 |
| |
|
|
Kloreep
|
 |
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
Two PMs from Arrian:
quote:
Hey there, gluttonous fiends... errr... friends! I just wanted to finalize our deal for Invention research.
We are currently researching Invention at 8 turn pace. Our beaker output this turn was 147. Divided into thirds (us, you, python), that's 49 beakers/turn. So, if you could send us 49 gold per turn, that will cover the research costs nicely. If we get a devaluation from another team getting the tech first, and/or if we can turn down research on the final turn (likely), we will refund whatever is appropriate.
One question that I'm not sure how to answer is what to do regarding trades to other teams. I don't expect there will be many opportunities to sell Invention to MAST, SS or LL, but you never know. If that happens, perhaps we can agree that any sale made must be for cash, and the cash will be split 3 ways?
Thoughts, comments?
-Arrian |
quote:
One more thing, FYI: Latin Lover is trying to buy Feudalism. They approached Python about it. Python asked CoD about it, and we have told them not to sell it, as it should be yours to sell. So, to the extent you want your biggest rival to have it, you could sell it to them.
-Arrian |
On Invention: There are three teams that will need Invention. Sunshine, MAST, and LL.
I suggest we ask for exclusive re-sale rights to LL. Only CoD can sell Invention to Sunshine and MAST, only we can sell it to LL.
See where I'm going with this?  Just because we have re-sale rights doesn't mean we'll necessarily sell it. This would be great for stunting their chances at Leo's, and at getting Muskets should we attack.
As far as what to do this turn, I suggest we start sending the 50g per turn immediately and trust in CoD to work out the specifics fairly.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
|
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
New PM from Arrian.
What's our stance on the investigation thing? I'd say we should certainly do it if they're willing to pay for it all. I'm not so sure I want to be putting money in to this, though.
On the trades, I think we should go for #1, and assure them we would work out NTAs.
Also, I think we should tell them we'll increase payments to up to 80 gold a turn if that would speed things up; we can handle that under Rep without any treasury loss.
quote:
Damn. I was hoping you had already established the embassy, and then we could just pay for the investigation itself. Can you do me a favor and check how much the embassy would cost? Depending on how much, maybe we could split the cost of the embassy and then we would pay the entire cost of the city investigation?
Re: invention trades... actually, I see two ways it could go:
1) your suggestion
2) one team brokers the tech, and we divide the spoils evenly (perhaps with a slight bonus for the civ that does the legwork) between us.
I like #2, although it only really works if we sell Invention for cash. The problem with your proposal is that we don't know which civs will even want to buy Invention from us - they may already have deals set up. It may be we can only find one buyer. One major thing: the LAST thing I want is for Monkey to get it. We're having enough trouble as it is. Frankly, I wouldn't mind if it doesn't get sold at all. But if it does, let's try for a standard 20-turn no-trade, ok?
Let me know what you think.
Thanks,
-Arrian |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
|
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Kloreep,
I'll take the embassy thing back to my team and get back to you.
Regarding invention... who are you going to sell it to anyway? Removing Monkey, that leaves SS, MAST & LL. I was under the impression that one or more of those teams had a tech lead, and therefore might get Invention on their own. The list of potential buyers is short to say the least. So assigning rights to trade - say Python to SS, CoD to MAST and you guys to LL - is very likely to end up screwing one or two of us when it turns out only one team even wants to buy invention. We really should try and figure out what the other teams are doing, to assess what the trade market looks like. If there really are 3 buyers, then your proposal may work. If there aren't, it really can't.
Regarding payments... well, the objective is to have you guys fund exactly 1/3 of the research cost, and I thought we calculated that ahead of time, so there shouldn't be any need to increase your payments. IIRC, we are within a couple of turns of discovering Invention.
Which brings up another topic: what to research next and who is to do it. CoD is fine with continuing to be the researcher, but now that you're in republic we might want to re-evaluate that. Let's check our team's beaker power again: what is the maximum beakers per turn you guys can muster, taking only happiness into account? I'll look into the same question for CoD. However is highest should research the next tech.
Or we could both do research... it kinda depends on what's going on with the other teams. I haven't heard ANYTHING from the other teams. IIRC, Krill sent out notes asking about tech trades & research, and received no response. Have you guys heard anything?
-Arrian |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
|
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Kloreep,
Cort sent a note with the save, and I'd like to add a couple of things to that.
First, with the completion of Invention, we really need to come to an agreement regarding the sale of that tech to other teams. As you know, CoD would very much prefer to have one team sell it and split the costs more-or-less evenly.
Second, we need to decide on future research and who is doing what. Last turn, our max beaker output was 156 beakers/turn. What is Tabemono's max output?
We obviously really want gunpowder, so that's the tech we're inclined to research next. The question is whether you wish to approach this the same way we approached invention, splitting the cost 3 ways, or whether you would like to research another tech while we're doing gunpowder? Depending on the answer, we can figure out how Python can best help (I'm thinking they provide funds to the researcher or researchers like before).
-Arrian |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UnOrthOdOx
|
 |
Hello....
Jun 2002
time: 22:34
|
|
Do we have a no-sistine agreement? Couldn't we take Sistine/Bach as a compensation?
No I don't believe I just said that either, but am looking at this...they might be just as effective a wonder in the long term.
It's FAR better, IMO, to trade it around and not reveal a tech alliance than to attempt to keep it from everyone. I would even suggest trading it TO LL. Hell, I say WE should even do it. Preferably for gold. (less for them to upgrade)
.
.
.
Had GoW traded Chivalry to RP right off like myself and Ghengis were advocating, there would have been far less preperation on thier part.
Last edited by UnOrthOdOx on 25-06-2004 at 00:17
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UnOrthOdOx
|
|
Hello....
Jun 2002
time: 22:34
|
|
quote:
Arrian, CoD,
In an attempt to get as many things diplomatically set as possible for my upcomming vacation, I'm pushing things a bit to get it all done before I leave next week.
On the issue of capabilities, the techies inform me that we are currently able to produce 161 Beakers at a 91 GPT deficit. However, they assure me that our ample food gathering skills coupled with courthouses soo to be finished will push that number up sooner rather than later. Gunpowder would be a most beneficial tech to us as well, and I believe we would be more than willing to research it ASAP with funding. Sometimes the food nazi's(tm) don't agree with me on these things, though, and I will have a team answer soon.
On the issue of trading, some have expressed concern with trading Invention. Most particularly to Latin Lovers. Myself, I do not share that trepidation and some discussion is ongoing at present.
UnOrthOdOx |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UnOrthOdOx
|
|
Hello....
Jun 2002
time: 22:34
|
|
quote:
UnO,
Good to hear back from you. It appears our research abilities are roughly even. Our economy is about to jump a bit soon too, due to domestic improvements of our own (jungle chopping is proceeding well). I guess it's a tossup as to which one of us researches gunpowder. It doesn't really matter to me. If all things are equal, maybe we should go with you, in case WW kicks in for us and we have to go up to 20% lux spending.
We also might want to consider having both CoD and Tabemono research techs, with Python funding both of us. I guess that depends on what we can do on the trade front (what's the deal with the other side of the tech tree - Monotheism and beyond?). What do you think? 1 researcher, or 2?
-Arrian |
quote:
Sunshine still will maintain a lead on the other side of the tech tree, and will be looking to trade those for the bottom half of the tree. MAST seems to be content grabbing the optional techs along the way, and LL I'm just not sure about.
I would say it benefits us best for now in researching the bottom half of the tree and trading with Sunshine, but that we need to take care in how we go about it. Don't need others seeing too obvious a tech cooperation.
This allows, hopefully, for all three of our teams to maintain a tech parity with Sunshine as well as build up enough bank to keep upgrades going. If the opportunity to pass Sunshine arises, we should of course take it, however.
-UnOrthOdOx
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
|
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Yep, just started slow last turn. We're currently on 18 turns till, but we haven't dipped in to deficit yet.
How much do you guys want to fund us?
-Kloreep |
In response to that e-mail which I sent above:
quote:
Kloreep,
Sorry I didn't reply on this at the time- I missed this email and only just found it.
Had I seen this we probably wouldn't have started Monotheism and would be now sending you gold to enable max pace research on GP, which we're keen on getting sooner rather than later.
So either we break off Monotheism research for now, or, if Python can send you enough gold to allow max research, that can include their cash contribution for Monotheism to you instead of us, and we'll supply Monotheism as part payment for GP, with a cash balancer afterwards depending on the research cost of GP.
Therfore, if GP costs 1300 beakers to research, that's 433 each. Mono will cost 630 beakers to research, or 210 each.
Therfore,
CoD pay 433g to Tabemono for GP,
Tabemono pay 210g to CoD for Mono,
net = CoD pay 223g to Tabemono.
Python pay 433g to Tabemono for GP and 210g to CoD
The amount the Python would owe CoD is close to what CoD would owe Tabemono, so if Python could manage to pay their third of GP and their third of Mono (433 + 210 = 643) to Tabemono, then CoD pay the balance of 23g to Tabemono, and all 3 teams get both techs, and quickly. It all depends on whether Python can spare what's needed to cover Tabemono's deficit. CoD estimated they could get GP in 12 turns at max (90%) research, and at that time
Tabemono estimated a higher research capability, so a similar or better time-frame would be likely at max power.
I've posted this idea in our own forum and will send it on to Python too, and we'll see what everybody says.
Regards,
Cort |
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-05-2004 02:03
) looking at our diplo thread is what to do once Invention is researched. We're thinking we should split up trading rights as evenly as we can; we get the rights to trade it to certain team(s), you get the rights to trade it to the others.
|