Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[Shoot the Moon]

Thanks Merovech, didn't think of it that way. And on Tyrmith's comment - I also thought about just completing omitting any mention to the known tech bonus, and if they want to bring it up again then fine. So I'm still considering doing that, I'll sleep on it and see what other reactions pop up here. If more people agree with Tyrmith, I'll nix that part.

I thought the known tech bonus stuff was fine. One of our micro/game mechanic gods could probably even quantify just how small of a bonus it is to further our point if we want. I suspect at this point it comes out to something like 1 or 2 beakers, which obviously isn't worth changing your tech path for.

[NobleHelium]

Not a fan of letting them pick whether we have a no scouting clause or not. We should decide whether we want it and then try to get that. I don't see a reason to just go with what they want.

I prefer omitting any mention of the known civ tech bonus in our initial response.

[Bigger]

Thanks Merovech, didn't think of it that way. And on Tyrmith's comment - I also thought about just completing omitting any mention to the known tech bonus, and if they want to bring it up again then fine. So I'm still considering doing that, I'll sleep on it and see what other reactions pop up here. If more people agree with Tyrmith, I'll nix that part.

I thought the known tech bonus stuff was fine. One of our micro/game mechanic gods could probably even quantify just how small of a bonus it is to further our point if we want. I suspect at this point it comes out to something like 1 or 2 beakers, which obviously isn't worth changing your tech path for.

(grumble, ditto has two t's)

[Nicolae Carpathia]

Either we ignore the known tech bonus part of their email, or we go on a long tangent to explain just how worthless it is in an 18 player game. Which could have the side effect of patronising them, cooling relations.

[Tyrmith]

I'm happy with whatever the majority decides. For what it's worth though, this is our first substantive piece of diplomacy with a team we might need against CFC's theoretical cabal (which really seems to be the largest chance we have to lose). I don't think spending at least half the message going off on how their idea is stupid is the right way to start things off right, even if we're trying to be nice about it.

If they bring it up again, it'll give us something to talk about with them, which will be useful just to keep them talking to us imo.

[Lewwyn]

You know I don't know if its such a big deal. We can tell them we'd be happy to help, but we're not going to give out what techs we have unless they are our super secret friends. At the rate we're teching they're going to get a known tech bonus from us anyway! If we swear them to secrecy we can draw them in closer, and make them feel more allied. We're already getting a hundred turns of NAP. I think they want to be friends. How about super secret friends who don't tell others things we don't want others to know?

Edit: Also I don't think they would look badly upon us saying we don't want to shag on the first date. "Yes we'd be open to discussing known tech bonus and tech paths, but we feel that's a conversation for when we've built a bit more trust. Signing the NAP first will be our foundation."

[Bigger]

You know I don't know if its such a big deal. We can tell them we'd be happy to help, but we're not going to give out what techs we have unless they are our super secret friends. At the rate we're teching they're going to get a known tech bonus from us anyway! If we swear them to secrecy we can draw them in closer, and make them feel more allied. We're already getting a hundred turns of NAP. I think they want to be friends. How about super secret friends who don't tell others things we don't want others to know?

Edit: Also I don't think they would look badly upon us saying we don't want to shag on the first date. "Yes we'd be open to discussing known tech bonus and tech paths, but we feel that's a conversation for when we've built a bit more trust. Signing the NAP first will be our foundation."

I like this. Super secret friends .

[novice]

I prefer to keep all diplo discussion in one thread, as issues will be interleaved. Having a separate thread for archiving is fine, though. I'd suggest one initial post with our current diplo status and active deals, and then one post for each team summarizing our correspondence with that team.

[SevenSpirits]

I prefer to keep all diplo discussion in one thread, as issues will be interleaved. Having a separate thread for archiving is fine, though. I'd suggest one initial post with our current diplo status and active deals, and then one post for each team summarizing our correspondence with that team.

+1. Don't want multiple discussion threads, there are already enough cross-thread conversations with the threads we have.

[Old Harry]

I prefer to keep all diplo discussion in one thread, as issues will be interleaved. Having a separate thread for archiving is fine, though. I'd suggest one initial post with our current diplo status and active deals, and then one post for each team summarizing our correspondence with that team.

So there would only ever be two messages in any thread? That sounds good.

I think you should address the shadow bonus (that's a much better phrase than "known tech bonus") as it seems rude to ignore the only bit we're not keen on. I like the suggestion of "maybe later when it will make a bigger difference"