TNT Files Term 7 - 9

[Chamnix]

I don't think we attack TNT under any circumstances - I also don't think we should threaten to. They know they are dead, and they are not going to give us something if we threaten them - they would rather abandon cities than have them go to their enemies. The only way for MIA to get things from them is by being their friends.

 

[peter grimes]

One thing to add to your crib sheet, Fe -

You have quite a lot of words talking about NOT declaring war on DNUTs. I think a safer approach would be Evasion.

If TNT says "You guys are going to attack DNUTs, right?"
you may honestly reply "We have plans in place, and are in the process of upgrading units. We also can't move until we have another Galley completed"

This is true (we're not going to go anywhere without an overwhelming stack, which requires lots of boats), and it avoids language that might pin us down to one specific course of action.

One other thing, though I'm pretty tired of saying it. I agree with Chamnix. Threats are useless against TNT. We have to sweet-talk them into letting us take control of the Silk-Town. They could easily abandon it in a scorched-earth policy; we must get them to understand that we can help them maintain a supply of Silks for their citizens.

 

[fe3333au]

I am in total agreement with you all on this issue of threatening TNT ... it was just an option if they demand action against Nuts ... which we cannot give ... and them spitting the dummy.

We will of course do our utmost to get the city and haggle for the best deal

Regarding the Nut issue, which will be the prime reason for the meeting ... I am absolutely sure that they will want some assurance ... which we cannot give ... so we will have to be carefull to be as non-commital as possible.

I assume that our stance means even losing the opportunity to control Silk City if TNT require confirmation on us declaring on Nuts.

 

[peter grimes]

I assume that our stance means even losing the opportunity to control Silk City if TNT require confirmation on us declaring on Nuts.

Don't let it get to that point, and we won't have to make that choice

 

[General_W]

You're missing the obvious escape here Fe...

... Blame Democracy!!

I'm serious. If they press – just tell them that the team is debating the issue, because our team constitution won’t let us go to war without a 3/5 Majority.

Say, “We’re moving forces into position, and I’ve personally made the argument that we need to help you by attacking the nuts, but I can’t promise anything, because the team may not vote that way.”
(All of which is true!)

If they try to say they’ll wait to make the city deal till our vote is done – tell them that you’re 100% positive that a demand like that from TNT will kill any chance of getting either deal. MIAers on the fence won't vote for a war to help someone that's trying to dictate our team strategy on something as sensitive as starting a war.

I think that should do it

 

[fe3333au]

Nice one Gen_W

BUT we got conflicting Rulings ... i wonder what will be final?

I sent the last TNT letter to them both with this attached

Hey guys we have sent a proposal to TNT in order to buy a city. We actually have a Knight nearby and already know the area.

My interpretation of the rules is that this is valid.

Unfavourable Ruling

Here is the ruleset regarding city trading:

Definition: A team trading one or more cities to another team for the purpose of either granting that team an advantage (premature contact with another civ, map information, etc.), or denying an aggressor the right of conquest.

...

As a general rule, the administrators will consider city gifts/trades that are temporary in nature (i.e. only a few turns in duration) and those given/traded for the purpose of granting a team an advantage (premature contact, map information, etc.) or to deny another team the right of conquest to be against the spirit of this law.

I would consider this denying Doughnuts the right of conquest. If the Doughtnuts wish to spend the time to hike an army in that direction, it would be unfair for them to go that entire way just to discover an M.I.A. flag flying over the city. After all, you say yourself:

If the city is likely going to be lost anyway – how much better to benefit an ally and gain generous compensation, and also deny your enemies another of your cities?

and

Favourable Ruling

First, the relavant rule:

As a general rule, the administrators will consider city gifts/trades that are temporary in nature (i.e. only a few turns in duration) and those given/traded for the purpose of granting a team an advantage (premature contact, map information, etc.) or to deny another team the right of conquest to be against the spirit of this law.

You have two options, as I see them:

1. Take the city, and just keep it forever...they gave it to you, it is now yours, and you aren't gaining anything you don't have besides the city itself.

2. Take the city, and keep it for a few turns, and then gift it back (say after 5). However, if Donut comes and wants to take the city, you must gift it back to TNT for "right of conquest", when their units are on the doorstep.

You can't do something like take it now, wait until the war's over, gift it back...that's unfair.

I'll also let RM rule on this, so wait just a bit....

My arguments supporting our plan.
... is that the city is not threatened by either KISS or Nuts at the moment.
... and that the deal is for keeps not to be swapped back later.
... and we are not getting a gift, we are paying top dollar.
... and TNT will be wiped out soon anyway as both other teams are eager to put TNT into history.
... Nuts have no plans for city at the moment and are too stretched to take it at the moment as it.
... KISS and Nuts have invited us to join the fun, just that we choose other methods not available to them.


... What should we do ???

I sent this to both ... Title - Sorry to be a pain

I have posted both your rulings and unfortunately see a conflict ...

Here is the link ...

 

[General_W]

I think we should ask them to consider that KISS is no-where near taking that town, and that we've just learned that the Nuts aren't close either.

We are only "denying the right of conquest" in the broadest sense - where any team at war couldn't trade a city because it could potentially be conquered by the enemy.

The spirit of the rule seems (to me) to be that you can't unload a city right before you're sure to lose it.

In this case, the city is moderatly defended, a long way from enemy forces, and it's clearly in TNT's interest to gain some tech and gold help in exchange for a fairly useless town.

The motive for the trade isn't to "deny the right of conquest" - the motive is to consolidate forces, and gain much needed technology and gold.

I think that's perfectly reasonable and within the spirit of the rules.
We could at least ask!

 

[peter grimes]

I'll ask again - why are we certain that DNUTs aren't close to taking Mezzonotte Keep? Robi made an oblique reference to '2 Southern Cities', but until we get more specific reports, we really can't assume that DNUTs aren't engaged there.

 

[Chamnix]

It’s certainly a tough call. When you read these 2 parts together:

Description: No team or individual is permitted to barter, gift, or otherwise trade multiple cities with the intent of joining teams to destroy another team and keep both teams alive to survive to the end…

Definition: A team trading one or more cities to another team for the purpose of either granting that team an advantage (premature contact with another civ, map information, etc.), or denying an aggressor the right of conquest.

It sounds like “denying right of conquest” is really talking about preventing the elimination of a civ which we are not doing.

On the other hand, there is this:

Purpose: To prevent the use of outside game elements to break the spirit of the game by allowing contact and location information to be traded before they are allowed in-game or to unfairly prevent a conquering civ from taking your cities.

Which talks about preventing a civ from taking your cities which we clearly are doing. However, I don’t think there is much doubt that TNT will prevent that city from falling into Dnut hands regardless (by abandoning).

So to me it comes down to a “spirit of the game” type thing. Quite honestly, I don’t really want to push this line if there is that much uncertainly. If the admins get together and say they are comfortable it is allowed, and TNT agrees to sell, then fine, but I don’t really want to have to argue that we are (barely) following the letter of the law.

If we cash-rush the settler in Ithaca, then we can have him positioned by the silks in about 7 turns so we should be able to claim at least 1 source of silks regardless. If TNT does abandon the Keep to prevent Dnuts from taking it, then we can even pick a better town location to give us 3 silks.

Hope nobody’s mad at me for posting such thoughts…

 

[General_W]

No - MIA has a clean record of following the rules - I'm sure that none of us want to bend or weasal around the rules.

Whatever the admins say will be fine.

Not the right thread for this - but I agree, we should probably rush a settler and get busy on sailing to the silks asap anyway. At the least, we may soon need our own harbor connection in the jungle.

 

[fe3333au]

Just want clarification of ruling ... happy either way

@ Peter ... if Mezzonotte Keep is being surrounded then everything that Robi has said in chat and official correspondence is false.

Reason ...

He mentioned already taking two cities last turn close together that are further into TNT territory - Fur trade gone suggests eastside.

Also our Knight is near a city that still stands, which is further inside TNT lands.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

I have a semi-compromise I guess: you are free to trade the city, AFTER the war has ended...it seems sort of cheap to transfer it during the war and then promise TNT silks forever, because, but in effect they donit of the city's resources, but in effect they don't have to worry about Donut taking it. (You are free to trade silks to them forever as a deal for acquiring the city...after the war).

I presume RM will agree with this, and I'll give him a link to this post, but I think this is what you guys should plan for.

 

[General_W]

Thanks for taking the time to sort this out for us!

@ Ginger Ale – if the above is what you decide, that's fine, and it makes sense.
But it's essentially a denial of our request, because KISS and Dnuts don't show any sign of wanting to stop this war before TNT is dead.

I only bring this up, because from my totally biased and loaded perspective – disallowing this proposed trade really puts the final nail in TNT's coffin.

Extra towns are the only bargaining chip that TNT has left to offer. If they want to stay alive and have a chance to sue for peace, they're going to need Gunpowder. But what will they trade to get it? They have nothing left of any real value… expect their towns.

If KISS or the Dnuts were on the border getting ready to take an undefended town… then I totally agree that trading that town is an abuse of the game.
But in this situation, Mezzonite Keep isn't in any more immediate danger than any other TNT town. (It's in less danger in many real ways!)

By ruling that TNT can't trade that town – you will take away TNT's last bargaining chip to get the Technology or Gold aid that they so desperatly need.

(you see – I'm just motivated by concern for TNT! )

But again – let me repeat – whatever you decide is really fine. I recognize that I'm totally biased, and I will happily respect whatever decision you reach.

 

[RegentMan]

I have a semi-compromise I guess: you are free to trade the city, AFTER the war has ended...it seems sort of cheap to transfer it during the war and then promise TNT silks forever, because, but in effect they donit of the city's resources, but in effect they don't have to worry about Donut taking it. (You are free to trade silks to them forever as a deal for acquiring the city...after the war).

I presume RM will agree with this, and I'll give him a link to this post, but I think this is what you guys should plan for.

I agree with the above.

 

[General_W]

sigh. ok.
Thanks Regent Man and Ginger Ale!

So - we probably don't want to even bother bringing up this idea with TNT unless they mange to end the war somehow.

This makes getting our own settler over there asap much more important, imo.

 

[peter grimes]

@Ginger Ale and Regent_Man: Thanks for ruling so promptly. Obviously you knew there was a time crunch here, but thank you nonetheless for acting quickly

 

[fe3333au]

Thanks for the ruling guys ... must be hard to be a referee sometimes

Well ... Plan B ... Settler convey and send units I guess is the answer.

 

[fe3333au]

Revised Chat with TNT

TNT will be made aware that I can NOT agree to anything as it must be ratified by whole team !!!

> We discuss the security breach and future confidentiality.
... will want reports on ALL future diplomatic and chats with other teams.
... will want a TNTer to go through the chats posted on their site and send summary
... we can agree to send reports relivant to their situation.

> We discuss what intel apart from troop movements that TNT actually want and can use.
... I request Rel. Military Strength at the very least for us
... and Battle Logs if possible.
... Stressing that these should be sent separately and NOT as a g-mail cc (let's try keeping secrets)

> When will we attack Nuts, ( Never, unless they attack us)
... be vague
... we will need time to mobilize and transport a sufficient force.
... use excuse about potential KISS attack hinted by BCLG100
... team democracy.
... an attack against Nuts must be properly planned.
... we cannot declare early as it would tip our hand.

> However ... Agree to diplomatically try all avenues (except declaring war) to call Nuts off from them.
... if we can reduce the number of opponents it will aid their cause.
... KISS is their main threat, and we can do nothing for them other than what we are already doing.
... we will try to get Nuts to see KISS as an enemy (3 vs KISS may be only way to stop them)

> Mezzonite Keep is Priority for TNT to Raze rather than allow capture !
... explain game administrator rulings regarding selling cities.
... MAYBE co-ordinate a razing with our settler so we found a city which will secure ALL silk.
... TNT benefit by selling all improvements prior to razing.
... for this we can pay them the same deal as we were prepared to pay for the city.

> Inform them that we plan to settle on Battle Isle

> We basically want TNT to keep KISS busy and distracted for as long as possible.

> We support TNT suing for peace
... BUT only with MIA blessing, can tech be traded for peace (not an issue at this stage)


> Period of non-aggression deal
... cannot be done for no direct benefit to us.
... we prefer to keep other teams guessing.
... there is no real benefit for either team to sign such a document.
... they must trust us ... we have show in recent trade that we are supporting them.

What we can offer as support
... offer upto 200 gold
... Gunpowder
... free peeks at KISS cities (worth 30 per peek)

What TNT can offer
... warring with KISS.
... commit to razing strategic cities rather than allowing them to be captured.
... perhaps agree to a combined razing with us settling to certain cities that fit our expansion plan.



The Selling of a City Ruling
I suspect we may have opened a can of worms because I gather TNT are now forbidden to trade any city other than those directly threatened by another team.

Why?
Because TNT are at war with two teams ... and it would be unfair for KISS to get a city that Nuts could possibly take later. I guess it would only be OK if Nuts also agree that it can be done

 

[Chamnix]

> Mezzonite Keep is Priority for TNT to Raze rather than allow capture !
... explain game administrator rulings regarding selling cities.
... MAYBE co-ordinate a razing with our settler so we found a city which will secure ALL silk.
... TNT benefit by selling all improvements prior to razing.
... for this we can pay them the same deal as we were prepared to pay for the city.

What we can offer as support
... offer upto 200 gold
... Gunpowder
... free peeks at KISS cities (worth 30 per peek)

We were talking about giving 200 gold in exchange for their town. Since we can't have their town, I see no reason to pour our gold down the TNT toilet. TNT should raze the town for their own benefit - I'm tired of offering TNT stuff to do things in their own best interest. If Dnuts capture it, so be it - we will claim the fourth silk.

> Inform them that we plan to settle on Battle Isle

Why? We won't be there for several turns - all telling them now could do is give TNT the opportunity to "slip" and give that info to someone else.

> We basically want TNT to keep KISS busy and distracted for as long as possible.

Well, yes, but don't tell them that. We are looking out for TNT's best interest, right?

> Period of non-aggression deal
... cannot be done for no direct benefit to us.
... we prefer to keep other teams guessing.
... there is no real benefit for either team to sign such a document.
... they must trust us ... we have show in recent trade that we are supporting them.

I think we could sign one if it makes them feel better. If we refuse to sign, TNT will wonder why. The other teams won't know, so that's no excuse.

The Selling of a City Ruling
I suspect we may have opened a can of worms because I gather TNT are now forbidden to trade any city other than those directly threatened by another team.

Why?
Because TNT are at war with two teams ... and it would be unfair for KISS to get a city that Nuts could possibly take later. I guess it would only be OK if Nuts also agree that it can be done

I suspect that giving cities for peace is a different issue and would be allowed - giving a town to one enemy instead of another is not the same as giving it to a friend to prevent an enemy from having it.

 

[fe3333au]

I agree to whatever is decided ... I have a health glitch today and am only online now 11pm my time (but will back to bed go soon) ... so if greekguy was after me he would have missed the opportunity. sorry

But regarding what to talk about ... there isn't too much concrete we can give them ... will see how it goes.

I will send him something prior to TNT turn.