No, we must do it all together. If we get NAP with French to t210 only for us first, what will stop French from saying: "Well, we got NAP with you guys, but we think we dont like the idea to have NAP with Poly, so we will go park our army there and wait for t180 to invade them from the back. Please dont forget we have a NAP, so you cant even be able to help them." This must be done together. we all 3 get NAP with French or none get NAP with French.
We already told CivFr we agree to end the war and proposed an NAP until turn 210. They made an NAP with us conditional for peace. We can't say "NAP with all or no NAP at all" at this point. If CivFr wants to invade Apolyton, there are two outcomes: CFC-CivFr do not have an NAP. CivFr keeps a sizable army on the CFC-CivFr border, CFC keeps a sizable army on the CFC-CivFr border, CivFr invades Apolyton with the rest of their army. CFC-CivFr have an NAP. CivFr invades Apolyton. We can help Apolyton with the army we would have stationed on the CFC-CivFr border had CFC and CivFr not had an NAP. Our "CivFr-border defensive" army gifted to Apolyton would even the odds with CivFr's "CivFr-border defensive" army. That's even if CivFr wants to invade Apolyton or CP. Maybe we can sick CivFr on UCiv- telling them that would bring down RB as much a CivFr-RB war would. And if CivFr invades and gimps Apolyton, we don't have a problem rounding up CP and the remnants of Apolyton into a 3-way alliance against CivFr after RB is eliminated. The way it is now, after RB is eliminated, we're going to have to do some serious deflecting and diplomacy to prevent the next "Kill the score leader!" alliance from forming against us. A belligerent CivFr would make it much easier.
I like this plan, on the whole. Ideally I'd prefer the French teams fought it out, but if they attacked Apolyton that would make them very receptive to such an alliance. WePlayCiv's gonna be around for a long while, it seems.
I like 2metra's message. I would just take out this sentence: The rest of the message I think strikes a nice balance of confirming that we have agreed on peace with CivFr, and strongly implying that a 4-way NAP is now required.
It is not official offer, it is more like looking for their opinion. And what is even better, they are not answered anything yet. We not only can, but we MUST tell them NAP with all 3 or no NAP at all. I cant stress enough the importance of sticking together with our allies, especially at this point when we are all depend so much from each other as we are jumping together in the breach and we must keep each-other's backs. Interesting fact is I just mentioned to MZ last night with few words why we were slow to get that 4-way NAP, and one of the reasons I told was we had internal discussion if it is our job to make this 4-way NAP happen and that there were voices that we must just make sure we have a NAP and leave other teams NAPs to their own efforts. MZ's reaction was: "I am deeply worried that you even mention such scenario where we are left unprotected while you have NAP and cant help us with French", to which I had to explain him it was only a discussions and we would never really do such thing. That is correct. This is exactly why is all this 4-way-NAP-or-no-NAP-at-all about. If CivFR dont have a NAP with us, they cant move any army to attack Apolyton or CP. I dont even know how to comment on this. Either you did not looked at maps and screenshots of the game in the last 100 turns to know that sending army from our RB-CFC front (where our army will be if we take NAP with French - this is why this is all about, right? to free army to send to RB front in the west and not just stay to neutralize French threat in the east) to Apolyton will take like 15 turns at best, or you were not attacked by human in MP to know that even 5 turns not being able to defend properly are a lot, what to speak about 15 turns. Our war with Spaniards lasted 6 turns. 6 turns and Spaniards were dead. How we will calm Apolyton by saying: "Dont you worry, send all your rifles bravely to fight RB, we will get NAP with French and to give you sense of security, we promise to gift you our French front army if the French decide to attack you. Bad thing is you will have to wait some 15 turns for it and accept you will lose half your cities in the meanwhile. Plus, there is a chance CivFR will capture the only city where we can send you army if we dont have OB with French, in which case, we guess you will simply have to deal with French all on your own at all. LOL" Sending CivFR to attack Uciv will be good, but how we help it if we dont make sure CivFR have NAPs with ALL their neighbors except Uciv? There must be some awful misconception that RB are already dead and we just have to divide and gut their tasty flesh. RB is well alive and kicking, their claws and teeth on their places and deadly dangerous and if we want to bring RB down, we need ALL our 2 allies well alive and concentrated at RB. With what is much different the "remnants of Apolyton", from our current strong and loyal ally Apolyton? I will tell you. If CivFR manage to hurt Poly even a little because we failed to make sure we all have NAPs or we are able to help Poly with war with French, then you can be sure we will never be able to even talk to Poly, as we will be the worst example of selfish and egocentric pseudo-allies. Nor we will be able to have another good ally, as who will ally with someone famous for leaving his allies in the open? And finally, it is way too early to think about the after-RB age. There are Uciv to deal with before we have to come to think fighting with our allies. CivFR is higher on the list too. WPC is there too. But most of it, it is RB on top of the list. We have a saying: "The fish is still in the sea, but we have put the pan on the fire already to fry it" Lets catch this big fish. For this to happen we need concentrated, strong and loyal allies.
I say send it. We did not agree to their NAP anyway, we just sent them a message asking them if they would agree to a NAP. They haven't even responded, so we are free to add/change terms. I understand your point, but either way, we are gonna look a little shady to someone. The way I look at it is...Are we more concerned about looking shady to our War allies, or our enemies? TBH I don't care as much if CivFr doesn't trust us, or accuses us of trying to change the deal mid-stream etc... They are enemies. Who cares what they think about us... Werent they just threatening to bury us and end our game a few turns back?
Man, this reads like we're just politely informing CivFr that we're going to continue our three-way alliance against them on T210 once we've gotten rid of RB. Two beers that they will either a) reject it, or b) accept it, and gift their entire army to RB while allying with UCiv and teching to infantry and tanks in time for T210.
LOL, then get a smuggler friends or pray to not lose Seriously, I asked and waited for like 5 days for someone to come up with a good way of telling CivFR there must be 4-way NAP without telling them "you are next" and this is what I came with at the end. Ot4e was the same: "Why you did not said you have problem with that, I was going to write it?" Well, I told him not once but few times I am not sure how to write the proposal.
For sure, it's a difficult position. It's tough that they are demanding the four-way NAP. You did a great job, and re-reading it, it seems that the impressions of the three way alliance I was getting mainly came from this thread. The third last line might freak them out a little bit, but hey, playing mind games with them it fun too!
I must admit, I was convinced that CivFr decided to pull out of the peace offer once they saw that we were coordinating it with our allies. I am very glad to be proven wrong! Great work 2metra. Have we already started moving our troops to the RB front, or do we need to start doing that now?
Thanks guys. I had my doubts too, but all is good when it ends good. I already started moving the knights with the belief that it will come to peace after all. Now we need to start moving the slow movers too. They will be in 8-9 turns at our current border with RB. Of course I hope we will push the border even further west, so those units will take more than 10 turns to get there, but it is still OK. We were discussing with Bistrita if we can trust 100% the French, but we have no other choice. If we leave half of half army, they wont do much good anyway, so I say we better move almost all units west to join the second or third wave we throw at RB.
