28-01-2004 12:37									#1
	3-Way Chat - Poly/CFC/CGN - Policy Thread Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

We are scheduled to have a 3-way chat with both CFC and CGN on Thurdsay at 4 p.m. EST (I believe that is GMT -5). This thread is to set policy for such chat.

First of all, preliminary discussion with CFC has revealed that CGN's intention might be to set up an official Poly-CFC-CGN alliance. This of course, while sounding good, might have negative consequences should CGN win the war with GWT.

Background: CGN has reported that GWT has begun an advance with 21 MIs, 13 pikes, 5 cats and 3 workers. Against this force, CGN has 18 knights, 15 MIs and 20 pikes. This seems like more than enough but the reality is that GWT might have as many as 20-25 Ansars waiting in reserve which can very well be decisive.

For CGN it is a do or die situtation and it is obvious they will seek as much help as can be. However, by signing away at an alliance, we risk serious consequences down the road should CGN emerge victorious.

In other words, we cannot allow either GWT or CGN to emerge with a dominant position on the other continent.

So, what will our policy be during the chat? I suggest the following, and leave the details to the FAM and the rest of the team:

- We cannot accept a binding agreement for a long term alliance with CGN

- We must assist CGN by all means necessary so at to not ensure their defeat.

- We cannot assist CGN any further in their attempts to defeat GWT should the chance arise.

- We should make our concerns public with CFC so as to have the same position in this matter.


My suggestion, rather than to have a binding agreement, is to reassure CGN that we are on their side and that it is not in our interests to see GWT defeat them. We can ensure them that we will do all that is in our power for GWT's attack to be blunted.

Remember, our best hope is that this war continue in a stalement for many turns to come and that GWT's GA is withered away in futile attacks. But also consider that Sipahi's are not far from appearing and that CGN's chances of a smashing victory are not to be underestimated in the future.

Please discuss, we have around a day and half to debate this.

-MZ

	28-01-2004 12:47									#2
	Suffering from ads?

CGN can't ask for much from us other than an alliance. I say give it to them. Right now it's only words since the poll is set against sending them Cats. We can afford 'words' very easily now. GWT/GCA are already at war with us. There's no harm in making it official in CGN's eyes. I think the GWT-CGN wars will always end in a near stalemate unless CFC or APO takes an active role post Astronomy/Navigation against one of them. If I had to be concerened it would be now and the concern would be for CGN.

	28-01-2004 12:57									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

BF, I have no objections in making it official, my main concern is a timeline. Do we really want to be allied and assisting CGN even if they are marching into Parthemunde? Or worse, even after?

	28-01-2004 14:13									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

You know... there's a good point to be made here...

I will agree that our own power interests dictate that neither CGN nor GWT outright wins their war.

The following possiblities seem to exist by war's end:

A. We are allied with CGN and they win their war with GWT, becoming the dominant power on the board, but still allied with Apolyton and CFC (all remaining players are allied, and Apolyton is only 2nd place). No alliance survives victory, so the game may consist of an Apolyton/CFC alliance trying to keep the game competitive with a hegemonic CGN (or, worse, CFC helps CGN and the game ends pretty quick).

B. We are NOT allied with CGN and when CGN starts winning, we start helping GWT. The war ends in a stalemate and both GWT and CGN hate us.

C. We are allied with CGN and the war ends in a stalemate. Great resources were lost by both CGN and GWT in the war, neither has become a dominant power. Apolyton and CFC have been building during this time and have gained considerable ground (in terms of economic development) on both CGN and GWT. CGN and GWT may realize at this point that they have lost considerable ground to our continent, but CGN and Apolyton/CFC remain allied against GWT/GCA, hopefully ensuring (or at least making more likely) that we avoid a CGN-GWT alliance to catch up to and challenge Apolyton.

D. We are NOT allied with CGN and the war stalemates on its own. We are most likely friendlier with CGN than GWT, but CGN remains suspicious of us, especially since we have perhaps used the opportunity to surpass them in economic development. In this situation, our relationship with CFC will be absolutely critical to determining the endgame.

--------------

I think BigFree is on to something here... if we're coy about supporting CGN or "allying" with CGN in this war, they are going to be less likely to play nice with us after its over, whether they won or stalemated. If they win the war outright, we're screwed regardless.

The area where I agree with you is that being "allied" may very well prevent us from helping GWT once CGN gains the upper hand. The problem is, let's say we DO help GWT when CGN gains the upper hand... GWT isn't going to remain friendly with us after the war (afterall, GCA are their allies) and CGN is quite certain to see this as a betrayal whether we're formally allied to them or not.

Perhaps an alliance that expires? Perhaps we could even get an alliance that specifically states that we only support a DEFENSIVE war by CGN. Can we trust that CGN will understand that while we wish to seen CGN defend themselves, we have little interest in seeing them conquer the entire planet? Could we appeal to the idea that the GAME itself should be won by builder victory means (spaceship or diplomatic) and that we are opposed to any conquest or domination victory?

Would that work with CFC, who have little shot at any victory aside from an outside shot at either a Diplomatic victory or a spaceship victory or a much better shot at a "cooperative" victory (assuming they're willing to do such a thing)?

Perhaps we should be honest that we do not support either CGN or GWT becoming the dominant power of their continent... we fully support CGN in this war because they are clearly the defending power and furthermore because GWT has made it clear to us that they are hostile to us. We warn CGN from the outset that we cannot support a march on GWT's core.

By being honest about what our actual interests are, since it seems likely CGN isn't so stupid as to not figure them out, would we gain anything we'd lose by trying to lie to them or play coy about supporting them? Would they, at all, be more inclined to trust us?

Furthermore, would we even have a REMOTE chance of put just enough fear in CGN of what happens if the DO march on GWT's own territory that they choose not to even if given the option to try it?

All of this needs to be discussed. I'm not entirely convinced that obscuring what our interests are and trying to remain coy about siding with anyone is going to get us what we want in the long haul... if CGN is truly afraid of GWT conquering them (as they should be), perhaps they'd even understand our concern about anyone conquering anyone from here on out. That our interest is the balance of power.

As for CFC... that's another whole can of worms. The policy with them I think is to have a frank discussion at some point about how the game is going to be won and how Apolyton and CFC are going to accomplish it... is there a way we can do it "cooperatively" and give each other due credit even if the other one wins? Perhaps now is not the time for that, perhaps it is... but one thing is for sure, we want CFC in OUR camp, not CGN's. I fear that if we play coy on the alliance issue and CFC decides to formally ally with CGN, Apolyton is going to get outmanuevered here. I'd rather not see that happen.

	28-01-2004 14:16									#5
	Remove this text

hmm.... why not make our aid and an official alliance conditional upon CGN agreeing that they will defend their own territory, but will not invade and conquer GWT's territory (unless the agreement is later renegotiated)?

Something to think about.... would CGN agree to it? would it be wise to propose it? what is gained by being honest about this versus trying to deceive them?

Personally, I'm tempted to believe that laying out our interests on the table honestly for their consideration, we show them that we area actually invested in making an alliance with them... if we fail to lay out our real interests, do we send the signal that we are NOT truly invested in an alliance with them and that the situation will change the moment the wind changes?

	28-01-2004 17:27									#6
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I say, that whatever is decised, that 1 condition be made as part of any agreement. That CGN (assuming they get an upper hand) is to totally destroy GCA!! I think that CFC will also agree to this.

E_T

	28-01-2004 21:03									#7
	Suffering from ads?

I like the idea of being honest about where our interests lie. It shouldn't come as any surprise to them that we are in favor of them successfully defending themselves, especially since GWT and CGA are hostile towards us (the latter especially so), but that the creation of a hegemon (be it CGN or GWT) on their continent will make it more difficult for us to win the game*.

Well, that last part isn't necessarily true. So long as the war takes a long time and is bloody, one civ emerging victorious does not seal our fate. Our strength will continue to build, and so long as CFC remains our ally, the two of us can most likely out-research a single power over there, since we can divide the tech tree and/or go with our current system whereby Apolyton researches and CFC contributes cash. So, a CGN victory is preferable to a GWT victory not only because of those team's current relations with us, but because if GWT wins, they can easily afford to provide CGA with a tidy chunk 'o land, enough to become CFC's equal, thus allowing them to outpace us in tech.

-Arrian

	29-01-2004 02:58									#8
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I don't see what the problem would be with breaking an alliance, whether official or not, to stop CGN from conquering GWT.

	29-01-2004 03:58									#9
	Put an end to popups!

My suggestion would be to make an official alliance but a very simple escape clause.

I don't want people to end up saying we won because we broke every treaty we signed. Only one or two...

	29-01-2004 04:54									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Hum, maybe bless them getting a little bit of GWT's fridge if they actually have the military to pull it off but disallow attacking the core instead?

(Might be much more platable to CGN.)

Of course, we'd have to specify what line that is.

I'd also include a note that they are free to raize any city owned by GFC.

quote: Originally posted by Arnelos hmm.... why not make our aid and an official alliance conditional upon CGN agreeing that they will defend their own territory, but will not invade and conquer GWT's territory (unless the agreement is later renegotiated)? Something to think about.... would CGN agree to it? would it be wise to propose it? what is gained by being honest about this versus trying to deceive them? Personally, I'm tempted to believe that laying out our interests on the table honestly for their consideration, we show them that we area actually invested in making an alliance with them... if we fail to lay out our real interests, do we send the signal that we are NOT truly invested in an alliance with them and that the situation will change the moment the wind changes?

	29-01-2004 05:07									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Eh. GWT and CGN are mortal enemies. I would not expect CGN to agree to any alliance that requires them to act defensively. They will fight off their enemy and possibly decimate their army, but that can't capture/raze cities? Please, that is ridiculous. They will not be willing to keep their enemy around with the same great production potential that they have now.

We will most likely be signing some sort of alliance, but we must carefully decide under what terms it will be, for other teams (CFC included) could become very suspicious of us.

I think the only thing we can agree to is moral support. We don't have the money to spare due to our own research, and current technology prevents us from sending units. I think the only thing we can do at this time is sink the GWT galley near our land and be done with it (granted, then we risk the whole war warriness factor and stuff with them as well).

	29-01-2004 05:27									#12
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by WhiteBandit I think the only thing we can agree to is moral support. We don't have the money to spare due to our own research, and current technology prevents us from sending units. I think the only thing we can do at this time is sink the GWT galley near our land and be done with it (granted, then we risk the whole war warriness factor and stuff with them as well).

This may be our best angle.

We tell them we can't really offer any tangible support right now, so what would the purpose of a 3-way alliance be?

On another subject...

What do we do about 3-way tech sharing? I know that's what CFC wants more than any alliance. They want to scratch out tech parity somehow and a 3-way alliance/tech-sharing arrangement may be just what they need. How do we respond to that?

	29-01-2004 07:16									#13
	Support Apolyton

No alliance.

Just a mutual understanding, that we will be helping them as much as possible.
eg..."it is not in CFC & APO best interests to allow GWT control of an entire continent."

But we should NOT be limiting ourselves from trading with GWT if it is in our best interests to do so. (ie non military techs & maps)

I know with have a tech embargo already..I disagreed with that, but it happened so fast that I did not get a chance to post my objection. (I was also crook at the time).

	29-01-2004 10:01									#14
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Here's what we need to do:

PRIVATE CHAT WITH CFC:

Talk up how strong and unique our alliance is, and how it's great that we're working together. We are in a locked alliance until we're the last two in the game. It would be a shame to interfere with that.

We don't need a third wheel. Adding CGN as an equal partner just means that either of the two of us could buddy up with CGN and stab the other once CGN wins the war. CGN, if they win, will be THE greatest power on the planet and we have to stay together as we may have to face that power soon enough.

It should be Poly & CFC above all else, including CGN.

PRIVATE CHAT WITH CGN:

We're friends with CFC and CGN and while it makes sense for all of us to form a triple alliance, it's not really very wise. CGN is clearly the most powerful amongst us, we're second, and CFC is third. We cannot equally contribute to the alliance and what will happen if we all contribute is that CFC will get a really nice free ride, and that CGN will be putting in more than anyone.

Let's not complicate matters. We have a great working relationship now. Adding in another party gives us entitlement issues, fairness issues, and balancing issues that didn't exist before.

We should agree to research different techs and to sell techs between each other at a discount, or to trade them straight up. The team that researches the tech deserves some return for their work. If we make a policy of just handing over techs as we research them, then CGN will be doing 60% of the research, Poly 35% and CFC 15% (very roughtly). However, all of us will be equally sharing in the benefits. That's really not fair to the big teams.

Let's keep the statis quo with techs.

IN GROUP MEETINGS

Apolyton fully supports CGN in it's efforts to fight and defeat GWT and their GCA allies.

We recognize that GWT has started this war and that CGN has every right to end it. We would prefer a state of peace on the far continent, but we understand that it is not possible at this time. We hope to see neither side wiped out, especially our good friends at CGN.

We are willing to aid our friends at CGN by spying on GWT cities (with compesation for costs only) and by giving intel as we discover it. Due to the fact that we cannot cross to their continent we cannot actually aid or help in CGN's defense.

If we could give military aid we probably would, but we can't. Right now our aid can only be intelligence and moral support.

--Togas

p.s. We may just want to use up time at this chat to get them to tell us all about the war with GWT and to speculate and plan about what may happen and how CGN can beat GWT. Devote the meeting to talking up the war and giving them actual moral support.

	29-01-2004 18:07									#15
	Theo to CFC, why we should get them to wait Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

from my post in the turn 155 thread

quote: I did some checking and no one has Monarchy at this time. Also, GCA still needs Theo and Chiv and GWT does not have Theo. We will soon see as to the current direction of GWT's research, because with us getting Theo, the beaker cost has dropped from 960 to 720. If CFC also gets Theo, the cost will drop further to 600 beakers. [EDIT] No one also has Invention, either[/EDIT] We should let CFC know that we want to have that tech cost GWT as much as possible, so we should wait to give it to them until then. For instance, if GWT is researching Theo at 100 beakers per turn (possible with GA, but not likely because of all of the Ansar upgrades they are paying for), that would save them 2 turns of research if CFC also had it.

If it IS our policy to slow down and "harm" GWT as much as possible, we should try to hold off giving our extra techs to CFC until we know that GWT has them. We should reach Invention first and we have already made prior agreements with CGN as to gifting it to them. So that tech cost will go from 1056 to 924 with just us getting it. It will further drop down to 792 with CGN also getting it. If we give it immediately to CFC, we drop the cost again to 660 beakers. This last drop could mean that GWT gets it much sooner than we want them to, thereby staying abreast of us more in the tech race, especially with their GA. As we are benifiting from the tech agreement with CGN, we need to keep in mind that we want GWT to stay af far back as possible. The more money that they have to channel into research, the more they won't have for upgrades & rush building.

We can keep an eye on the techs and gift them to CFC as soon as we see GWT has them. Besides, at this stage in the game, CFC should be building things to get it's economy up to support the overall research plan, i.e. settlers, workers, Markets, Courthouses & FP. Having too many things to build, when you can't realistically build them, also isn't very good, either.

MoI E_T

	30-01-2004 03:42									#16
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Re: Alliance

I have no idea what is in our best interests in terms of winning the game. I do know that GWT pissed me off royally with the stunt they pulled with teleporting GCA, so I say to heck with them

	30-01-2004 07:28									#17
	Got spare money?

isn't this supposed to be going on today???

E_T

	30-01-2004 13:46									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

dont' improvise

	30-01-2004 13:52									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

wait, DO improvise... oh damn, I'm not present... (stupid conection..)

	02-02-2004 15:48									#20
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

What happened in the chat?

edit: ah, I see that a log has been posted in the Correspondance thread. However, it is way too long for me (and probably others too) to read it all. Can someone who was there please summarize the outcome? Thanks!

Last edited by BigFurryMonster on 02-02-2004 at 16:38

	02-02-2004 19:44									#21
	Suffering from ads?

ulp, posted in the wrong thread. That's what happens when your staying up past your bed time....

E_T

Last edited by E_T on 02-02-2004 at 19:49

	02-02-2004 20:31									#22
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by BigFurryMonster What happened in the chat? edit: ah, I see that a log has been posted in the Correspondance thread. However, it is way too long for me (and probably others too) to read it all. Can someone who was there please summarize the outcome? Thanks!

nothing was accomplished.

and that was precisely the objective of the chat (not to tie us down into any long-term or hard-to-get-out-of committment)