Sent to CivPlayers:
RB Wrote:Decebal,
First, I agree that Right of Passage is an issue that can be separately discussed. I'm going to assume in our conversation that Open Borders is strictly for routes, and we can deal with Right of Passage later if we want.
Our players have estimated that we will actually not benefit any more than you will. The reason for this is we are about to connect a route with a couple other teams too, so a lot of our routes will be taken up by other teams. Yes, we would certainly profit a little extra from routes to some of your bigger cities, but a lot of our routes will come from other teams too. This means our position is that we would rather not pay for trade routes to you. Besides, you will have to wait quite a long time for that tank . If you have a concrete, reasonable suggestion, I am always willing to listen, but we don't think paying a large amount of hammers for routes is really necessary right now when we can just get them elsewhere.
I don't want to totally shut things down though, so how about we consider a simple border agreement? I think we have a well-defined border between us, and I'd like it if we could keep it that way. I would propose that neither of us settle any more cities between our borders. There are a few dead tiles between us, but they would be very weak cities, and it would only strain our relationship. I think it's best we both just maintain this border and settle elsewhere. Are you interested in agreeing to this?
Thanks,
scooter - Team RB