Here is some light reading of the current conversation thread between Rego and I which I thought you might find interesting:
Rego,
The historical roots of our conflict are of little concern to me. At this stage of the game, it would be suicidal for me to ally with you. I would lose all credibility and trustworthiness thus becoming a pariah in this game and possibly in future games.
Despite your initial success, including the extra city from your dubious double move maneuver, the current war status looks decidedly in my favor from my perspective. My alliance will soon have made up the initial technological gap between us and it looks like we will be surpassing you techwise shortly thereafter. Our armies are of roughly equal strength at the moment however you have to divide your forces between two fronts whereas I only have one front.
Given your bleak strategic position, I can understand why you are desperate to achieve some sort of peace with me and I do enjoy reading your alternating ingratiation and bluster tactics as you try to worm your way out the hole you have dug for youself. I believe Mel Gibson in Braveheart set forth the only peace terms that might be acceptable at this stage and they were anatomically difficult to say the least.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Dan Miller <superdoubledan@gmail.com> wrote:
It is interesting your choice of words for my actions as "treachery and betrayal". When I think of treachery and betrayal, I think of someone breaking an agreement, or stabbing someone in the back.
Now you could make the argument that I "exploited" the rules, pardon the pun. While I would say that I played according to the rules as I understood them, I understand that you feel differently about the situation, and I can't argue with that. Being on opposing sides is bound to lead to differences of opinion.
But when I think of treachery and betrayal, I actually think more of the actions of your predecessors in Inca. Yaz and I were negotiating with each other over the land to the east of Pirates Pad. He had agreed I could settle that area, and we were talking about where I should put my cities (he wanted to ensure that they did not take the seafood for the city that turned out to be Wild Wonders as well as the other city near the sheep that I am assuming you are close to founding). In the midst of negotiations, I made an offer, and rather than counter offer, he just snuck 2 settlers in and settled.
THAT is what I consider betrayal, and is what led to my declaring war.
Now you are free to continue to attack me - you can play your game however you want of course. Like I said, this is my first MP Civ game, but I have some experience playing other multi player games. So I'm familiar with a civ deciding to just focus on the destruction of a civ that has wronged it, rather than make an attempt to win the game. But usually those are minor powers that have no chance at winning, rather than a civ in 1st place with a dominant land position.
Which is what led me to offer up ways that we might successfully work together in this game. I am more than happy to suggest agreements that are mutually beneficial to both of us, including gifting of my cities and units where it makes sense. Like I said in my earlier email, the element of surprise of you and I working together is something that NOBODY would expect, which is why it would be so successful.
But if you want to just keep attacking me, I'm more than ready to handle it, though it is not my preference.
dan.
regoarrarr
India
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Yaz & Krill <old.mail.storage@googlemail.com> wrote:
You are always welcome to chat. Treachery and betrayal are ways to earn an untrustworthy reputation that tends to follow one from one game to many others. The small advantage gained in the one game is not worth the problems in all future games. That is why, I must unfortunately destroy you in this game.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Dan Miller <superdoubledan@gmail.com> wrote:
Exploit,
Good to hear that we're still okay on a personal level. It can be hard to draw that line I know....
As for this game, it's up to you. If you feel like you need to just fight it out with me, that's fine - I understand. I just wanted to explore some other options with you. Besides, wouldn't it make you feel even better to work with me, then slip the knife in me while I'm not expecting it? :-P
And if it's more blood you are wanting to see, just march your boys east out of Pirates Pad - I will sow the desert with their blood!!!!!
If it's all right with you, I will probably check in with you periodically just to see what's going on
dan.
regoarrarr
India
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Yaz & Krill <old.mail.storage@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Dan,
Despite all the rhetoric, I have no personal animosity towards you. I would be happy to work with you in any future games we might play however in this particular game we will be fighting it out to the death since I have publicly made that proclamation. Besides there are a lot of spectators who want to see more blood in this game!
Regards,
Exploit
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Dan Miller <superdoubledan@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Exploit,
Sorry I had to run when we were chatting in-game the other day. I did want to chat a bit more. I know that we kind of got off on a bad foot there, and I accept my part of that. Yaz left the game at kind of an awkward point, at least in my opinion, what with settling those forward cities in a place he had already agreed I could settle.
But real life does that sometimes (boo! hiss!) and kind of left you and I to pick up the pieces. Things were hot and heavy for awhile, but they seem to have calmed down now. We're kind of at a standstill. One thing that I have noticed in this game (and I don't know if this is true of all MP games or just large PB ones), is that it's REAL hard to make any kind of inroads attacking when both civs are at tech parity (you've probably noticed that too!). What tends to happen is that you see me building up an army on your border, so you have to build up YOUR army. But then I see you building up your army, so I have to increase MY army. etc. etc.
But in the end, it doesn't really do much for either of us. I already went through this exact situation with shadyforce a few turns ago, and that helplessness on both of our parts was one of the big impetuses (is that even a word?) to the alliance shakeup that happened.
Anyways, I just thought I would throw that out there. I don't know how fanned the flames of your passion of hate are against me. So maybe it's not even worth it - but I do think it's important to touch base every now and again because times and situations change.
One of the big keys to any kind of attack, besides some sort of technical advantage, is the element of surprise. And what would be more surprising than you and I working together!!!?!!!?? :-D. I know you have NAPs with both the Lins and Sunrise (till T190 I think?) But maybe at that point we could do something against one of them, or Imhotep potentially?
Anyway - you don't have to answer this if you don't want to, but I would truly look forward to hearing back from you and any kinds of discussions you'd like to have.
dan.
regoarrarr
India
