Posts: 13,214
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
I'm tired of WPC's constant one sided demands personally. I see no reason to give them gems for free right now.
Posts: 2,313
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2010
I am completely against gifting to WPC.
Completed: SG2-Wonders or Else!; SG3-Monarch Can't Hold Me; WW3-Surviving Wolf; PBEM3-Replacement for Timmy of Khmer; PBEM11-Screwed Up Huayna Capac of Zulu; PBEM19-GES, Roland & Friends (Mansa of Egypt); SG4-Immortality Scares Me
Posts: 4,416
Threads: 34
Joined: Dec 2010
From Apolyton:
Quote:Greetings,
We discussed your proposal about EP spending: we don't wish to use our EP aggressively against anyone, but for passive spending we believe the best if we gather the most knowledge about the most advanced civilizations. If it's more than the minimum to see the graphs then it's more.
Ottomans
Posts: 5,455
Threads: 18
Joined: Jul 2011
Bah. This was bound to be someone's response eventually. No preferential trade deals for you guys, in that case.
Posts: 4,090
Threads: 28
Joined: Jul 2008
Another in-game message from WPC when I dismissed the first one (the first one was only "Thx!":
Now for my personal opinion:
I think I'd be willing to front them some happiness (spices or gems) if they guarantee they will send us furs in 10t. it will arrive during our golden age, so we can take some advantage of it, and it means we won't have to rush for the furs site to our south.
We can even speed it up by sending a missionary (if we have one available) to their fur city - say that the furs are claimed culturally in 6t or 7t then. Something like:
* We give them spices/gems from this turn
* We send our missionary in their land to their fur city
* We send them an additional missionary to a city of their choosing
* They send us furs on the second turn after they have been claimed culturally
* They send us an archer (with 2 available promotions) in trade for the missionary
* More missionaries can be sent in trade for archers (with 2 available promotions)
Furthermore, I consider that forum views should be fluid in width
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
I'm on board with that, kjn.
I have to run.
Posts: 614
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2005
In general, I agree to trading happy with WPC. Not sure about sending 4th missionary. Also, I would add that they would switch from furs to dyes on the first turn of them getting dyes. Just lock in future dye trade...
Mwin
Posts: 4,090
Threads: 28
Joined: Jul 2008
(March 19th, 2013, 11:23)Boldly Going Nowhere Wrote: Bah. This was bound to be someone's response eventually. No preferential trade deals for you guys, in that case.
Yeah. I think we will have to chalk up Apolyton as a honest opponent in this game. That said, the research visibility isn't that critical (especially since they have Alphabet), and the other passive EP bonuses are a long way away, so an EP spending agreement is actually a quite good deal if you want to become friendly to someone, at very little cost. Ie, I think they are doing a mistake here, but hardly a major one.
Furthermore, I consider that forum views should be fluid in width
Posts: 6,664
Threads: 246
Joined: Aug 2004
I think that proposed deal is way too complicated, and I don't want to keep building more and more missionaries for WPC either. I still don't have any desire to send them gems for nothing in return, because let's be pefectly honest here: they have nothing to trade us in return. We'll have our own copy of furs by the time they are ready to trade it to us. And any kind of plan to send them a fourth missionary just to pop borders in one of their cities is plain silly. Come on. We're not a charity here.
If you guys genuinely want to give WPC a happiness resource to build relations, then that's fine and all, but let's stop pretending that this is any kind of even exchange. It's a pure gift from us, no different than what we're sending to CFC. We should make our decision with that logic in mind.
I still think we'd do better to try and find another trading partner for the extra gems. I literally see us getting nothing in return from WPC beyond their goodwill, and they are so incredibly weak that I'm not convinced that that's worth much of anything. (They already signed an NAP to T175 with us and a military alliance, plus we're already sending them missionaries for religious happy. Why are we obligated to do even MORE to help this painfully incompetent team?)
Posts: 3,725
Threads: 25
Joined: Sep 2010
(March 19th, 2013, 15:13)kjn Wrote: Another in-game message from WPC when I dismissed the first one (the first one was only "Thx!":
Now for my personal opinion:
I think I'd be willing to front them some happiness (spices or gems) if they guarantee they will send us furs in 10t. it will arrive during our golden age, so we can take some advantage of it, and it means we won't have to rush for the furs site to our south.
To be honest, that last message and the way it was posted would put me off helping WPC. It's couched very much in terms of a demand as if we were obligated for some reason to help them.
I honestly don't think we should be going out of our way to help others without getting something back, especially if they seem to be pushy about it.
Travelling on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam.
|
