Doughnut Files Term 7 - 9

[General_W]

This is really coming together!

I support Peter's suggested change to "unless the balance of power is threatened" – and otherwise, the way Fe wrote it is wonderful.

 

[peter grimes]

General_W's comment has made me realize something. I tend to post only when I have a comment concerning a change. This may result in me coming across as more critical than supportive. But rest assured, if I don't comment it's because I things (letters, decisions, builds, etc.) are going along well.

So, Well Written, Fe!

 

[fe3333au]

OK while I totally agree with the comments made and in no way dismiss them. I think it best to send it as is. The letter does indicate that we are concerned with the actions of KISS and by default any action that effects the balance of power. I prefer at this stage to leave it ambiguous and just express our thoughts as is. Hopefully if Nuts do look at the big picture, they will see for themselves that KISS' aggression is not good for them. If they do not respond it will indicate that they agree with KISS and are very much alligned with our northern neighbours.

I really appreciate the feedback, so please don't get discouraged that I make a decision counter to the advice.

Sent to g-mail ... Title ... Concerns Abroad

To Robi_D, nobody and all Doughnutians

Again, we’d like to thank you for your offer of peace, and for the warm relationship we’ve been able to cultivate over the years. All of us here have grown to love your grapes – and we always value a good friend.

However, to be perfectly honest we were expecting something more substantial than an extended non-aggression agreement. At this stage we see no need to make this official as it is our stance that we will not act aggressively to anyone unless we feel threatened.

Both of our peoples share a common love of peace – and that is what we wish to speak with you about ... We wish to know if you have any concerns about the KISS expansion?

KISS' latest aggressive land-grab has us all a bit worried. While we have no doubt that TNT was in great need of a humbling experience, if KISS comes to dominate the top half of the world, both our empires will be in great peril as the Gallic Idiots look to cement “domination” of this world at both of our expenses.

We understand that you have an active trading relationship with KISS at this stage, but do you not have any concerns about the implications of KISS' rapid expansion and what their ultimate motives may be?

How can our two nations leverage our love of peace in the face of two warlike and bloodthirsty countries in the North?

Your proposal to us stops far short of what is required to keep us both safe against an eventual domination win by the KISS. We would like you to know that we are willing to enter into a mutually beneficial relationship which would assist us both to curtail the dangerous KISS expansion.

You would find us generous friends indeed

Our thoughts involve our two teams forming stronger ties and us making you some very good deals on technology, but it will require you to honestly and critically evaluate your current relationship with KISS.

We hope that we can work together and that you are not determined to cast your lot in with the rampaging KISS. As Winston Churchill observed, it's not a good strategy to feed a crocodile, hoping it will eat you last.


May peace always favour your lands,

Feaurius III
MIA Foreign Minister

 

[peter grimes]

Now that the letter is sent, we should remember what happened in the early stages of trading.

We talked to DNUTs about a trade.
KISS talked to DNUTs about a trade.
DNUTs played us both to their advantage.

We must not let that happen again. We can't make deals so sweet that the benefit to DNUT's game outweighs the advantage we need for our strategy.

 

[General_W]

Can't wait to see what the Nutters say! (Good work Fe!)

Peter makes a good point - but let me just suggest that as long as KISS is hurt, I'm personally ok with Dnuts getting a better deal than we get.

 

[fe3333au]

I totally agree ... we will certainly need to be suspicious of any Nutter correspondence ... and be on guard

 

[General_W]

A Facinating and candid response to our letter...
(to our gmail account)

VERY interesting...

To Feaurius III and the MIA government,

Firstly thank you for your response to our offer. It was open and candid so I will endeavour do the same in addressing it.

You say your government were hoping for something more substantial then a formal non-aggression agreement, in particular I believe you alluded to the prospect of a technological partnership. Our offer is the maximum we can give at this current time, to give more would be contrary to our current international agreements we have in place. Therefore our current offer stands at a 40 turn non-aggression agreement.

That you bring up Winston Churchill's quote is both interesting and amusing given the irony, for it has been MIA not Doughnutia that has been feeding the crocodile. In fact the current predicament we fact is in large part due to your governments actions, not ours. I can almost here you asking "How!?" so I will point it out to you.

Cast your minds back about 40 odd turns. We had just crushed TNT's offensive army and had launched a counter attack. At around the same time KISS informed you that they were not going to renew their non-aggression treaty with you. Your reaction was to dramatically increase your military to the point where it surpassed KISSes and secondly you did a dubious tech trade with TNT (I say dubious given the extreme asymmetry in TNT's favour). This was successful in bring KISS back to the table, and you promptly signed a very long extension to the non-aggression treaty.

These actions changed the face of the game, which in turn has led to the current situation developing. We were in a winning position against TNT, while we were equally behind in terms of technology, economy and expansion compared to KISS and yourself, Militarily we had them on the run. Their offensive was a complete disaster, they barely left the jungle and they lost 13 units to our 3. We had just gone on the counter offensive when your tech deal with TNT went through, suddenly changing the balance of the conflict, as they were now level pegging with you on the technology front, leaving us and KISS for that matter behind, however unlike KISS we did not have the luxury of a developed economy and expansion. This technological leap allowed TNT to switch off their science and upgrade spearmen en mass to pikemen, neutralising our offensive advantage. We were able to still take 2 of their cities but their rapid build up of pikes meant we were in for a hard slog, plus we now had the problem of the technological advantage they held, thus we were forced to the peace table as it was our only viable long term option. We then went about trying to narrow the economic and expansion gap to KISS and you, while at the same time we entered a trading agreement with KISS to try to make up the technological gap to TNT and you. All these new agreements suddenly left the door wide open for this current situation to develop. While KISS steamrolls through TNT territory, the only nation capable of stopping them is currently obliged to sit on its hand and do nothing.

We are asking for a non-aggression agreement so we can free some units and salvage some land from TNT before KISS has it all under there control. It may not be as much as you had hoped for but that all we can offer at the moment.

Robi D
Acting Foreign Minister, Doughnutia

 

[fe3333au]

Well that is interesting indeed.

I don't think it is in our best interest to sign a non-aggression pact with Nuts ... they will gain more from it than us.

In fact it seems that the only thing that stops Nuts joining KISS in the TNT free for all, is the fear of us taking action directly against them.

 

[Chamnix]

Well, it looks like Dnuts want to blame us for screwing up their game plan - let them vent.

I have no regrets regarding the technology trade (except for the misunderstanding with KISS which is an altogether different matter). We did what we had to do primarily to help ourselves - prevent KISS from getting Construction, and get ourselves Construction and Feudalism and closer to Chivalry. If we had known it would also stop the Dnuts advance, then I would have viewed that as an additional perk, whereas obviously they disagree.

Regarding our peace deal with KISS, it may have been a mistake, but it's done. Similarly, their technology/peace deal with KISS (whatever it says) is done.

Dnuts seem equally concerned about KISS' position now, so what do we do about it? We have a peace deal that we won't break, DNuts have a peace/tech deal that they won't break. Dnuts essentially are asking us for permission to attack TNT to "salvage some land before KISS has it all under control", but I don't see how this helps things at all - it doesn't make any sense. Dnuts should have an easier time simply settling instead of attacking. If anyone can give me a reasonable explanation of how forcing TNT to split their troops and having DNuts kill some of them for KISS slows KISS' advance, I'd love to hear it.

We need to start laying the groundwork for a MIANuts alliance against KISS once our respective deals expire. Having a 40-turn non-aggression pact fails to do anything in that direction.

 

[peter grimes]

I agree with Chamnix. Signing the 40-turn Non-Aggression removes any bargaining leverage we have. And, we get nothing in return for it.

Maybe we could counter-offer something less dramatic. Explain that we will maintain a Peace, in blocks of 10 turns, as long as they confine their movements north of the jungle to settlement, and not open aggression.

Of course, we could just say "Thanks for explaining your views, but that doesn't change the fact that KISS is going to run away with the game if we don't act together constructively to stop them". We would go on to say that it's all or nothing: We're not signing any non-aggression deal without a concurrent partnership.

 

[fe3333au]

I propose to send something along these lines

To Robi_D and your fellow Doughnutians

Thank you very much for your reply to our recent communications, you have gained much respect by being so honest and frank.

We understand your concerns behind our military buildup although we disagree with your reasoning and suspect that KISS has somewhat trainted your appraisal. The fact is that we were reacting to a very tense and escallating situation with KISS. Regarding our deal with TNT, this was also a reaction and due primarily to KISS who were already deep in tech negotiations with your northern neighbours. I wonder if this history has been brought to your attention by your 'partners', or is it as I suspect a revelation?

We remain open to any thoughts and ideas you may have regarding the aggressive KISS action and will be happy to discuss in confidence any concerns you may have.

At this stage we decline the offer to make official a non-agression pact, but rest assured that we have proven to all that we are a peaceful nation and that we have no designs to enter into war for war's sake.

Remember that you have a potential ally in us and that you will find that we are generous and usefull to friends.

Regards

Feaurius III
MIA Foreign Offices

 

[Chamnix]

We understand your concerns behind our military buildup

What concerns about what military buildup? They only mentioned our past military buildup to get KISS to the bargaining table. There is no current military buildup, and they aren't concerned.

I don't think we should even mention past happenings - it is a sore spot for them because we (sort of inadvertantly) prevented Dnuts from finishing TNT, and I don't think there is anything we can say that won't irritate them further.

I also think we should be a little more explicit in why we are turning down their proposal. Specifically, we see KISS as a major threat, and Dnuts attacking TNT obviously helps KISS. Dnuts can settle "TNT land" to prevent KISS from getting it, but killing TNT's units helps KISS more than we are comfortable with.

 

[fe3333au]

Concerns expressed by Nuts

Cast your minds back about 40 odd turns. We had just crushed TNT's offensive army and had launched a counter attack. At around the same time KISS informed you that they were not going to renew their non-aggression treaty with you. Your reaction was to dramatically increase your military to the point where it surpassed KISSes and secondly you did a dubious tech trade with TNT (I say dubious given the extreme asymmetry in TNT's favour). This was successful in bring KISS back to the table, and you promptly signed a very long extension to the non-aggression treaty.

I disagree and think it is beneficial to put our case forward.

My reasoning to not be more explicit is that I don't think at this stage it would be a good idea to threaten Nuts against TNT action. I am trying to plant a seed of distrust against KISS and leave it open for Nuts to approach us if they have any worries concerning KISS.

 

[peter grimes]

We will be making a grave error if we simply 'hope' that DNUTs will read between the lines, and come to a not-so-obvious conclusion that MIA will attack DNUT if DNUT attacks TNT.

We must have DNUT believing that we will use our much stronger military to keep DNUT from acting aggressively against TNT. We can sugar coat the language as much as we like, but DNUT must get the message.

Chamnix has it spot-on here:

we should be a little more explicit in why we are turning down their proposal. Specifically, we see KISS as a major threat, and Dnuts attacking TNT obviously helps KISS. Dnuts can settle "TNT land" to prevent KISS from getting it, but killing TNT's units helps KISS more than we are comfortable with.

I completely agree that we should plant seeds of mistrust. But we must not neglect spelling out why KISS will be helped more than anyone else if TNT dies.

 

[Chamnix]

I read that "military buildup" line in Dnut's letter as part of their history lesson and not something they are concerned with now - they are saying we built up military 40 turns ago.

I am trying to plant a seed of distrust against KISS and leave it open for Nuts to approach us if they have any worries concerning KISS.

I think your letter does the opposite. If I were a Doughnut, I would read that letter as MIA is planning to attack Dnuts - why else would MIA turn down a peace deal? As a Doughnut, I would want to solidify my alliance with KISS to prepare for the coming MIA attack.

"Don't worry about our military buildup - we're peaceful really... but no, we won't sign peace with you, and we're going to give no explanation for why not and not offer any alternative." How would you read that?

 

[General_W]

I 100% support the idea of telling the Dnuts exactly what kind of problem we're going to have if they attack TNT.

I did some Major additions to this letter… I hope it helps.
At least, it shows what I'm personally thinking.

To Robi_D and your fellow Doughnutians

Thank you very much for your reply to our recent communications, you have gained much respect by being so honest and frank.

We fully appreciate that our past actions caused considerable harm to your plans for finishing off TNT… and we sincerely regret that consequence of our actions. However - we suspect that KISS has somewhat tainted your full appraisal of the situation.

The fact is that we were reacting to a very tense and escalating situation with KISS. War was all but certain, with KISS even ignoring our pleas for negotiation. We then discovered that KISS was deep in the midst of tech negotiations with TNT already.
I wonder if this history has been brought to your attention by your 'partners', or is it as I suspect a revelation?
The fact is, TNT was on the verge of a similar tech deal with KISS, one that would have caused you equal trouble. The deal we gave TNT was only slightly better – thanks to our Scientific Trait – and was the only way for us to save ourselves.

We understand this will probably always be a sore spot for you – but we hope you can understand that we were only doing what anyone would do in trying to save themselves from a war they weren't yet ready for.
If TNT hadn't gotten era-advancing technology from us, they would have gotten it from KISS. You would be in the same situation, we would be under attack in a brutal war, and KISS would probably be even closer to a domination victory than they are now.

Again, we apologize for wrecking your plans. But now that's in the past and we are optimistic we can move on.

We must tell you, we see KISS as a major threat that is quickly advancing on a "domination" victory in this world. If you attack TNT to "salvage some land" there is no question that this will be a MAJOR boost to KISS's conquest ambitions. This is something we cannot, and will not, stand idly by and watch happen.

Now – we're more than happy to see you busily settle land in the "Sacred Jungle" and claim "TNT land" that way. Perhaps you could even sign a peace deal with TNT that specifically grants you large portions of the Jungle? We would be happy to work alongside you in lobbying TNT… and maybe even contributing some of our gold to help seal that kind of a peace deal between your peoples.

We remain open to any thoughts and ideas you may have regarding the aggressive KISS action and will be happy to discuss in confidence any concerns you may have.

At this stage we decline the offer to make official a non-agression pact, but rest assured that we have proven to all that we are a peaceful nation and that we have no designs to enter into war for war's sake.

Remember that you have a potential ally in us and that you will find that we are generous and useful to friends.

Regards

Feaurius III
MIA Foreign Offices

 

[Chamnix]

Trust General_W to take a note and turn it into a novel...

I still think it is better just not to talk about our past. No matter how many excuses/phony apologies/hypotheticals we give, it won’t help. Have we learned nothing from the slow burn/"you broke our deal" conversations? Just let it drop.

No matter what else is in the letter, if the only conclusion is MIA will not accept peace, then Dnuts will not trust us and will be forced closer to KISS. We need to figure out what it would take for us to sign peace with Dnuts and tell them that we really want to sign peace with them as part of a larger deal. Tech trading seems to be out, but a Dnut/TNT peace must be in. What else?

 

[General_W]

I happen to like novels… thank you very much.

So you're thinking something more like this…
(Only 1 quick paragraph reference to the past, and more focus on how to make a peace deal work)

To Robi_D and your fellow Doughnutians

Thank you very much for your reply to our recent communications, you have gained much respect by being so honest and frank.

We fully appreciate that our past actions caused considerable harm to your plans for finishing off TNT… and we sincerely regret that consequence of our actions. However - we suspect that KISS has somewhat tainted your full appraisal of the situation. (Did you know that before we thwarted them, KISS was negotiating with TNT for a similar tech deal to the one we eventually signed?)

But now that's in the past and we are optimistic we can move on.

We are eager to have a non-agression pact with you – but we must tell you, we see KISS as a major threat that is quickly advancing on a "domination" victory in this world. If you attack TNT to "salvage some land" there is no question that this will be a MAJOR boost to KISS's conquest ambitions. This is something we cannot, and will not, stand idly by and watch happen.

Any treaty we sign with you will have to include a clause that prevents you from aiding KISS by attacking TNT.

(Side Note: we're more than happy to see you busily settle land in the "Sacred Jungle" and claim "TNT land" that way. Perhaps you could even sign a peace deal with TNT that specifically grants you large portions of the Jungle? We would be happy to work alongside you in lobbying TNT… and maybe even contributing some of our gold to help seal that kind of a peace deal between your peoples.)

We are also very open to including some generous technology trading agreements to our non-aggression treaty with you – but you'll have to suggest what you'd like to see, as we don't know the details of your current arrangement with KISS.

Also, please know, we remain open to any thoughts and ideas you may have regarding the aggressive KISS action and will be happy to discuss in confidence any concerns you may have.

Remember that you have a potential ally in us and that you will find that we are generous and useful to friends.

Regards

Feaurius III
MIA Foreign Offices

 

[fe3333au]

Wow ... I won't post yet as I think that there will be more input ... but if this is the way the team wants ... then the message we will send shall be as above.

Let's send them something in 24ish hours which will allow tweeking.

I do think that it is important to present our side ... also do we want to be as threatening with this line

This is something we cannot, and will not, stand idly by and watch happen.

or tone it down

This is something that we would consider as directly supporting KISS' master plan and it would force us to re-evaluate all our international relationships.

I personally don't like the threatening tone ... and I think that it may back fire and result in offending the Nuts which in turn will cement them to KISS ...

But then again it is a team decision ... and together we steer the MIA ship.



PS. Don't forget your mums on Sunday (or is it only mother's day in Australia)

 

[General_W]

I'm ok with toning it down Fe... but I'm not sure your proposal is less threatening.

I'm not sure how we make our stance clear without sounding threatening? Maybe just declining to sign the treaty without a clause protecting TNT will be a threat enough?

P.S. - Yeah, it's Mothers day here in the USA this Sunday also. yaay for Mom!