Embaixada da Kazakhstan

oyzar · Jan 15, 2009

Here we post all dealings with Kazakhstan.
This is our current treaty with them:

The Treaty of the True Triple Alliance (TTA):

§0. Treaty Duration and cancellation terms

* This treaty will last indefinitely, and can only be canceled by written notice 20 turns in advance.
* Such notice to cancel the treaty can not be given before the year 800 AD (turn 150).

§1. Peace and Non-Aggression

* The peoples of Cavaleiros, Kazakhstan and Mad Scientists agree to take no hostile action of any kind towards members of the alliance.

§2. Open Borders

* The peoples of Cavaleiros, Kazakhstan and Mad Scientists agree to open borders with each other, to allow the free passage of units and merchants alike.
* This state of Open Borders will be effective immediately, on all sides, from the signature of this treaty.
* This will be handled via a formal Open Borders agreement when possible, once Writing is commonly known within the alliance. If passage is needed before that time, it will be handled through a phony state of war.

§3. Mutual Technological Advancement

* The peoples of Cavaleiros, Kazakhstan and Mad Scientists agree to form an Exclusive Tech Alliance (ETA). No member of the ETA will buy, sell or trade technologies with a civ/team outside the ETA without the consent of the other two ETA members.

* The peoples of Cavaleiros, Kazakhstan and Mad Scientists agree to cooperate on the advancement of knowledge, initially to achieve the
following technology goals and trades as soon as possible:
- Team Mad Scientists to give Sailing, Iron Working and Polytheism
- Team Cavaleiros to give Meditation, Priesthood and Monarchy
- Team Kazakhstan to give Hunting, Animal Husbandry, Writing and Alphabet

* Members agree to carry out research at the highest sustainable speed, with no stockpiling of gold beyond that reasonably needed to deal with adverse events.
* Exceptions to the advancement plan at any point in time may be given in a state of emergency, or in the case of an urgent domestic need.
* If any member of the alliance wishes to invoke such an exception, it must notify the other two alliance members of its intent and reasons for the deviation.
* Upon completion of any technology goal by any people, the technology will be traded to the other two peoples as quickly as possible, after Alphabet is common knowledge.

* All members agree that mutual technological advancement will continue beyond the completion of the immediate technology goals, but that plans for the future technology goals are to be negotiated continuously at later points, as addendums to this treaty.
* All members agree that a cooperative spirit is more important in such an alliance than strict adherence to minute advantage to the own team.

§4. Resources

* The peoples of Cavaleiros, Kazakhstan and Mad Scientists agree that in the case that any alliance member has a spare resource to trade, they will first try to negotiate a trade with the one of the other peoples of this treaty.
Only if no such deal is possible will the people consider trading that resource to another people.

§5. Religion

* The peoples of Cavaleiros and Mad Scientists recognize the wishes and needs of the people of Kazakhstan for a religion, and will agree to let Kazakhstan have priority for researching any technology that leads to a religion, until they have managed to found one.

oyzar · Jan 15, 2009

Spoiler Convo with Mars(Kazakstan ambassador) :

oyzar · Jan 15, 2009

and an official letter from them:

Spoiler letter :

Niklas · Jan 15, 2009

This is really good news, and a superb payback from our investment in an early scouting boat. Some random thoughts that stand out to me:

* They haven't met anyone else. Mars/Provolution makes that pretty clear when he comments how clever we were to scout with a workboat ("you being so ingenious to scout with a work boat, very clever, speaks volumes"), and how fortunate our two teams are to have met so early ("I also think we can make this an opportunity to cooperate well [...] as we have actually met this early"). The fact that they have EP only against us is only confirmation.
* Considering the route we believe (or rather, are quite certain that) they have taken tech-wise, they may possibly be the best possible team for us to meet at this point. They seem to be headed for Writing (just researched AH, researching Pottery now), and I doubt it would take much coercion to get them to go for an early Alphabet. They already hint that they want to trade techs ("Working together would make us not only stronger but more knowledgeable as well.")
* We definitely want to tie them into a tech alliance before they meet anyone else. This tech alliance should have a hole in it for a future third part that we select together. We need to stress this in our communications with them. We may currently be the stronger two teams, but two cannot stand up against three in the long run (unless they are already bigger economically than the others combined).

Need to go to bed now, more thoughts in the morning.

oyzar · Jan 16, 2009

I certainly agree. Nap, roadmap to tech choices and intelligence needs to be shared for this to work out...

TheMeInTeam · Jan 16, 2009

NAP and tradewhoring. It's better if people trust us for now. Trust us and hopefully we seem inconvenient targets if possible. If we're thinking of betrayal (ours or theirs) it will have to wait until feasible at least.

In games like this, mini-alliances usually win out. If they're a strong team as others are saying, we could pretty useful as a screw-others alliance. Especially if we betray another group or civ as a team.

oyzar · Jan 16, 2009

Spoiler Yet more chats with provolution :

TheMeInTeam · Jan 16, 2009

Hmmmmmm, I'm kind of in wait and see with this. Obviously I'm in favor of swapping monarchy for the alphabet line. That team is lallygagging though. Annoying.

Renata · Jan 16, 2009

I think we need some guidelines on what we're giving out ourselves ... :shifty:

Diamondeye · Jan 16, 2009

Revealing that we are going for Monarchy with Oyzar on our team is not really anything special, Renata. Besides, I think Oy wanted to scare them with what info we have on them due to our demographic-analysis.

On a not entirely related topic, can you send me Provolutions msn, Oyzar? Would be nice. I played in the DemoGame III with him, by the way...

oyzar · Jan 17, 2009

Another letter from them. Seems like they are not acting entierly in accordance with our wishes...

Spoiler letter 2 from Kazakhstan :

Also had some more chats with mars:

Spoiler more chatlog with mars :

Empiremaker · Jan 17, 2009

Good job with the Diplo. Couple of comments. First, I think it will be easier to have separate threads for each team rather than have all the conversations jumbled here. Also, if we can meet another team soon from our other workboat, a long term alliance with Kazakstan might not be so beneficial given how difficult they are to work with. If they fail to find a partner and the game becomes 2v2v1, they would be a tempting target.

Niklas · Jan 17, 2009

Sigh. Seems we have to do some very slow and patient explaining to them about the value of cooperation. Preferably in a wording that strengthens their cooperative faction and makes the paranoid faction look foolish. I've started on a draft.

Renata · Jan 17, 2009

Good God. *headshake*

I'm having a bad 24 hours.

oyzar · Jan 17, 2009

I think we need to hold a vote on wether we want to accept their conditions or not though...

Renata · Jan 17, 2009

Set up a poll, I guess. I'm not inclined to agree to them, to be honest, at least not before Niklas has had a go at them and we see if that works.

Niklas · Jan 17, 2009

No need to be rash and set up a poll before we discuss our options. I'll have a draft coming up shortly.

Renata · Jan 17, 2009

I wonder if the point of the border closure is to get a workboat of their own out to the east ahead of ours? Though I'm sure they could have managed it anyway if they wanted to; it's still about three turns before we even get there.

Edit: oh, and I love Mars acting like their telling us how far away their capital is is such a big concession, considering we were going to get there anyway in a handful of turns, whereas it's a huge IF as to whether their warriors will ever even find ours ...

Niklas · Jan 17, 2009

Here is the note I propose we send to them, via email:

Dear Team Kazakhstan,

surely you have heard your wise men say to you what ours say to us. That in a world where discoveries can flow freely between people {Tech Trading On}, a lone people cannot hope to compete with two people that cooperate, nor can two cooperating people hope to compete with three people that cooperate. It is simple arit... eh, counting of beads in a bowl. And in accordance, from the beginning of time, this has been the task we have set ourselves, to find not one but two other like-minded people with whom we could face the future together. Any other people would naturally be left in the dust, for such is the way of this world.

So when your warriors hailed us from the shore we were delighted, de-LIGHT-ed, to find a kindred civilized people in the world. When the first pigeons returned to Olho Serpentem, there were celebrations in the streets, for those were truly marvellous news. We had made contact with a people like us, a strong, proud and inquisitive nation. A people with a will to look forward in the world and embrace a glorious future, in cooperation with us, so that we together could soar above and beyond the other people that surely must exist in this world. A civilized people who would know the words of the wise men for truth, and would be eager to join in beneficial cooperation, live in mutual peace and prosperity, and aid in the search of a third people to share our future with.

But then the marvellously good news began to mix with strange discordant notes. At first only minor things. Your people needed some time to think, where our intrepid sailors already had the relevant policies brought with them from before they set sail. You could not give any information that could be beneficial to all of us, despite us being open and sharing our own goals and thoughts. And you insisted on slower communications {no IM but email} despite the seasons turning fast {you didn't even pause your play!}.

But we were patient {most of us anyway}, and we waited, for surely you would know the wisdom of cooperation, and it was just a matter of bureau... eh, lengthy discussion that would in the end reach a fruitful conclusion. So when your formal note finally arrived, we eagerly opened it, only to be highly disappointed - nay, shocked! - at its highly uncooperative contents. These were not the words of the wise men that we expected to see, they were the words of the rash, hot-headed and paranoid young men that always share the camp fires, always calling for antagonistic action. Whereas the cooler, wiser heads nod sagely to each other and disregard the foolish words of those who do not yet know the full ways of the world, those who believe they alone can take on the world and do not need to rely on others.

To be precise - your insistance that we do not sail past your lands can only be interpreted as two things. First and foremost it speaks of a fear, a fear that we would abuse any knowledge we gain of the lay of your lands. While this could be understandable among wary neighbors, it should not be so between two people that have agreed to cooperate in full. It speaks only of distrust and discord, where we seek openness, friendship and cooperation. We would understand that you would not let just anyone pass, but we do not wish to be just anyone to you, which we have tried to make very clear. We would obviously allow you the same concessions, and agree to work with you in the fullest to ensure your feeling of security. But also from a practical point of view, your strange and discordant wish is directly at odds with the grand mission we have set ourselves, to find not only one but two people with which to share this bright future, a future you would be included in.

So to conclude, we are truly disheartened to hear your reply, for we certainly have nothing but honorable intentions. But if you do not share our bright vision of the future, and prefer to live in darkness and fear, we will lament the loss of a golden opportunity for both our people, but we will not give up our vision. We still hope, with all our hearts, that you will cast off the shroud of mistrust and heed not the young and rash but the old and wise among you. Then we can set our sails together and ride the wind into the unknown glorious future.

With our most sincere hopes and wishes for a strong cooperation,
Niklas, speaking with the (more patient) voice of Team Cavaleiros

Niklas · Jan 17, 2009

I just sent this quick note to their email:

Greetings Team Kazakhstan,

this is just a quick formal note asking you to hold the save as long as possible until our discussions can reach a conclusion. We will send a formal reply to your note as soon as the team has agreed to what to reply. We promise to keep the discussions quick so as not to keep you waiting.

Thank you for understanding,

Team Cavaleiros

And we got a quick note back:

Greetings, thank you for your response. We will hold our turn as long as we can in order to give you time to formulate your response, that's fine.

When sending communiques shall we also agree to sign up with the name of the person sending the actual message?

Team Kazakhstan

... to which I replied:

Greetings again, and thank you for understanding. Signing with a name
certainly sounds like a good idea, and we will do that in the future.

Niklas dos Cavaleiros (who also sent the last note)

Embaixada da Kazakhstan

Have quit civ/forums

Have quit civ/forums

Have quit civ/forums

Fully Functional

Have quit civ/forums

If A implies B...

Have quit civ/forums

If A implies B...

homicidal jungle cat

So Happy I Could Die

Have quit civ/forums

Human Fish

Fully Functional

homicidal jungle cat

Have quit civ/forums

homicidal jungle cat

Fully Functional

homicidal jungle cat

Fully Functional

Fully Functional

Similar threads