RBP4 [SPOILERS] - Shaka of Zulu (sunrise089, regoarrarr, and friends)

[T-hawk]

You do know that Alphabet also allows others to see what techs you have, right?

[Krill]

Not like it let you keep up. Of course, diplomacy etc etc.

[regoarrarr]

Email from Lord Parkin proposing a NAP

Hi Rego and Sunrise,

Thought I'd finally get around to writing that NAP proposition we talked about a couple of days ago. Sorry about the delay, I've been a bit busy with work lately. Anyway, without further ado, let's get on to it.

I think we both agreed that a non-aggression pact should involve the following:
- No directly aggressive moves (i.e. war) against the other player for the duration of the pact (obviously).
- No passive-aggressive moves against the other player for the duration of the pact. This would include:
- No founding of cities in contested locations between us (i.e. aggressive expansion) without prior agreement of the other player.
- No allowing passage for a third party invasion against the other player through or around the edge of our territories.
- No assisting or "helping out" third parties at war with, or known to be planning war with, the other player (e.g. by gifting gold or strategic resources).

Anything I missed? It's entirely possible I've overlooked something from our earlier discussion (I only briefly skimmed it), so please correct me if so.

Obviously the main thing that needs clearer definition is the border boundary between us. I've mentioned before that there's a particular Clam SW of your latest city which is closer to us than to you, and it'd be appreciated if you didn't settle so that that Clam was in your BFC. (That'd just force us to settle so it was closer to us, and then we'd needlessly have a lot of culture pressure on both our cities.)

Aside from that, I suggest we make use of the natural land features between us as a border for now. After all, the "peak blockers" and seas make up a very easy-to-follow natural boundary for both of us. I suggest we treat the small amount of land on the other side of all these "peak blockers" (on both your side and mine) as effective islands which were forcibly joined to the main land mass - which we've discussed before as a likely possibility. Certainly both of us would require Galleys to reach these locations anyway, so they're basically islands in that respect.

As far as I can tell there seem to be 3-4 of these islands between us... if it's 3 then that might make it tricky (but not impossible) to split between us. Anyway, that requires more exploration to decide, I think. How about, for now, we both simply agree not to settle across the peaks or sea on any of these islands until further discussion? I believe we both have a reasonable amount of other easier-access land to expand into right now anyway, so we'll probably naturally want to claim that first before any islands regardless. That is, unless a particular island location seems too attractive to pass up for long - in which case we could start early negotiations. Does that seem fair to you?

I think that covers pretty much everything I can think of... let me know what you think. Assuming we both agree on the border division and NAP conditions, the only thing left to decide is the NAP length. I have two suggestions:
- Short term: ~50 turns in length, specifically ending on turn 140 (600 AD)
- Long term: ~80 turns in length, specifically ending on turn 170 (1100 AD)

In both cases we could of course extend the NAP further at any point if we both agreed. The main difference would be that the long term agreement would offer more peace of mind for both of us to expand, and the ability for us both to concentrate more on issues we might have with other nations in the near future.

Looking forward to heading back from you soon.

Kind regards,
Lord Parkin

[sunrise089]

Worked well in PBEM4...

No spoilers!

Or does everyone finally have it?

EDIT: Re: Parkin Nap, I have no real problem with it. It would be nice to get some sort of concession for the clams, maybe even a minor one for morale purposes. Are we worried about having insufficient OB partners? We could ask for guaranteed OB for X turns.

[darrelljs]

Or does everyone finally have it?

Everyone has it.

Darrell

[regoarrarr]

Reply back to plako

Well, Sunrise has made it clear to me that he doesn't want people wandering around our backlines. I'm not sure why that is, or why he feels so strongly about it. But I have a hard time overruling him. On the other hand, I dont' want to really seem like a jerk just making all your units go backwards.

So how about this for a compromise - you send ;-) to the NE through our lands so you can get over to the other side of our lands and see the rest of the world? That would be NE on to the rice next turn and then NE-N and following the eastern road.

Does that sound okay?

[regoarrarr]

Response back to Lord Parkin, as I continue to bad cop Sunrise and make him out to be the bad guy in everything

Hi LP,

I like what you wrote. Sunrise was mostly pleased as well. For some reason he's very hung up on that clam tile. I'm not entirely sure why. I think he has deep-seated "issues" from when I, in his words, "dastardly stole his seafood tile" :-)

He was asking for a minor "morale boosting" concession if we agree to your request on the clam tile. Any thoughts on what that might look like?

I'd also like to talk some more about our border. How many peak blocker tiles do you have extending from your lands? It would be nice to know a bit more about what we're agreeing to before we agree to. I do like your suggestions on a) treating them as "belonging" (at least by default) to the civ whose lands they extend from and b) both of us not settling in disputed areas while we're talking about them.

Though with your recent settling spree, you're probably running out of places to settle soon!!!!! :-P

What do you think?

[regoarrarr]

Sleeping Moogle responds

Greetings Dan,

I have been trying to formulate a response to your message, and as you are a straight talker I'll just give it to you bluntly: I think you're overreaching yourself. Even if the area you're trying to claim is not within my zone of influence (and this is debateable), I would certainly consider it Adlain's before you. It feels like you are trying to grab as much land as possible and settle your backline (which you repeatedly mentioned is mostly blocked off from other Civs) afterwards. This may be a solid strategy to stake a claim, but it does have the potential to piss off your neighbours.

You made a point of noting that your second city is about as far removed from the clam site as my sixth, but that really either means it was settled a long way from your capital, or you started further south than I did. Based on what I've seen and heard, it is a fair assumption that everyone started at more or less equal distances from each other, with relatively the same amount of land around their starting position. My best guess is therefore that the amount of backline property you can still settle is sizeable and most of your expansion has been headed south and southeast.

While I am willing to concede the clam site as part of the border agreement, I am convinced that at this point I'm not receiving an equal share. You even objected to me settling a city to its east, in a location that I definitely consider to be in my zone of influence. I like this to work out between us, and I can see the benefit of you settling in what is basically Adlain's land, but right now I'm not satisfied. So my question to you is, if I'm to agree to let you settle further southeast than that clam location, what will you offer me in return?

[regoarrarr]

Response to Moogle

Hi SleepingMoogle,

First of all, I wanted to thank you for the candidness of your response. I find in situations like this (with slight disagreements) it's all too easy to just pretend to agree while secretly plotting to do the other guy in. Personally I feel like it's better all around to try and work out a compromise, and I'm glad to see that you apparently feel the same way.

As for whether the area to the SE of the clam is Adlain's rather than ours, it may very well be. But that's our problem, right? It's like me conceding the far east to you - mackoti may have something to say about that after all!

As for you settling east of the clams site, I don't think I said that (though maybe I did). I do remember expressing concerns about you settling directly east of it just due to your Creative culture. But even a city say 1NE of the rice (equal latitude to the clam site) controls the 4th and 5th "finger" (and maybe the 3rd) which is what I mentioned in my email as being in your zone of control, right?

So I hear what you're saying about not getting an equal share, and I don't want that. I don't want to "sign" some sort of unequal agreement that's only going to cause you to resent us later on. "Our Open Borders have brought our people close together", after all ;-). So what would you feel like is fair? Do you feel like you should go all the way through all 5 fingers to the coast? Again, Adlain's going to have to get involved at some point, but if that's truly what you feel, I'd rather know that now, you know?

I'll be available off and on for the next few hours if you are

Probably not enough blaming things on sunrise in that post, but what can you do...

[NobleHelium]

Your blaming everything on Sunrise may reduce in effectiveness if you vastly outnumber him in posts in this thread.