them. We showed our's first and they were VERY, VERY reluctant to give us info that we had just told them that we knew. 
)
