Turn 123 - 110BC

[akots]

As you know, C3B has landed a warrior on the hill in the vicinity of Khazad-Dum. The following letter has been dispatched to them regarding this issue:

"To the People and Government of C3B

We have been tolerant of your behavior concerning galleys in our agreed territorial waters. We have tried to address your concerns regarding our lone warrior in the north who was protecting your lands from dangerous barbarians. We have notice, with distress and alarm, that a warrior of yours has landed on sovereign territory of Fanatica! This is in clear violation of all understandings and treaties that we have negotiated with you for all this time.

Our warrior, due to the great reduction in barbarian forces will be moving west this turn away from your land. We expect that you will remove your warrior from our lands and go back north of the demarcated area agreed upon by both nations. We expect that the fleets will do the same. These actions are required of you to be accomplished immediately, as this is a clear violation of Fanatican national sovereignty. We must admit that your actions are inexplicable to us."

Our glorious JT has lured one barbarian horsemen and defeated him in a fierce battle losing 2 hit point (no slave, no promotion). 4 last barbarian units are also advancing. This is the battleground:

 

[akots]

It has been also discussed and decided to slightly accelerate our research to Feudalism. There still might be an opportunity to trade it around, may be to CDZ or even to C3B for Monotheism and Engineering. This is our current budget.

 

[akots]

This is our mainland. There has been a lot of unit shuffling recently. We might be able to block all mountain tiles from landing of C3B units.

 

[akots]

Another city has been buuilt on the Iron Island this turn.

 

[RegentMan]

Wow that's one packed island!

What are our plans if C3B doesn't move their warrior (as I suspect they won't)?

 

[akots]

We can move our JTs around him and this will make C3B either disband their warrior or move him away.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Letter from C3B - send by TheCat

To our neighbors of CFC
from
C3B Official Government

Regarding the official communication received this afternoon towards the positioning of some of our units, the C3B Government states that:

1st - The C3B units DO NOT by any means violate the CFC territorial soberany, being that we are NOT by any means sending our units to your territory, which is containted INSIDE your cultural borders.

2nd - The agreement CFC government insists to refer to is long EXPIRED as we have said over and over again since our contact was restablished. It was conditional that we should rediscuss it by turn 109. We humbly suggest that CFC government browse through the archives and reread files now and then, being that it seems their memory has totally lost that part of the agreement. In order to help, we quote here the text which determines that.

"The agreement shall be effective from turn 60 to 109, consisting of 50 turns and may be renewed if that is the wish for both parts. Other details and rules may be added by mutual consense. In case a renewal is wanted, conversations should start by turn 99, in order to settle the new terms or reaffirm the old ones" (of course it might contain slight differences from the one you have in there, since it is directly translated from brazilian language, but the content is the same).

Since obviously there were no conversations by turn 99 or even later, we at C3B followed the directives and considered the agreement null, as accorded between the civs. We believe THAT settles the second point.

3rd - We would like to remind you that IN CASE the agreement would be still the rule, you would have disrespected it by keeping your warrior in OUR territory for over 14 turns and it did NOT move out despite our request. We did not take any action against it (as you knew we couldn't, due to the punishment) and we even had to consult with UN in order to know if we could defend ourselves shall it invade our territory without leave. Since the agreement is not effective anymore, it could stay there for as long as it did, and we did not complain and such courtesy we expected from our neighbords towards our warrior as well.

4th - Were stranger units a reason to worry, C3B would freak out by the Ancient Cavalry and Javelin Thrower near our borders. We are not, though, complaining or even mentioning those. We expect the same freedom from our neighbors towards our units as well.

As a conclusion, C3B government would like to affirm that the units ARE NOT leaving their positions, being that they have tasks to fulfill. They will stay there as long as it is needed for them to do so. We insist that we are NOT breaking any treaties or law by doing it and NOT being aggressive or hostile towards our neighbords. We are also NOT blocking any resources that we know of.

We would also like to ask our honored neighbors at CFC to restrain from sending official messages for such puny reasons. Our diplomatic body has been already informed that you wish for a meeting in order to try to renegotiate the agreement and we will have a member of the new diplomatic body contact CFC in 3 turns, when the punishment is over. We think any doubts or ideas about units' positioning could be settled in there, it is hardly a serious enough reason for us to interrupt our elections in order to explain something we have a right to do in a free territory.

Thanking you all kindly

Ambassador TheCat, on behalf of the C3B Official Government

 

[akots]

A bit contradictory to itself, I mean their letter. It might be a good idea to move later on some JTs to that warrior to prevent him from doing "a task". Also, we have to trust them. If they say that the unit has no hostile intentions, we can move our slaves adjacent to the unit and hope that C3B can keep their non-hostile intention promise.

It seems that this wariror has triggered barbarian horsemen movement north few turns ago when he was travelling to board a galley.

 

[Cheetah]

Still, I'm a bit concerned that we do not have an archive of our agreements. I did not remember that these agreements expired, and neither did anyone else on this team I suppose, as no-one said anything.

I don't like that Warrior there. It would be nice if we could clean up the remaining barbarians and withdraw our more visible units to our lands, before surrounding the Warrior with JTs.

But I don't like the fact that we don't seem to have any control with our agreements.

Then I would also point out that it seems strange that they don't want to take the time to answer a diplomatic letter...

Oh, and you just have to love their statement that their Warrior isn't blocking any resources that they know of!

(I'm sure they will soon discover Gonpowder and wants to know if there is any saltpeter in those hills. )

 

[Goonie]

Whoever has been running the FA has been sloppy beyond belief.

 

[RegentMan]

Sigh... they know that we consider that territory ours. What sort of mission could that warrior be on? Reserving a square for a settler en route?

 

[rcoutme]

That warrior is likely looking for our ancient cavalry unit, because they know that we can watch the coast with a horse unit w/o their seeing it from the coast. They were very worried about a solitary AC 4 squares from their nearest city, which is inexplicable from a defensive point of view (especially given the quantity of immortals they have in that region). Thus, their focus on a 2-mp unit suggests that they were dropping that warrior for one reason...to make sure we were not watching the coast for invasion.