 |
| |
|
|
Cort Haus
|
 |
London
Apr 2002
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
Hi MZ,
Thanks for your reply. The statement of neutrality implies that you do not have an MPP with ND that would come into effect if GS were to defend themselves against the ND aggression. This is good news. 
ND's aggression against GS - first seizing our Uranium then attacking our holdings (under RP stewardship) - has effectively broken a trade treaty in a way that prevents GS from retaliating without being the in-game treaty breakers with associated penalties. It remains to be seen at this point whether ND will hand over the tech they owe us.
Without Uranium it is effectively game-over for GS, which tends to influence things towards the blaze-of-glory side of the options. To this end, we have no choice but to return to Lego and take back our side of it by force, even driving ND from that continent if necessary. Should that eventuality arise, what would GoW's position be on GS attacking ND on GoW's half of Lego? Seeing as ND have misused the gift they recieved from GoW by using it as a staging post to seize GS land on Lego, we could only hypothetically return those holdings to GoW under condition that they remain GoW cities and are not forwarded to ND.
On the eve of tactical nukes, Uranium becomes essential to offer a deterrent and keep the peace. Would GoW be in a position to trade Uranium to GS should ND not end its occupation of the GS source? On a related question, would GoW be able to trade any of the luxuries that GS would lose in a war with ND?
If ND were to eliminate RP, they would only need Lego's and Vox's vote to win. Hunting down that settler could still be critical.
If ND build Manhatten they also have a shot at victory. With our side of Legoland in ND's hands, ND is very close to dominination. All they need is to attack your side of Legoland, and possibly a few cities on Bob. With only a few nukes they can keep GoW from retaking the cities for one turn (which is all they need). Whether you nuke them or bomb them would make no difference anymore, as ND would have won.
If GoW could mediate a truce where we get our holdings back, together with compensation we would certainly consider it, but it seems that ND is determined to go to war.
We live in Interesting Times, as they say in, er, China 
Regards,
-Cort
|
{edit - truce para near end added}
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
great message!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krill
|
 |
On a cold wet rock, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Dec 2003
time: 05:29
|
|
A couple of things:
- Has Trip told MZ about the Mob bug and wonnder builds?
- I am certain that Aeson knows this, but I can get a Carrier from Monsoon (in addition to the one from Typhoon). We just have to sacrifice the DD build in OB by a god knows how long, and build a Marine in Arashi instead of an MI. We need to hack into the buld queue at the start of the turn, though. We would waste 0 shields on the Carrier, 2 shields on the DD from WW by stealing the desert from OB, and OB goes further into the red with reegards too food.
Next turn we would have to change the build in Monsoon to a carrier, via hacking. Monsoon would have to use one hill from WW in addition to it's own, and the grassland and Bonus grasland from Arashi, and Arashi would then be at 44spt, wasting no shields to finish the Marine/Tank. WW would have us the irrigated desert, to not starve, and get 18 shields. OB coontinues to starve (it will hold).
The following two turns, WW has to use two hills and the desert, to get the DD on time (turn 257), wasting two shields. OB is behind time, but we could change it to an MI, wasting no shields, and getting it in 6 turns (including turn 253, 1315AD)
One less DD, one less MI, but one more carrier and one more Marine/Tank. Your choice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Theseus
|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Krill
- GoW: What if ND finish Manhattan, and build the nukes, as planned. But what if they then hit GoW instead of us? Even with Manhattan built we can't build any nukes without Uranium. If ND took out the Uranium, with a Nuke, and took the FP core (Yellowknife?) and the majorty oof GoWs Carrier fleet, then ND have won the game. Nothing we can do, as they don't even need to invade us, just settle Legoland, and rush Temples. GoW can't pilage ND without their carrier fleet/s either
I was just wondering what would happen if the above scenario were played out... |
No insult intended, but this sounds very Germanic to me.
I think I have a *feel* for how MZ thinks, and he could be led to this thinking in a heartbeat.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DeepO
|
 |
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
Good message, CH.
As to the ND-can-win-by-domination thing: Sure. It is possible. But we don't need to convince MZ of this, he already knows. Why do you think he stressed in public that in case ND returns the land to either us, or leave it open they won't interfere (implying that they can't allow that ND gets the land themselves)? GoW fears a ND domination, as they know it won't take a lot of extra land. Legoland is basically for any team that is willing to send a decent army there, it can be taken in 1 turn, all threatened harbors destroyed, and nobody can retake it. GoW knows this...
However, there is something else here. My intuition says that that message was just an expression of a treaty that GoW and ND had beforehand. When ND got the cities from GoW, and when they occupied our uranium source, I'm sure they did it with approval of GoW. GoW, OTOH, can say that they were not involved, while it does serve their purpose as well. This last message from MZ sounds the same: In front, ND and GoW agreed that ND was allowed to clean Legoland from all GS or RP forces, at the very express condition that ND didn't claim the land themselves. So, they can do what they want, as long as it doesn't hurt GoW.
If we can convince MZ that they are hurting GoW in the long term, or indirectly, we got ourselves an ally (albeit one that will not go for the kill, but for the win.). The point that, if we are kept from getting uranium means we can only go out in a blaze of glory is very dangerous to GoW as well. We could e.g. come up with crazy ideas like: let's take all the capitals of the world (we already conquered 2 of them, only 2 more to go). What does it matter, when we are lost anyway?
I'm sure MZ knows this. We don't need to threaten them directly, just telling them that if ND provokes us, and denies us what we owe makes us gung ho to the point where we do crazy things just because we can is frightening to them. So let that simmer a bit, without any further direct references to it.
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DeepO
Good message, CH.
As to the ND-can-win-by-domination thing: Sure. It is possible. But we don't need to convince MZ of this, he already knows. Why do you think he stressed in public that in case ND returns the land to either us, or leave it open they won't interfere (implying that they can't allow that ND gets the land themselves)? GoW fears a ND domination, as they know it won't take a lot of extra land. Legoland is basically for any team that is willing to send a decent army there, it can be taken in 1 turn, all threatened harbors destroyed, and nobody can retake it. GoW knows this...
However, there is something else here. My intuition says that that message was just an expression of a treaty that GoW and ND had beforehand. When ND got the cities from GoW, and when they occupied our uranium source, I'm sure they did it with approval of GoW. GoW, OTOH, can say that they were not involved, while it does serve their purpose as well. This last message from MZ sounds the same: In front, ND and GoW agreed that ND was allowed to clean Legoland from all GS or RP forces, at the very express condition that ND didn't claim the land themselves. So, they can do what they want, as long as it doesn't hurt GoW.
If we can convince MZ that they are hurting GoW in the long term, or indirectly, we got ourselves an ally (albeit one that will not go for the kill, but for the win.). The point that, if we are kept from getting uranium means we can only go out in a blaze of glory is very dangerous to GoW as well. We could e.g. come up with crazy ideas like: let's take all the capitals of the world (we already conquered 2 of them, only 2 more to go). What does it matter, when we are lost anyway?
I'm sure MZ knows this. We don't need to threaten them directly, just telling them that if ND provokes us, and denies us what we owe makes us gung ho to the point where we do crazy things just because we can is frightening to them. So let that simmer a bit, without any further direct references to it.
DeepO |
Would it benefit us in the least to make MZ think we might flip a coin to pick a target?
Would he want it to end tails and have marines and tanks all over GoW like a bad case of fleas?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DeepO
|
|
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Would it benefit us in the least to make MZ think we might flip a coin to pick a target?
Would he want it to end tails and have marines and tanks all over GoW like a bad case of fleas? |
It's an interesting idea, however there is one major problem with it. If we act like total loonies, ND and GoW will have a reason to band together and come after us. It must be an implicit threat to their security, but the moment we say something like 'let's flip a coin, and attack one of the two Bobians', we're gone.
Tricky... how can you endanger their security, without threatening them...
Another far-fetched idea is that we declare that we are from now on known as Greenpeace, and as we are denied uranium, we set out to occupy all the uranium sources in the world, no matter in who's territory they lay. No cities or so, only the sources. This would mean that neither ND nor GoW can build nukes or the SS, so a direct disadvantage to GoW.
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DeepO
|
|
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
MZ response ideas:
- MPP: good. Especially good that they don't mind us going for the ND cities on Legoland, as we want them off the continent.
- Bob for the Bobians: that is tricky to answer. In itself it is bad news. We can't start negotiating right now (has to wait until we have the save, and are ready to invade), as there might be options. But can we lie to GoW? I'd like to avoid that. We could say something like: we don't have the forces to attack Bob, ND is stronger than us and we're alone. But if you would decide to attack them on Bob, we'll gladly help. It's a bit stretching the thruth, though.
- treaties: he misunderstood. Technically we would be breaking the treaty, but ND still owes us a tech. They are in our debts. The act of breaking the treaty itself is of no importance, however them 'stealing' a tech from us is!
- lux: many thanks for this!
- Uranium: we understand. It does limit our options. It means we have to go to war, without any option (apart from a magic relocation of a source into Stormia of course).
As to why we let it slip: we didn't. ND has occupied our source for 2(3?) turns, denying us the possibility to build a city. We didn't had a settler ready so asked them politely to go away as they were tresspassing (if I'm not mistaken, their inf was not fortified). We asked them twice, and before having the chance of asking them again they attacked RP. Remember that we have to play nice, as we don't want to give a reason for them to keep the tech they owe us.
- Uranium is one of the reasons for the attack. The other is land (as mentioned in previous mail, they can certainly go for domination), another is a possibility for the UN when RP is gone (which means that it is in GoW's best interest to protect RP, how unlikely it seems. At least until Lego is gone). And maybe they want a provocation of us, so they have a reason and a chance to invade Stormia as well. They're welcome to try.
- mediation: We don't think it will succeed, but we're certainly not the ones aiming for war. It will lead to our destruction, without much doubt. But if they force us, they will get hurt. The tactic of keeping a navy of carriers afloat to bomb their cities is just as good for us (ask whether this would also fall under the Bob for the Bobians treaty. GoW should welcome the opportunity normally)
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DeepO
|
|
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
With a bit more thought into it, I think the Bob-for-Bobians treaty should be tackled like that: do not hint at invading Bob (deny nor confirm, just keep silent), but ask if bombing ND cities on Bob would also be considered a reason for GoW to declare war. Maybe say a bit more, like that it could be one of our options, but we would like to hear their thoughts before commiting to building up our carrier fleet. And maybe also ask them to keep quiet, as we don't want to run into fighter or jet squadrons if we can avoid it.
What I like about that, are 2 things:
- GoW knows we would be planning something sneaky, and have already mentioned us invading ND. By giving them reason to think we want to bomb them as we don't think invasion is possible, they might forget the more bolder option.
- If they agree to this, it is a lot easier to start negotiating with them once we invade ND. I don't think anyone will think that we can hold ground on Bob, even if we only face ND alone. So, at the time of invasion, we could ask GoW to postpone their war on us, as we only want to hurt ND, and will leave the ground undefended.
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DeepO
|
|
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
CH, I would rephrase the MPP thing. If we know say we won't invade, and later we do, we lose our credibility towards GoW at a moment where we could use it. I would put it like this:
quote:
Could we ask how far the Bob-for-the-Bobians treaty goes precisely? If we're denied our uranium for which we fought so hard, one of the best options left to us would be to pour our resources into a carrier fleet, and bomb ND to high heaven. Would that trigger the treaty, and the need for you to join in on the war against us? |
So no mention about invading ND, just imply that we do not consider it a viable option without actually saying it.
Further, I would correct MZ on the reasons for war. Self-quoting here:
quote:
Uranium is one of the reasons for the attack. The other is land (as mentioned in previous mail, they can certainly go for domination), another is a possibility for the UN when RP is gone (which means that it is in GoW's best interest to protect RP, how unlikely it seems. At least until Lego is gone). And maybe they want a provocation of us, so they have a reason and a chance to invade Stormia as well. They're welcome to try. |
That should be rephrased probably, but it's the idea that counts.
DeepO
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krill
|
|
On a cold wet rock, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Dec 2003
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
Hi MZ.
The trade deal ND is holding over our heads is an exchange of Computers for Rocketry.
As for reasaons to go to war, uranium is one of the reasons for the attack. The other is land (as mentioned in previous mail, they can certainly go for domination), another is the possibility to win by the UN when RP is gone (which is why RP and Lego are so important). Maybe they want provocation from us, so they have a reason and a chance to invade Stormia as well. They're welcome to try, but they have a lot of options open to themselves, unlike GS.
We gave Computers to ND on good faith (600g deposit) several turns ago, and now ND is holding out on Rocketry (which it now has) and using that as leverage to keep us from retailiating. Obviously ND doesn't want us to have a chance to get Space Flight (tactical nukes) before they do. Our best guess is that ND is 6-7 turns from nuking someone.
We understand your position regarding the trade of Uranium, and appreciate your willingness to trade luxuries. You wondered why we let the Uranium slip out of our hands. ND has occupied our source for at least two turns, denying us the possibility to build a city there. We didn't have a settler ready so asked them politely to go away as they were tresspassing. We asked them twice, and before having the chance of asking them again they attacked RP. We have to play nice as we don't want to give a reason for them to keep the tech they owe us.
Could we ask how far the Bob-for-the-Bobians treaty goes precisely? If we're denied our uranium for which we fought so hard, one of the only viable options left to us would be to pour our resources into a carrier fleet, and bomb ND to high heaven. Would that trigger the treaty, and the need for you to join in on the war against us?
Regards,
-Cort |
(With alterations from DeepO and myself)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aeson
|
 |
orangesoda
Nov 2001
time: 22:29
|
|
I think we're saying too much about issues that have no relevency.
quote:
No, we do not have an MPP though technically the old "Bob is for Bobians" treaty is still in effect but of course that would not be invoked unless for example GS sneak attacked ND by invading them (Lego-style). If you start a war with ND on Legoland or at sea or whatever, that does not constitute a "threat to Bob" and thus we don't have to intervene. |
No need for us to reply to this. It can only get us into trouble to address the issue further. We asked, they answered, end of discussion.
quote:
Regarding treaties, to be honest, GoW doesn't really give a crap if GS or ND break treaties between each other. It's so late in the game that those issues are hardly of interest to us. If you attack ND or whatever, we won't hold it against you nor will we stop dealing with you or otherwise, in short, no diplomatic penalty. And I doubt Vox or RP would care either. For all I care, only treaties regarding ourselves actually concern us. ND broke a treaty by invading RP's holdings, GS breaking a treaty to counter that action isn't betrayal, it's payback. |
No need for us to replay to this either.
quote:
Regarding luxes, we'll give you as many as you need (and Roleplay too). |
Thank you.
quote:
Uranium on the other hand is a more serious issue. |
We understand.
quote:
Why did you not build and keep a city around the Lego uranium when it was clearly on your side? If ND wanted to deny you resources they would have struck ALL RP/GS cities on Lego but they did not attack yours. And if uranium is the secret reason behind ND's attack (quite likely IMO) then it's unlikely they'll compromise with you or us for a peaceful solution. |
ND has a crossing to Lego that requires 1/3rd the Transports that our crossing requires. With current Transport numbers that means they can put over 3 times the number of units on Lego that we can on any given turn. To offset this, we'd have to leave Stormia nearly empty, which is something we can't do. Uranium is important, but without Stormia we couldn't make use it. So in effect, we were at the mercy of ND (or rather the RNG which determined Uranium placement) regardless.
That's not to say we will abandon Lego to ND. We still consider that source of Uranium as in our territory. If ND is going to try to force GS into irrellevency, which is exactly what they are doing right now, they will have to go through all of Stormia to do it. They saw some open cities and took them, saw an undefended Uranium source and took it, without considering that by doing so the only way GS can continue to be relevent in this game is to go through them now.
quote:
I'm not so sure therefore how well mediation might work between us. What I did tell ND is that we do not look favorably to them keeping cities on GS's half after next turn since that would make US look bad because we made the treaty and allowing our client to violate it is akin to us violating it first hand. Have you guys talked to them at all? |
We have tried to. ND had "invaded" by putting their unit on the Uranium the first turn they were on the continent, and have been ignoring our communications since then.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-03-2005 19:04
|