February 14th, 2011, 05:32
Posts: 3,916
Threads: 14
Joined: Feb 2011
Ioan76 Wrote:We meet Lord Parkin - here is his "opening email" ( we didn't answer yet to it ) :
Lord Parkin Wrote:Greetings mackoti and Ioan76,
It's a pleasure to meet you both! I believe our Warriors encoutered one another a turn or two ago. You're the second civ we've met in this game - it'll probably be no surprise to you that luddite was the first civ we met, since you must have encountered him too by now.
In case you're interested, our nation is located a fair distance to the east of our meeting place. I presume your civilization is somewhere to the west? (If you'd rather not say that's fine, I'm just interested.) Either way, it seems we're not immediate neighbours, so there's not much reason for either of us to be interested in aggression towards the other right away. As a result, I think it would benefit us both to agree to a fairly long-term non-aggression pact. What do you think? We're open to your suggestions as to a renegotiation date... does 1000 BC sound reasonable? We're happy to talk longer if you want. Let us know.
As an initial act of goodwill and friendship, we're happy to let you know that - as you may have guessed for Ind/Cha Egypt - we're currently working on an early Stonehenge build. We realise you're unlikely to be going for this wonder anyway - but we thought we'd let you know just in case, so you can save yourself any wasted hammers.
Also, since we're both Industrious civs, it may benefit us both to communicate further about wonder building, if you're interested. It seems that your Roosevelt is the ideal leader for rushing out the Great Lighthouse, so if you're looking to grab this wonder we'd be happy not to contest you for it in return for you not contesting us on some other wonder. The Oracle is another wonder that all the Industrious civs are probably going to be keen on - if you have an interest in this wonder yourself, we may be willing to negotiate a deal here as well, where we don't contest it in return for you not contesting something else. Up to you.
Anyway, that's about all for now, I think. Once again, it's good to meet you, and I hope we'll be able to work out a lasting cooperation that will benefit us both for many years to come.
Kind regards,
Lord Parkin
P.S. Apologies for the delay in this greeting. Usually I'd make contact earlier, but I've had to shift flats all of a sudden - so I've been frantically packing/moving/unpacking the past few days. Haven't had time for anything forum- or diplomacy-related at all!
Ouch ... this isn't a very good news ... even an expected one from somebody playing with Egypt ...
As an update : our settler is completed and Stonehenge was started ( even too late maybe - 9 turns until it's completed ... if this will happen ... ).
Ruh roh. Conflict! Who will win the Stonehenge race?
I think the current turn is T29, so Ioan finishes at T38. From what I could tell, LP will pop it T36, assuming he's heading straight for it and is skipping the settler. If not, then T41 Stonehenge.
February 15th, 2011, 06:25
Posts: 23,409
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
Plako finds out next turn about the uber 2 seafood/gold/(copper) site. He is building his third settler but only has one warrior. I wonder what he'll do, especially because he'll find out he has already pre-mined the copper and that is about to be connected at his second city.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 15th, 2011, 11:38
Posts: 575
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2005
Nicolae Carpathia Wrote:Ruh roh. Conflict! Who will win the Stonehenge race?
I think the current turn is T29, so Ioan finishes at T38. From what I could tell, LP will pop it T36, assuming he's heading straight for it and is skipping the settler. If not, then T41 Stonehenge.
According to Luddite, Lord Parkin's capitel is now size 4, which implies he did not build a Settler prior to Stonehenge. I don't think Ioan has a chance as LP's cap can build SH 1-2 turns faster once they both researched Mysticism.
February 15th, 2011, 12:14
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Krill Wrote:Plako finds out next turn about the uber 2 seafood/gold/(copper) site. He is building his third settler but only has one warrior. I wonder what he'll do, especially because he'll find out he has already pre-mined the copper and that is about to be connected at his second city.
Rush hour?
I have to run.
February 15th, 2011, 12:18
Posts: 23,409
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
novice Wrote:Rush hour?
?
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 15th, 2011, 12:22
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Krill Wrote:?
With copper conveniently hooked up, send some Axes east? Stupid idea, probably.
I have to run.
February 15th, 2011, 12:30
Posts: 23,409
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
Not necessarily. Save gold to upgrade 1 warrior to spear. Build an axe in city 2 (with minded copper, takes 5 turns, with delay to work boat). Send settler to W2 spot. Revolt to slavery once settler/axe are built. Move worker to chop out one forest at capital, put into worker which is slaved for 1 pop, 2 workers then chop capital for more workers and maybe 1 settler for western gold/copper city site (that easily build own work boats using forest hill once borders pop).
Seriously piss of Warlord, but then again, he deserves everything he gets.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 15th, 2011, 23:28
Posts: 2,313
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2010
So no other thoughts from the peanut gallery as to a reasonable rules modification to prevent the double move, or does everyone feel it isn't a huge deal?
February 16th, 2011, 08:57
Posts: 575
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2005
Gold Ergo Sum Wrote:So no other thoughts from the peanut gallery as to a reasonable rules modification to prevent the double move, or does everyone feel it isn't a huge deal?
Stating that war declarations require a minimum 12 hours of inactivity (after your last turn) might abate the paranoia.
February 16th, 2011, 11:09
Posts: 23,409
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
Gold Ergo Sum Wrote:So no other thoughts from the peanut gallery as to a reasonable rules modification to prevent the double move, or does everyone feel it isn't a huge deal?
*shrug* It's a huge deal and it isn't easily fixable. I've written one rule already but people didn't like having to think, so I'm staying out of the argument now.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
|