Foreign Policy and General Diplomacy

[Caledorn]

What made the large alliance so powerful in the last MTDG was tech trading on. Without tech trading on I believe large alliances are no longer as powerful. Obviously we can't be allied and friendly with everyone, and most importantly we cannot be friends with all our neighbours as that will leave us without room for expansion.

Considering this is a toroidal map, we can assume that we have one team around 20 tiles north of us, and one team around 20 tiles east of us. South I am not sure, because of the tundra/ice - the team in that direction may be farther away, or may even be the very team we have north of us (although unlikely considering the map size). My guess is that plako has placed the teams in a 3x3 grid, and considering the tundra south my next guess is that we are in one of the lower parts of that grid (view the map in your heads without considering the wrap, just the flat layout of the map as laid out in the world builder).

So there's some thoughts about alliances, and some speculation about the map from my part that can be taken into consideration when continuing the discussion.

 

[Caledorn]

Oh, and also, just as headsup on what the diplomatic team looks like as far as I know right now - please let us know if any of you have changed your minds:

Diplomats/Ambassadors
Caledorn (RB & Spanish Apolyton) - also Lead Diplomat and responsible for the diplomatic team
Bowsling (UniversCiv & Civfr)
Talonschild (understudy for UCiv & CivFR?)
2metraninja (WPC & Apolyton)
socralynnek (Civilized.de?)

This means, taking the questionmark on Civ.de into account, that we need someone to step up and say that they want to represent us towards Civ.de and CivPlayers. Until someone does step up, they are my responsibility by default. I hope someone can step up soon though, as I would prefer that we do not change who the diplomat is in the early discussions with a team (It's okay to change the diplomat for a team after relations are established properly of course), and there is no reason why one of these two teams can't be the next team we encounter.

Also, those of you who have reported that you wish to do diplomatic work: it is very important that you check the forums on a daily basis (whether that is by physically checking via computer, tapatalk or similar on a phone, or subscribing to the respective diplomatic threads is irrelevant - what's important is that you pay attention to the diplomatic main thread, and the thread(s) for the team(s) you are responsible for in case we encounter them). If you know you're going to be away for some time, then please let us know, so that I'm not left in a situation where I have to send out a message to a newly met team that is supposed to be your responsibility.

 

[Bowsling]

I'm intending to write a quick generic message in French, ready to send very quickly. It is absolutely imperative that we send the first message to both teams. They will assume that all diplomacy in this game will be done in English, apart from with each other. If we don't send them a message almost immediately, they will send us a greeting in English, and our advantage of doing diplomacy in French will be lost forever.

I will make these messages sufficiently generic and up-to-date that anyone can send whenever we meet either team. I hope you guys will forgive me if I send a greeting without much approval from the team. It is just so important to get the first message sent ASAP.

 

[Caledorn]

Sounds great, Bowsling!

 

[talonschild]

I can do CivPlayers. Not to worry.

 

[2metraninja]

If our aims are peaceful then I'd try a universal friendship policy. If we are going to war we shpuld go for a lopsided alliance strategy - not necessarily 8 on 1, 7 on 2, or 6 on 3, but say, 4 on 1 and buying the othe 4£ neuttrality.

War is an extension of the politics. It is just a tool if we cant get by peaceful meanings what we want So I would say we aim for peaceful development, being strong enough as detergent and then if we need to fight someone or find a great opportunity for this, then we prepare and go to war.

 

[2metraninja]

Civ.de and CivPlayers. Until someone does step up, they are my responsibility by default.

I would like to join Talons in taking on Civplayers (I am surprised of myself that I did not asked for that in the first place). Not only I was their member for long time and I know most of them and their thinking, but recently in the double-move test game I had the chance to work with their newest and most active member Filon (they are only 4 guys in the team, so knowing 1 more is not a bad number). So we had some diplomacy, very successful on my side, also we had the chance to build up somewhat trust between us in the terms that when one says something, he does it. Also me totally dominating the game almost uncontested could send them a strong message we are dangerous and we know the game, making it easy for us if they are looking for a strong ally.

 

[talonschild]

Then you can be head of that mission - you're just more suited. I will, again, be available to step in if needs be.

 

[Bowsling]

Okay, I've done even more reading at the French forums. It seems like this is the first time UniversCiv has joined a game like this, so diplomatic material is extremely hard to come by. The whole atmosphere of the site, though, strikes me as relaxed. All their forums are well sorted, and their users have gigantic avatars. Whole site has a more polished look than Civfr. I'd say we can label this team as a French version of Apolyton. Roleplay to the max here.

Civfr, on the other hand, is the French-RB. They are very focused on the game, and seem to have a pragmatic approach on diplomacy like our own: roleplay back if roleplayed to, otherwise business as usual. Many of their prominent members also have respectable postcounts at UCiv, and they seemed to just pick and choose which team to play for, depending on who else was playing for what team. Point being, we should just be plain and forthright with them, like we are with RB. No need to waste the time of both teams with storytelling..

As I said before, we have to talk first to them. I will send a private message to the team captain of either team once we meet them telling them that we have met them and giving them our email, to make sure things get started out nicely in French, and to buy us time to discuss our formal message before sending it.

 

[cav scout]

OMG, where did your sub go? Didn't recognize you there for a sec

 

[YossarianLives]

Bowsling, that's an awesome analysis! That kind of insight is going to be really helpful in dealing with these teams when we meet them. I agree that the simple fact that we're willing to communicate with them in French should make them much more open to working with us over the other Anglo teams.

Switching topics...

I mentioned something similar in another thread, but human psychology is certainly not my strong point, and I want to move away from personally weighing in on the precise wording of messages we should (or shouldn't) send in order to get our desired reactions / outcomes from other teams. However, I wanted to talk more about our overall Diplo strategy here. That is something I think I can contribute to.

Basically, we're now thinking that the teams are spread in a 3 x 3 grid on this map, with teams approximately 18 tiles from us to our West (RB), East, North, and possibly South beyond all that tundra. That would look something like this:

.x....x....x.
.x....x....x.
RB..Us...x.

What makes sense to me is to make sure we have strong alliances / partnerships with two of our neighbors, so that we can concentrate on taking land from the 3rd (or, if there is a connection to our southern neighbor, partnering with three and going after the 4th). However, we should not initiaite any fighting until we have a strong lead over the team that we are going to war against, and not until we have clear gains to be made. That means that we should try to remain at least neutral with our "enemy" team until we are ready to initiate combat. To that end, I think our diplo team should try to keep everyone on friendly terms until we decide who we want to attack. It will be easiest for us if we choose a weaker team for this. Once we identify our "enemy", we should then make efforts to befriend their neighbors to see if we can coordinate any future war efforts.

If our map guess is correct (and I have no idea how accurate it might be), then RB's Western neighbor is our Eastern neighbor, making it very important that we find them quickly and start establishing good relations with them. It would be devestating if RB and our Eastern neighbor partner up, leaving us out in the cold (or similarly, if our Southern and Northern neighbors partner up).

 

[Sommerswerd]

If your analysis of the map is correct (it seems like a balanced/fair way to structure a Toroidal Map) then to me our enemy is clear. We have to establish a protected zone, that is a block of cities that is covered on both sides by another block of our own cities. This means going after the neighbor to the immediate East or West, and then going after the Northern and Southern neighbors of that civ. That creates a situation where we have at least one block that is protected on all sides.

 

[talonschild]

Could you clarify, Sommerswerd? Can't quite visualize that.

 

[grant2004]

The other option I see, if the map is laid out in a 3x3 grid, is for a 6 v 3 alliance of the polar nations. I would expect that either, the gap across the poles will be larger than the other N-S gaps between teams, or the teams in the middle will have a more good land to settle than anyone else. It might be a challenge, but if we could convince all of the southern nations to attack their neighbor to the north, and all of the northern nations to attack their enemy to the south, we'd have easy 2v1 situations across the board, and would be able to divide the good land between ourselves at the equator.

 

[talonschild]

Seems good on the face of it. I'd hate to discover the Germans to our north if we do that, though.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Could you clarify, Sommerswerd? Can't quite visualize that.

Imagine a 3X3 grid (9 slots). The four corners are blocked in by the 2 adjacent slots. That's what our goal should be... to capture those protected spaces.

 

[cav scout]

Imagine a 3X3 grid (9 slots). The four corners are blocked in by the 2 adjacent slots. That's what our goal should be... to capture those protected spaces.

Wait, i'm confused... if it's a 3X3 grid that wraps in both directions there aren't any corners...

 

[Caledorn]

I'm crossposting in this thread because of the importance of team approval of the drafts. Please direct your attentions here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=471449 - specifically Post 44 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11827564&postcount=44).

 

[Sommerswerd]

Wait, i'm confused... if it's a 3X3 grid that wraps in both directions there aren't any corners...

I wrote a really long, really mean... really sarcastic post... but then I thought "Why let the special reserve XO Cognac do the talking?"

So, anyway the 3x3 grid is surrounded by water, so there are corners. That is the assumption I am going by. Hope thats clearer

 

[talonschild]

Perfectly clear, thank you.