Bowsling
Deity
Wow! This is excellent! 
Foreign Policy: UniversCiv
- Thread starter talonschild
- Start date
cav scout
The Continuum
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2008
- Messages
- 2,630
This. We need to hear them say "we have a NAP with you guys." Otherwise they could honestly say they never agreed to anything.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Lets send them the proposal about where they settle explained with numbers or whatever. And word it in such a way that they need to only say "Yes" in reply and we have the NAP signed.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
In accordance with my desire for a message which tells them where we are OK with them settling and they are only required to send us back only "Yes, we agree" to have the NAP in effect, I am proposing the following message, which is basically a modification of the message we had sent them some month and more ago, but taking in consideration their desire for having a city to claim the Elephants.
I would rather limit them to the first location as well, but them confirming the NAP is more important than them only settling location 1 right? Anyway this is how I would change the wording. Rather than imply that we don't already have a NAP, I would prefer we say that we have a NAP and we are just finalizing the border agreement so that they get the elephant.
If they suggest another location that does not interfere with the MArble, I think we should be ready to accept, as the NAP is more critical at this point I think.
YossarianLives
Deity
I've got a really bad feeling that this is their delaying tactic, making us think we're going to get that NAP, only to have them pull out at the last minute because they don't like the locations we're giving them permission to settle. That spike in power is alarming, and I do think we're going to see those units coming down our way. You don't whip units like that unless you're building a big force to use before the victim notices the power increase.
Whatever we do, we need to make it extremely easy for them to say yes to us, and we need to give them a short timeframe (before this turn is up) to confirm the NAP. No more back-and-forth negotiations.
Whatever we do, we need to make it extremely easy for them to say yes to us, and we need to give them a short timeframe (before this turn is up) to confirm the NAP. No more back-and-forth negotiations.
Which is why I prefer just not telling them where to settle, but instead just asking them to confirm the NAP and settle where they want. Can we claim/defend the Marble spot while in a defensive posture with Spaniards anyway? Because if we can, maybe the way to go is to just claim the Marble spot now, to end this issue.
Either way, we need to send them a message asking for them to confirm that we have a NAP. Maybe something simple without the settling map:
SilentConfusion
Emperor
I like the shorter message, but I think we should also give a short time frame to get back to us. I like that it says "went into effect" as though we are accepting their agreement, but I still want them to have to come back to us quickly.
Spoiler :
Good addition SilCon
It really doesn't matter where they settle to claim the eles' as long as it doesent steal marble from us. How much time is left in the turn?
It really doesn't matter where they settle to claim the eles' as long as it doesent steal marble from us. How much time is left in the turn?
SilentConfusion
Emperor
Right now, 36 hours.
YossarianLives
Deity
36 hours left on the timer. I will send SC's version when I'm done updating the turn reports unless there are any major objections in the next 20 minutes.
Edit: Ninja'd by SilentConfusion.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
I like the idea of telling them this is only the addition to our already in-effect NAP, but how we tell them
We still need to give them choice between 1 and 2 and to ask them to confirm they accept the NAP and the settlement plan.
and then:
We still need to give them choice between 1 and 2 and to ask them to confirm they accept the NAP and the settlement plan.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
I am strongly against setting pressure on them by asking them to confirm or deny till the end of the turn. We are not in position to put pressure. We rely on their good will towards us.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
AND!
We MUST give them choice where to settle.
If we only send them "Confirm that we have NAP immediately!" without giving them specific option to settle their elephants, they might think: "Those ba$tards want les elephants for themselves! They want us to sign the NAP without giving us option to get those elephants?!?! No way!"
We MUST give them choice where to settle.
If we only send them "Confirm that we have NAP immediately!" without giving them specific option to settle their elephants, they might think: "Those ba$tards want les elephants for themselves! They want us to sign the NAP without giving us option to get those elephants?!?! No way!"
Caledorn
Emperor
I am very much in agreement with what 2metraninja is saying above. We must not in any way make them feel pressured into accepting our terms as that may be what makes them turn us down! So please reconsider what we are writing to them (I don’t have the time to make a suggestion of my own tonight due to work, but felt I had to comment on this).
YossarianLives
Deity
Ok, I will not send the message immediately in light of objections.
Note that we are telling them that in return for a NAP they get to settle ivory. We do not specify where. Let's get the NAP confirmed and then we can worry about exact locations.
I understand why you don't want us to pressure them, but if they are just playing us to delay revealing their plans to go to war with us, then a little pressure is exactly what they need.
Note that we are telling them that in return for a NAP they get to settle ivory. We do not specify where. Let's get the NAP confirmed and then we can worry about exact locations.
I understand why you don't want us to pressure them, but if they are just playing us to delay revealing their plans to go to war with us, then a little pressure is exactly what they need.
SilentConfusion
Emperor
I agree with Yossarian. Better to ask for a deadline. Call it two turns if you don't want to rush them too much, although they have more than a day left in this turn. If we don't give them a time frame, where are we if they just don't answer. We won't know if they are stalling or just taking their time. If we give them a deadline, they'll know it's important and they'll know that if they don't do it before then we might suspect them of bad things.
If they aren't preparing to attack us, they'll understand why we want a time limit and so long as it is a reasonable time limit, they shouldn't be angry. If they are preparing to attack, we want to know as soon as possible. A time limit is one way to do that.
If they aren't preparing to attack us, they'll understand why we want a time limit and so long as it is a reasonable time limit, they shouldn't be angry. If they are preparing to attack, we want to know as soon as possible. A time limit is one way to do that.
Caledorn
Emperor
I don't see any reason why we should not include the suggested spots they can settle, together with a statement that if they would prefer another location we are open to suggestions. Is there any good reason why we shouldn't?
Similar threads
