 |
| |
|
|
Kloreep
|
 |
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by conmcb25
Read the chat, either F-P was sincere or a very good liar.  |
He was definitely sincere.
But, again, I want to emphasize we should be looking over our shoulder. For one thing, they could be sincere now and change their minds later post-CDG. For another, I think this team is capable of attacking PAL if we thought we had a good chance, which I'm not sure PAL gets because they talk mainly to con, a PAL advocate, just as we talk mainly to FP. Just because FP may like the idea of allying with us doesn't mean his team is behind him as much.
quote:
Originally posted by conmcb25
quote:
Originally posted by Donegeal
The MP culture does not fit into PBEM culture. They are going to be very difficult to handle diplomaticly no matter who they run up against. This amazing sense of urgentcy just doesn't cut it. |
I dont agree here. These statements imply that the two cultures can not work together.
I disagree. It wont be easy but I believe it can be done. |
I don't think Don's saying it won't work, I think he's saying we may be the ones doing the adapting; and that if they meet someone who won't in game 2, their diplomatic options will be curtailed.
We can hope... 
quote:
Originally posted by conmcb25
Whats the matter with a sense of urgency? Just look at the way they have proposed things from a very strategic geopolitical veiw point. Is there anything they said about Grand Strategy that you really disagree with? |
Mainly that other teams may not feel quite so urgent... in this situation their strength makes their urgency transferable, as teams will really want to figure out if this strong team is with them or not. But in other situations where other teams don't feel the same urgency, trying to rush them might not be very productive.
quote:
Originally posted by conmcb25
They have already met us half way. They were hoping there was no deal with CDG, and we could begin to choke them NOW.
I got them talked into going along with a tech trade where we wont screw up the deal with CDG, BUT just remember from there viewpoint every tech we give to CDG, moves them closer and closer to Berzerkers, every tech we give them makes CDG a tougher target to take out.
THATS HOW PAL LOOKS AT THIS.
I with some help from FP got them to comprimise on this. Im asking us to expand the way we think and meet them half way.
The diplomacy is not going to be easy, but not because they are unreasonable. They have already demonstrated there reasonability with the comprimise on the tech trade.
Diplomacy will be difficult because we have two different CIV Playing cultures. If we can meet them halfway though I believe we can work those issues out.
Look at this team this way. Either they are your best friend or your worst enemy. Thats the way they do business. |
 Good analysis.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Octavian X
|
 |
Probably buried under piles of Literature, Biology, or Government homework
Jan 2002
time: 23:35
|
|
To be totally honest, I'm not yet sold of the idea of an alliance with PAL just yet. I just don't trust them or their team structure enough. Even now, I think cracks are appearing within the team. For example, F-P kicked Lord_Phan from the chat, something I've never seen in a diplomatic situation. This could be demonstrating a lack of good team concensus and organization. It also makes F-P stand out further as a dictator-type figure (his apparent of domination of the team, from being the major single turn player and diplomatic head being others), another problem that could lead to future internal troubles for them.
I don't know, maybe PAL won't crack this game. Maybe an alliance will work. But, at this particular point in time, I must strongly disagree with any pact that would carry our alliance into Round 2, as may have cracked by then, and as it could be a violation of U.N. rules against making deals with unmet teams.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hot_Enamel
|
 |
Melbourne, Australia
Aug 2002
time: 14:35
|
|
OK – I also have finally got around to reading the chat.
Note however, that I have found it difficult to keep up with the volume of other posts in this forum, so I please excuse me if I repeat anything that anyone else has said.
I have already made my opinion known before that we should align with PAL against CDG.
After reading the chat, it has neither changed nor reinforced my mind. It is in my opinion that it is in Apolytons best interest to align with PAL.
I thought it before and I still think it now.
1.
PAL do tech trading like I like to do tech trading with allies.
When you align, then you commit to a partnership and everything gets shared. Kinda like marriage.
So I have no care at all with regard to counting tech points. Just gift techs to each other as they become available. I don’t care who researches the most.
But on the flip side of that, lets make sure everything else is equal.
They are getting some extra slave workers right ??? Well hand some over PAL.
They may be generating more gold than us ?? Well, lets keep the joint cash reserves equal and evenly within the teams.
And even if they are the Growth team, we are still going to agree to an even split of the continent. Just because they can produce more settlers, faster than us, doesn’t mean they get more land.
Let’s agree to all that… but do not sign any NAP. I hate NAP’s.
2.
When I read the chat, they certainly offered some bones… but I also noticed the sticks.
They made it clear, that they are not afraid of us.
They made it clear, that they are the biggest and baddest team with huge growth, and we should be afraid.
They made it clear, that if we don’t align, they will look for another partner. Probably CDG and we need to be afraid of that.
I want to make sure we also put our position forward.
We are not afraid of them
We are being offered some great deals from CDG that THEY need to be afraid of.
And they need to know that we will NOT be rushed into a decision.
However, we do see the advantages of aligning ourselves with PAL, and it is most likely that we will make the wisest decision.
We need to make sure that they understand that we will not break any agreement with CDG, and we will go through with the tech trade we have with them. However, we do not have an alliance and are open to the possibility (as we always were considering anyway) to putting the heat on the as soon as our tech trade is complete.
3.
We make an agreement that CDG is destroyed ASAP after the completion of our tech deal, and as soon as both teams have enough forces to make their destruction assured.
And we would like the option, and tactics discussed well beforehand, to include the possibility to avoid the use of hopilites to save our GA.
We make an agreement that upon the destruction of CDG, that we immediately agree to a joint goal of meeting the other continent. (ie suicide galleys). And upon meeting the other continent, we agree to align with one of them to destroy the other.
That will include the gifting of tech gold and whatever is needed to ensure a quick and easy victory.
The decision on which team to chose will not be rushed into, and will not be pre-decided. (ie we may end up helping the Germans if it is a wise decision for us to do so.)
4.
If PAL thinks this Game 1 alliance will be carried forward into the next game, then all I can say is….suckerssss…..
We will select our alliances on the next game within the guidelines as what is best for Apolyton. Usually, this means aligning with the weakest against the strongest, which will most likely mean PAL will be in our crosshairs. By all means, encourage them to think this alliance will carry over, but in my opinion, I seriously doubt it will.
5.
Some things to consider…
Trading CDG IW is not that bad. It will mean, that we will find out what we are fighting against.
If they have iron…its against swords
If they don’t…then its spears & archers.
Our tactics can be changed accordingly.
Trading CDG republic is also not a bad idea.
Attacking when someone just went into anarchy is a wise move.
Not sure if we can time it right… but you never know.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Togas
|
 |
California
Jun 2002
time: 21:35
|
|
Summary of PAL Chat on 5/11/04:
Met in chat with 4 representatives from PAL: Their Pres, VP, Foreign Affairs, and MOI.
conmcb25 showed up later and took over the chat, so I invite him to add in any details I miss.
The chat was not, as I feared, about making additional promises and deals and obligations. It was more of a strategy session and information exchange.
1) PAL is looking at an attack 50 turns from now, and expects it to be a joint attack. They are preparing a horseman army for this attack. They plan to build a road down towards meeting moutain and attack in conjunction with Apolyton swords that would, somehow draw out the CDG defenders and allow PAL to strike their rear and reserves. F-P was proposing that we create a 50 sword army for this attack. I didn't think that such an army would be possible.
2) They prefer that CDG not have Masonry and are trying to scheme up a way to keep them from having it. They fear that CDG will rush walls in their cities and make the attack very costly for PAL. They want us to either not trade Masonry, or to make long term deals where CDG researches Mapmaking and other lengthy techs and we throw in Masonry (and other techs) for it. They also are considering offering such a deal to CDG themselves, and just not following through on the deal -- attacking them before the deal is complete.
3) They have met CDG. CDG sent them a polite letter, but no proposals have been made. They told CDG they hadn't met us, and realized that the lie was pretty obvious as we told CDG we had met PAL. They're going to clean that up and probably use a very distant diplomacy where they respond slowly and don't do direct chats.
4) They have no iron. They have only 1 fur and may have silks.
5) They have no decent coastal cities to build harbors, and really want a trade route and prefer that we build a road. They will build a road to "meeting mountain" and we will road to it as well.
NOTE: This bothers me. While it may be true, it seems like a hell of a lot more work to build a long road than to build a city and a harbor. Roads are invitations for invasions. My fear is that PAL will attack us once we destroy CDG as our main army will be out of position in CDG land, and the traderoad we built will give them a rapid advance to our core. My advice is that we make building such a road a low priority, and we make permanent sentries along the roadway ... for the "purpose of keeping barbs from ripping it up"
6) They really don't like us getting the Statue of Zeus. Yes, they told us we can have it, but they are having reservations now because they fear that we won't have any use for the free cavs other than to, well, attack them. Voicing such concerns gave me a lot of pause. People tend to assume that others think the way they do, and often people fear things in others because such thoughts are festering in them.
Now, it may be that this concern is entirely practical -- why do we need a bunch of free cav when CDG will be dead by the time we get them? We could have a far more useful wonder. However, if they do fear betrayal by us, it certainly means we should fear betrayal from them.
However, this issue should be debated and I'll start a new thread about it.
7) Any previous scouting restrictions have been waived. They trust us now. They just ask that we don't kill their barbs as they're farming them for slave labor.
8) They want to share resources and luxuries, of course, but seem to feel bad that Apolyton would be the ones giving all of the excess. I told them that the extra luxuries aren't doing us any good. We'd prefer to do what's best for the alliance.
--Togas
|
|
| |
|
|
|
conmcb25
|
 |
Angmar
Aug 2002
time: 23:35
|
|
On the chat with PAL, I believe Togas is right on.
Now on the opinion part.
As far as the road goes it could be as simple as this looking at it from PAL's viewpoint:
"Hey we are building a road way to the south, to help you get rid of the third Civ that is crowding you for land. So why dont you meet us with a road so we can trade?"
Or the more sinister it will eventually be an invasion route.
A road I might add would be easier to control trade. Lets say we give them iron for 5 turns so they can do upgrades, we cant cut it short with a harbor, but could if we had a road.
In either case whatever we do sentinels are a must. Sentinels are a standard procedure in MP. If nothing else PAL wont be expecting us to use them, so they would give all that much more advance warning.
They have a good point about the Statue of Zues, but again I will take that with a grain of salt.
Maybe someone needs to do a "resource study" and tell us what is more sheild efficient? Building 7 horsies that are up-grade-able (210 sheilds) or building Zeus (200 sheilds) that will give us an Ancient Horseman (non up-grade-able) every 5 turns until metalurgy. But an Ancient Horseman is pretty much obsolete at Gunpowder.
3 attack vs a 4 defense
Some one should look at this and we do need to open another thread on it.
We also need someone to sim the possibility of an attack in 50 turns.
If GK is too busy, maybe Krill can do this. But we need to give them some idea how prepared we can be in 50 turns.
And Im not saying this because "PAL wants us to do it".
Im saying this because PAL suggested it, they are obviously working on a plan to do it. And we need to know as a team what our possibilities are. Especially if we want some muscle in this alliance, which is a concern that was stated several time during the PAL Alliance debate.
Knowledge is power. Building and developing and simming the future is our strong point. Lets not let PAL get too far ahead of us in this reguard.
As you all know Im 100% for this alliance. But Im 150% for Apoly, lets watch our backs and do what we need to do to ensure we have some muscle and negotiating power in this alliance.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krill
|
 |
On a cold wet rock, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Dec 2003
time: 05:35
|
|
While I can run a sim, I will have to meke certain asumptions, such as city placement, barbs attacking (look to the west), build orders, etc. I could get it completely wrong, or spot on (nah, not going to happen  )
And depending on the tech pace, we can use the AC as portable shields, so they will continue to be of use until Metalurgy. An extra 14 shields every 5 turns is not bad in corrupt cities.
And, Con, you need to change your sig. You're no longer a consul
|
|
| |
|
|
|
conmcb25
|
|
Angmar
Aug 2002
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Krill
While I can run a sim, I will have to meke certain asumptions, such as city placement, barbs attacking (look to the west), build orders, etc. I could get it completely wrong, or spot on (nah, not going to happen ) |
Yes you would, I would run t and record what you did every turn and post it, not only would that answer the war in 50 turns but would give all something to look at to plan out and discuss what we are going to do the next 50 turns
quote:
Originally posted by Krill
And depending on the tech pace, we can use the AC as portable shields, so they will continue to be of use until Metalurgy. An extra 14 shields every 5 turns is not bad in corrupt cities. |
Darn good point, thats why I think someone should look at this from all angles.
quote:
Originally posted by Krill
And, Con, you need to change your sig. You're no longer a consul |
Another good point Consider it done
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2004 00:19
|