Foreign Policy: RealmsBeyond

[YossarianLives]

When we tell RB we met WPC (as I believe we said we'd do, correct me if I'm wrong), what exactly will we say? Will we name Thunderfall as the one who located them? Will we mention we located them at all, as opposed to the other way around? Are we giving them info on direction?

This is the proposal we sent to them:

We agree with your proposal that we notify each other when we meet other teams. Our suggestion, to get a clearly defined agreement, is that when one of our teams meet a new team we notify one another what team we met, the turn we met them, and in what direction they are (thus making it easier for each other to meet up with those teams).

This was their acceptance:

We agree with your suggestion to better define the agreement on meeting other teams. I'll be sure to let you know if we meet anyone, and I'll include the info on which team, direction, turn number, etc. Hopefully between our two teams we can chart the rough map shape and where everybody is at pretty quickly.

That is pretty specific, but still leaves some room to maneuver, if we desire. For example, we could tell RB that we WPC is Northwest of us, which leaves a lot of room for doubt (i.e. somewhat implies Thunderfall was not the one that made contact). Technically, since we need to state which turn we meet a team, that implies that the meeting could have occurred several turns in the past. However language at the beginning of the sentence does suggest immediate notification.

fwiw, I think it's fine to tell RB that Thunderfall has been moving NE since leaving their borders, and has just found WPC borders. I don't see what the benefit is in being less than completely honest here, while I do think it could be harmful to our friendship if they feel we tried to fool them.

 

[Bowsling]

Totally agreed. I don't see why we should withhold anything from them, especially the direction of a potential alliancemate.

 

[RegentMan]

Yeah, just let them know we found the border of WPC to their NE and are making contact next turn.

 

[talonschild]

Good enough for me.

 

[Aivoturso]

Honesty is best policy here. Though, I do think that we should send the message on the actual turn that we'll meet them i.e. next turn. In our effort to take the diplomatical advantage here a single turn can end up being crucial. Theoretically there is also a possibility that a panther rushes across the opening in the jungle killing Thunderfall and we'd end up not meeting WPC and not starting diplo with them but still revealing their location to RB.

 

[YossarianLives]

Is it possible for Panthers to still be lurking in the fog, or have all barbs converted to warriors by now? My test games have one warrior watching over the Workers building the road network, and also the settler traveling to the new city site, and it cannot cover everyone at the same time. I was hoping keeping him in position to defog all surrounding tiles would be sufficient, but if we still need to be on the lookout for 2-movers, then we might need to hold Plotinus back to have a second warrior in place for protection. Bowsling, do you know the answer?

 

[Bowsling]

It depends on how many animals there were to start with. I'd err on the side of caution and assume that there are still panthers out there, but I don't think there's a way to definitely tell.

 

[Caledorn]

I believe I am going to start some heavy discussion in the team with this draft. I'm looking forward to your reactions and comments!

Current draft to Team RB (in regards to meeting WPC)

 

[cav scout]

It depends on how many animals there were to start with. I'd err on the side of caution and assume that there are still panthers out there, but I don't think there's a way to definitely tell.

There is a lion currently visible NW of Indira right now so animals are still in play.

 

[Caledorn]

TMI. We need to resist the urge to play this like the last MTDG where we were in effectively a permanent alliance for the first half of the game.

Yes talking is fun and all but RB is our rival... I don't think we need to make them party to all of our diplomatic efforts with other teams.

Oops...didn't realize I was posting in the log thread (why is a draft here?). Perhaps Dave or another mod can move this post....

I'm responding here, cav scout. I post the drafts in the Diplomacy Log thread, because it's easier to just link them in here than to post oodles of drafts in this thread.

I don't agree that we need to resist the urge to try to get one or two permanent alliances. In fact I believe permanent alliances for the first half of the game is the exact key to our victory. If we resist that urge, as you suggest, I believe we will lose the game. RB is going to be a strong partner (unless WPC finds them and goes havoc on them of course), and I think we should nurture that relationship rather than destroy it. RB has shown very clearly that they want to cooperate with us based on the latest messages from them, and also based on gtalk, and that means we have an ally at the moment.

However, yes, I included a lot of information in that draft to give a clear indication of just how detailed we can be. I want this to be discussed before sending it off, as I want to know how much the team wishes to cooperate with them now that we are in a favourable relationship with them (they want to cooperate with us). I would like to give them all that information as I believe that by doing so we truly cement them as our ally. However, this is one of those matters that I believe need a clear majority, and as such I am dependent upon feedback from you guys.

In other words: Lurkers who agree with either my draft, or with cav scouts opposing opinion, please let your voice be heard so that there is no assumptions made. Please state clearly whether you want us to cooperate with RB or not, and if you are in favour, then please state how much detail you would like us to provide them.

And cav scout, would you please let me know exactly what parts was TMI?

 

[talonschild]

Little bit overmuch. Stating direction and even distance is good. I'm not sure I'd include advice. The speculation on expansion and whatnot is all the same to me whether it's in or not. Wouldn't have added it myself but I also don't mind.

 

[Aivoturso]

I agree with talonschild. Let's keep it simple and let RB play their own game Info about our intentions is definitely too much at this point. Though, we still should aim for alliance with RB we should keep our options open until our relationship improves more. BTW, at what point should we start pushing towards that direction more?

Here is another proposal with the TMI part removed. I also modified the part about dyes to not include any speculation (my suggestion in bold).

scooter/RB,

Thank you for your information in regards to the mountains, and we're looking forward to when you guys have explored a bit more so we can pool even more information.

In accordance with our treaty, we want to let you know that we met Team WPC this turn (t46), and that you can meet them by sending a unit directly NE from your gold mine. At the moment there is 7 tiles from the very NE tip of your borders until you should reach their border, directly NE (moving 9 all the time). Only interesting feature about the land between your borders seems to be a few dyes few tiles away from WPCs borders.

Caledorn, on behalf of Team CFC

 

[grant2004]

I like that revision. I don't support the idea of telling RB what we're trying to do diplomatically with WPC yet. We have no idea how successful we'll be, and I don't want to give them the expectation that we're establishing a 3-way alliance. Right now I believe it makes sense to develop strong relations individually, and then piece them together into a powerful early game alliance when we know a little more about the layout of the map.

 

[Caledorn]

I have updated the draft to look more or less like Aivoturso's suggestion

 

[YossarianLives]

The revised message looks great to me.

 

[RegentMan]

I like the revised draft. It doesn't give away our intentions and establishes precedent: RB should (THEY'D BETTER!) give location and tile distance between a new civ and us when they're the ones finding someone.

 

[1889]

I like the revised draft as well.

@Cav Scout or anyone please explains briefly what went wrong with the last game. I didn't play it and have very little experience with Diplo games anyway. I thought permanent alliances were the only way to win one of these. Then when the opposition is wiped out there is either a gentleman’s agreement or a free for all.

Am posting this in the Foreign Policy and General Diplomacy thread also. Please reply there.

 

[Caledorn]

I've sent off the message (as revised according to Aivoturso's suggestion) to RB, thus honouring our deal with them.

Message sent

 

[YossarianLives]

I just wanted to put this in here, since it might get lost in the long demo-hacking post.

I had suspected back on T44 that RB was saving gold, since Best GNP plummeted from 54 down to 41. To me, it looked like they just lost their 40% bonus for completing AH with 2 pre-reqs*, so they were down to just their base commerce output without modifiers. However, Best never increased over the next couple turns, so now I believe they were working on a tech with no bonuses, which for them could only be Fishing or Myst. Therefore, I am now predicting that they have finished Myst. If they move onto Poly next turn, with the same amount of research power (which might actually drop now with a 3rd city's maintenance to account for), they should be able to finish Poly in 4 turns, or T50. This ties with our best Poly completion date, and is two turns ahead of our delayed Poly completion date. Since RB is in front of us in the Turn Order, they would get Hinduism in the event of a tie. I will leave it up to the Diplomats and rest of the team to decide what to do with this info.

 

[Caledorn]

I just wanted to put this in here, since it might get lost in the long demo-hacking post.

We can just go ahead and ask them about it?