
Iriqoi. To gang up on one civilization, wedged between 2 military powers seems... Cheap. Even for you. We do not appriciate this.

I would argue that you have the same amount of land on your side, if not more.
I would argue that you have the same amount of land on your side, if not more.
You didn't see the three fish and horse, did you? That's a nice city location. You can squeeze another city if you settled there.
besides, aren't you supposed to be arguing for me to stay in this evil war?true enough, I was looking for more in the way of luxesbesides, aren't you supposed to be arguing for me to stay in this evil war?
I was trying to argue that Greek CAN have one more city with the land given to them. Same as Roman here, we can have 4 cities, but...
The lux distribution is uneven. Greek has mostly ivory, Roman has mostly gem. Iroquois has mostly dye, but lost one to the Arab so can't supply enough dye to trade. Looking at the diplomatic screen, Arabs have 4 different copies of lux than us, which is so tempting to destroy before they got the bazaar and have camels to run away. Different copies of lux means the war can sustain itself in the happiness front.
reasoning seems very reminiscent of the logic that led me to declare war on you in another game 
good points allreasoning seems very reminiscent of the logic that led me to declare war on you in another game
![]()
or the RKH-Roman one?Let me guess which one, the small naval Greek-Sweden one?or the RKH-Roman one?
the one where I actually declared war on you and your extremely industrious siamese ...
the Iroquois leader is surprised he was allowed to declare peace so soon ... 