2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Here I agree, we should not have given them Marble, but this war their clause put in the last minute and I could not afford to waste another turn not settling. 15 gold + 10 wasted workerturns were already enough waste. This is common tactic - to seemingly agree and make the other already taste and feels the deal finished, when at the last possible minute you change one of the clauses - ask for something more, or change amount of something. It works most of the time if you are not the one who is in hurry.
They settled Starfall way before those negotiations. And the general sentiment of the team was to not mention it at all, so we did. I wanted to ask for REPARATIONS, while most wanted to not mention it and keep it for some obscure future. Well, RB never crossed their word settling Starfall, nor they asked us so we can have our say. As for this specific negotiations, they wanted our city on B1, we settled it on B2. Yes, we could had settled it at B3 to annoy the hell out of them, but this could have been bad location for us too.
It is not when they want it, but when we give it to them in the specified time frame. Yes, it was all in their favor to have the Marble, but as I said, we were not in position to wait any more, while they are not in hurry at all.
But the same goes for them too! And they have MORE resources than us and most probably will have more resources in the near future too. So we gain possible trades here, not give away.
This works both sides. And from my experience, espionage requires economics. The better economics wins in espionage fight. And I think RB will be the better economic for quite yet time to come. Like t175 or something.
But that is absolutely natural! Every sane player will ask for it. I mentioned it from the beginning. I was hoping they wont think of it, but alas - remember - our opponents are at least as smart as us. What we were to say when they ask for such clause? "We want NAP with you, but wont sign it if we cant arm other nations!" LOL Really? What I did (and probably went unseen from this minor tone) is I have put only units in the clause. So we can send money to whoever we want (help them research to catapults, etc, etc)
For this, I wont argue, as I think the same. But this was not something to be discussed in those negotiations. We lost A1 way earlier by failing to secure border agreement.
As my bottom line, those were exhausting negotiations, but the outcome is OK. Now we have our time to build and try to outplay them. Also, I will say I like your critic opinion on everything. You are like the alarming (although a bit paranoid) voice to keep us sober.
, is that fighting battles for ego and ego alone is not the way to win. You have to be able to look at the situation and weigh the actual benefit versus loss. 
Everyone in their paranoia over espionage always asks for these deals thinking they get protection, but they are wrong, because of how espionage works. The key to using espionage against someone is not in trickling 3 or 4 or 20 miserable 
points on them one turn at a time. Even the silly AI can see this coming and defend against it easily.
"Making ourselves look silly" would be negotiating heavily for stone and then not bloomin' bothering to ask for it when clearly they appear to be finished with it.
