 |
| |
|
|
Panzer32
|
 |
Queens University, Kingston, Ontario
Oct 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
Here is what adaMada is proposing:
quote:
We have Ceremonial Burial and Alphabet, both of which are rare techs (only two civs start with them). You have Warrior Code -- a valuable and rare tech -- and Masonry, a tech that several groups have.
We'd like to propose the following trade:
GoW: Warrior Code, Masonry, Small amount of Gold
RP: Alphabet, Ceremonial Burial
* If either team meets another group, the above deal is rendered invalid (pending re-ratification), and the other team must be notified.
The small amount of gold would be to cover the difference between Masonry and Alphabet, as Alphabet has a high re-trade value. The point is negotiable, and I'm sure we'll end up repaying you once we hire you anyway . The ending bit is just to ensure that neither team is locked in this contract if they meet someone else; from our teams perspective, if we do meet someone else before we meet you, we'd still like to have a standing deal -- we just may need to adjust the deal if we get Masonry.
Please let me know what your people think, and if the baselines above can serve as a starting point. We are very interested in trading with you, both when we meet and throughout the game.
-- adaMada
|
Obviously, this deal benifits them; but we do not necessarily want to give away warrior code, since of its importance of a military tech.
We might be able to get away from paying gold if we offer them an 'ensured golden age'. That is, we let their UU kill our warrior whenever they want.
I think that alphabet and ceremonial burial are crucial to have. Ceremonial burial lets us control discontentment, while alphabet is crucial for us to get to literature and the great library.
Anyway, I think (when we get it), the wheel is more crucial than warrior code, especially for our purposes. Therefore I see no problem with trading warrior code. All it really does is alows archer rushes, which will not be so effective in MP.
Feel free to discuss this in the thread. Note this is if RP and us happen to meet next, before we meet someone else.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GhengisFarb
|
 |
I want my HAMBURGERS!!
May 2002
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Panzer32
Counter-proposal (straight up trade + our goodwill sent to adaMada) |
Did you trade mini-maps? This will give us a good idea if we are on the same continent. If we both agree to trade those techs and try to meet in the middle we can trade for tech other than the two we are trading each other until we meet.
Make sure to let them know we have info on other civs to trade them to increase their desire to agree to the trade deal.
Last edited by GhengisFarb on 16-12-2002 at 09:33
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Donegeal
|
 |
Apolyton's Resident Law Enforcement Officer. Founder of the Glory of War, Champions of Apolyton!
Jul 2002
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Straight up trade, and our goodwill. Read my other thread on why I think we should trade Warrior Code.
I say we tell them we contacted Neu Demo in good faith and on the condition they let no one know we told them (this will reinforce our trustibility and hopefully foster the concept that we hold them in higher regard than other civs ) and that Neu Demo has contacted another civ whom we are not sure as of yet. Offer to trade them our starting location on the mini map for their starting location on mini map (mini map doesn't show terrain and resources just where you started in the big picture so we can aim towards one another. The info we provide should be more than enough to cover the stragegic value of alphabet.
We can coordinate moving warriors to meeting somewhere in the middle. |
This looks like a very good idea. However, I think they will be very hesitant to agree to a map trade as I feel they will think an Archer Rush would be eminent. We might have to ease their worries about this by making some kind of non-aggression pact for X # of turns (maybe see if we can get something for this from both ND and RP) Hold off on the GA contract. I am sure that they aren't even thinking of a GA yet as it comes with explores much much later in the game (however, with a crappy offensive UU like they have, I am sure they will drool over the possibility)
Speaking of GA contracts, we should let them know that just because we sign a GA contract with them, it does not mean that we will not sign a contract with another civ against them. If Lego contracts us to attack RP, we still attack RP, just promice them that the Warrior unit is theirs to do with as they please. We won't attack them with it and we will move it to where ever they want us to move it. But we would still be contracted to fight. Hey, a GA contract is not a Non-aggression contract. Hmmm... this is going to take some thinking...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panzer32
|
|
Queens University, Kingston, Ontario
Oct 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
hmmm, it seems Unorthodox told Gathering Storm something I didn't know about trading minimaps :
(from Zeit)
quote:
I greet you for your initiative of trade between our two nations.
As you probably realize, this offer must be seriously considered, as it involves very sensitive information exchange. I shall do whatever in my power to make sure the respected members of my team review and discuss this offer.
However, one must ponder, what caused your late change of heart?
I say this because not long ago your consul UnOrthOdOx has informed me that your team has decide to refrain from this sort of trade.
|
well, I don't know... I didn't think we had any official policy before...
Well, they will consider the deal, and I sent a reply saying I was not aware of this previous statement, and therefore we are not 'changing our minds'.
Last edited by Panzer32 on 20-12-2002 at 19:00
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-12-2002 01:53
)
|