What can I say besides
EDIT: Oh, and BTW... Maga saysto that!
Great, thank you, buddy!
Foreign Policy: UniversCiv
- Thread starter talonschild
- Start date
Great, thank you, buddy!
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Well, well, well, do you two take a 5 beer bet that WPC are not at all in relations with RB at the moment?
I am generally very concerned about current geopolitical situation - so not a good time for beer bets
.I actually think that RB may be in a better diplo situation than us
Anyway, We, RB and CivFr are top 3 civs - does not matter that much who is which number, but I think if they would be 2vs1 war among top 3 civs, having to face two of them at the same time would be disastrous for us.
Hopefully, CivFr would accept peace. But if not, I think we should seriously consider exploiting the very lucky circumstance that they are openly hostile with RB (pillaging) and consider allying with RB against them. RB is definitely worried about CivFr and says they have much better architecture - and I understand will get a lot of land outside of Zulu territory anyway. Any thoughts?
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
I think we mix things seriously. Only us and Apolyton are pillaging in the newly conquered RB lands. CivFR are not pillaging RB. And now, here, we discuss our (and RB) relations with another team - Uciv.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Too bad CivFr is not pillaging RB-to-be tiles
Ot4e would say "They are too lazy to do that!" LOL
That explanation would be my favorite
But as you know, I am easy to scare , so I am afraid they may not want to antagonize RB.
Answer in beer thread
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Now, when all this with the answer to French is done, let us concentrate on something constructive. Let us prepare strategy and compose a mail to our southern neighbor Uciv. We have NAP with them till t220 and since now they had showed few times good will towards us and inert in their foreign policy as a whole. Lets change this
Despite their seemingly inert foreign policy, Uciv had actually kept eye on what is going on and last time they came to us telling us they are afraid of RB power and asking us to close borders to RB. This is a solid ground from which we can work forward.
Despite their seemingly inert foreign policy, Uciv had actually kept eye on what is going on and last time they came to us telling us they are afraid of RB power and asking us to close borders to RB. This is a solid ground from which we can work forward.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
This is what we last sent to Uciv. I cant find in our mail the message this one is answer though, the one in which they ask us for closing borders with RB.
Plus one more very important fact - we have NAP to t200, not to t220.
Draft message to UCiv:
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Just some rewording of otherwise great message Sommers proposed.
Can we agree on sending it?
Can we agree on sending it?
Here is my edit of your edit 
I think it is important to draft all messages to teams (besides CP and Poly) with the understanding and assumption that it will be shown to RB. We also must draft our messages to everyone with the assumption that it will be shown to CP and Poly.
That is why I think it is best to ask "Do you agree that we should not extend" because it makes it clear to whoever reads it (RB, CP etc) that we strongly lean towards not extending it, in fact that for now the decision is that we will not extend it, but we are still asking to hear what people think.
So CP hears this and says "Oh good, they will not extend and they only ask if UCiv agrees with this decision...They are not changing their mind, just asking to hear others thoughts... very prudent"... while RB reads this and says "Oh they are not wanting to extend, but they are still asking around so maybe they will change their mind... good, that's exactly what they told us/what we already knew."
If we say to UCiv "Do YOU think we should extend?", it sounds like we ask UCiv what to do... ad that they are making the decision not us. This will alarm allies, make UCiv see us as weak and indecisive, and possibly have the side effect of making RB take a more active role in trying to manipulate us through UCiv... which will undermine us trying to ally with UCiv.
The other thing I changed was that we really need to remind them that we are still on-board with cooperating with them to hold back RB. Just saying at the end of a letter "We are looking for closer cooperation" is the same as "We are looking forward to mutual beneficial relations" or "We are looking forward to a profitable relationship" etc etc... just friendly rhetoric that is the same as saying "Sincerely yours" We need to mention specifically their plan to cooperate and that we are still interested.
I think it is important to draft all messages to teams (besides CP and Poly) with the understanding and assumption that it will be shown to RB. We also must draft our messages to everyone with the assumption that it will be shown to CP and Poly.
That is why I think it is best to ask "Do you agree that we should not extend" because it makes it clear to whoever reads it (RB, CP etc) that we strongly lean towards not extending it, in fact that for now the decision is that we will not extend it, but we are still asking to hear what people think.
So CP hears this and says "Oh good, they will not extend and they only ask if UCiv agrees with this decision...They are not changing their mind, just asking to hear others thoughts... very prudent"... while RB reads this and says "Oh they are not wanting to extend, but they are still asking around so maybe they will change their mind... good, that's exactly what they told us/what we already knew."
If we say to UCiv "Do YOU think we should extend?", it sounds like we ask UCiv what to do... ad that they are making the decision not us. This will alarm allies, make UCiv see us as weak and indecisive, and possibly have the side effect of making RB take a more active role in trying to manipulate us through UCiv... which will undermine us trying to ally with UCiv.
The other thing I changed was that we really need to remind them that we are still on-board with cooperating with them to hold back RB. Just saying at the end of a letter "We are looking for closer cooperation" is the same as "We are looking forward to mutual beneficial relations" or "We are looking forward to a profitable relationship" etc etc... just friendly rhetoric that is the same as saying "Sincerely yours" We need to mention specifically their plan to cooperate and that we are still interested.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
All points are straight on the spot. Agree with sending it.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
After 3 edits and seeing no one objects, I am sending the last revision. (The earlier we send it, the better, as we have to wait quite some time after for an answer as we know well)
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Sent mail.
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
So, we got relatively quick answer. Laconic, but it's something.
YossarianLives
Deity
Well, good enough, I guess. I really don't think that these guys are in any sort of alliance with RB. If anything, after getting Magno's input recently, I believe that they're really just keeping to themselves and communicating with other teams only minimally when it suits them.
Do we have any suggestions for further cooperation with them? We have a nice long NAP with them right now, and that's probably the most we'll be able to get from them. As they said, they don't have any borders with RB, so they're probably not too interested in active hostilities against them. It is pretty important that we can make sure they keep their borders closed especially after T175. That will really hurt RB's economy.
UCiv must have just entered a Golden Age. Here are some graphs from this turn that show how we'll they're doing right now (despite their relatively low score):
Do we have any suggestions for further cooperation with them? We have a nice long NAP with them right now, and that's probably the most we'll be able to get from them. As they said, they don't have any borders with RB, so they're probably not too interested in active hostilities against them. It is pretty important that we can make sure they keep their borders closed especially after T175. That will really hurt RB's economy.
UCiv must have just entered a Golden Age. Here are some graphs from this turn that show how we'll they're doing right now (despite their relatively low score):
Spoiler :
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
Yes, ideas how they can be in use for us will be great.
Is it too much if we ask them for preparing military corpus?
Do we talk only for RB or we try to get their opinion on CivFR?
Is it too much if we ask them for preparing military corpus?
Do we talk only for RB or we try to get their opinion on CivFR?
2metraninja
Defender of Nabaxica
It's been enough time and since no one commented I think we must use the time we have. I will send mail to Uciv in something not-much-binding. Like asking them to agree to share information about enemy units approaching each-other's borders. French can easily sneak few knights and wreak havoc in our middle-north.
Also, I will ask them if they are interested in military actions whatsoever or they prefer to stay away from international politics and just develop.
Also, I will ask them if they are interested in military actions whatsoever or they prefer to stay away from international politics and just develop.
Similar threads
- Sticky
