Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[Ruff_Hi]

This team is like a muscle car. Powerful on the track, but we don't idle well.

I nominate this for Quote of the Month.

[darrelljs]

Seconded...that was hilarious !

Darrell

[scooter]

Chatting with CivPlayers currently. It's going pretty well surprisingly. Log up when I'm done.

[Sullla]

Excellent! Looking forward to the log.

Now, just so that we can make sure that scooter's worker is never done here, I'll repost from the turnplaying thread. How about we ask WPC if they would like a missionary for their capital? We have the chance to produce one in the next few turns that doesn't need to go to one of our cities, and this would be a great chance to get that shrine income running with another civ full of cities. They would probably jump at the chance for more happiness, and it would draw WPC closer into an alliance as our vassal... err, partner, yes, partner.

We could even do a little scouting in their territory while moving a missionary to their capital. How about it?

[zakalwe]

I think that's a good idea, Sullla, even though I don't expect WPC to spread it on very quickly or efficiently. Maybe we could add a clause that they must spread it to another X cities in Y turns? Or is that too cutthroat?

[scooter]

FWIW on CivPlayers, the major issues:

NAP: They don't like T170-180 range. They think this is only something they'd do for a really close friend, and they're not sure we are that. However, they agreed to a NAP through minimum T130 with the same auto-extension + 10T buffer. That's the best they're willing to do, so we take that and try to extend in 15T or so. It comes with this border arrangement:

[2:27:32 PM] scooter: ok. the NAP sounds good. and to go with it, how about this simple border clause
[2:28:21 PM] scooter: 1) during the NAP, RB wil not settle southwest of the two cities we have in the area (so we will not settle across the river)
[2:28:58 PM] scooter: 2) during the NAP, CivPlayers will not settle the minimum distance from one of RB's cities (3 tiles) OR settle on the lake coast to threaten our seafood
[2:29:06 PM] scooter: does that seems fair to you?
[2:29:17 PM] pr11er: yes, we can agree on that


The main issue is they misunderstood our border ideas by email. They have cities to the south of there that they'd like to settle (said there's some deer down there), and they were under the impression we were asking them not to do that. Of course, that wasn't the case. Surprisingly, they were also willing to promise not to settle by BbB for the two unclaimed floodplains. He said they were planning on settling those, but they are willing to not do so as a sign of good faith.

They are also willing to sign Open Borders, but they do not want Right of Passage. They are quite happy with the river being the dividing line between us.

We're done chatting now, so let me get that cleaned up a bit and posted.

[novice]

Great news about CivPlayers.

For WPC, simply offer them a missionary against a promise to use hinduism as their state religion whenever they adopt a religion. Or they can use a self-founded one if they ever get one (they won't).

[scooter]

Ok, lengthy chat with CivPlayers. Sorry in advance for the length - I tried to underline key moments. I tried to separate it into "paragraphs" just to make it easier to read as well as add a little bit of commentary.

<snip opening greetings and whatnot>

[1:59:34 PM] scooter ok. so I get the feeling we're not really understanding each other very well in emails
[1:59:34 PM] Decebal ok, so, to sumarize, what are the topics we are discussing today?
[1:59:58 PM] scooter IMO it would be nice to know where each team stands on 3 specific issues
[2:00:10 PM] scooter 1) preferences on longer-term NAP agreements
[2:00:15 PM] scooter 2) border settlings
[2:00:18 PM] scooter 3) open borders
[2:00:42 PM] scooter to me, significance is roughly in that order

<snip some comments just orienting each other on where cities are located>

[2:04:23 PM] Decebal if i am not mistaken you asked that we don't plant anything else in between
[2:04:36 PM] Decebal which is highly unacceptable from our point of view
[2:04:51 PM] Decebal if you planted your terrain faster it doesn't mean we don't get to plant ours, is that correct?
[2:05:25 PM] scooter what we are trying to avoid is a tense culture war where we are fighting each other for tiles
[2:05:37 PM] Decebal that we can agree upon
[2:05:39 PM] scooter there are very few unclaimed tiles between us, and no resources
[2:05:44 PM] scooter the main thing between us
[2:05:48 PM] Decebal south there are resources
[2:05:50 PM] scooter is 2 floodplains tiles that are unclaimed
[2:06:05 PM] Decebal north I can accept the compromise of not planting for those floods
[2:06:15 PM] Decebal but south we have resources that we can plant for
[2:06:32 PM] scooter (trying to find a better picture of the south portion, one sec)
[2:07:03 PM] Decebal i think we can share screenshots if it's land we both know of? or not until paper?
[2:07:11 PM] Decebal nm, i am trying to log in anyway
[2:07:22 PM] scooter not until paper sadly . we voted in favor of allowing the screenshots but we got voted down
[2:07:44 PM] scooter ok. in the south we have a city called Seven Tribes. do you have visibility on it?
[2:08:11 PM] Decebal I'mlogging in hold on a few secs


[2:08:28 PM] Decebal Anyway, you said NAP comes first on your priority list
[2:08:31 PM] Decebal What would you suggest?
[2:08:54 PM] Decebal I said ok to 110 turn, you said it's less than others. What do you have with others then? Or what would suit you?
[2:10:07 PM] scooter the issue is we're already on T103-104 or so. if you guys initiate cooldown on T110, 10T is not much time to prep. so we'd like it if we can both avoid an unecessary buildup
[2:10:40 PM] scooter we would like something much longer, closer to T170-180 or so. specific number isn't a huge deal
[2:11:00 PM] scooter but something like that would be a nice way of both of us showing we don't want conflict
[2:12:50 PM] scooter to be honest, we think your team is one of the strong teams. at some point in the game (whether in 15-20 turns or 40-50 turns) both of our teams will probably look to conquer a neighbor I'm sure
[2:12:58 PM] scooter and it seems smart to make sure we dont target each other
[2:13:08 PM] Decebal ok, i am in [NOTE: he's referring to in-game here]
[2:13:41 PM] scooter and who knows, maybe we target the same team and work together, or maybe we conquer different targets, but either way, I think if we fight each other, it's a stalemate
[2:14:43 PM] Decebal well 170 is a bit too much
[2:14:51 PM] Decebal I mean, we would sign that, but only with a very close friend
[2:15:12 PM] Decebal And as I told you, we need strong evidence of that friendship before walking into one
[2:15:30 PM] Decebal Do you actually have someone who signed a T180 NAP?
[2:16:10 PM] scooter no, quite a few of our NAPs end before then. they vary a bit, but a lot are halfway between what we have with you and that longer length
[2:16:45 PM] scooter and in a perfect world, there may be one or two we don't extend



[2:17:10 PM] Decebal well, between when we started talking and now some turns passed, I have to admit I didn't check regularly on the current turns being played
[2:17:30 PM] Decebal So you have a city north working wheat
[2:17:35 PM] Decebal and one south working sea food, right?
[2:17:40 PM] scooter yes
[2:18:05 PM] Decebal Do you plan to expand further that river? or will your borders expand further anyway?
[2:18:33 PM] scooter both of our cities closest to you - they have popped their borders. it will take quite some time before they pop again


[note: this last comment was before I was reminded via chat by kjn that HG will pop Seven Tribes in 10T or so, so I hope this is not an issue with CivPlayers, but I don't think it is based on what comes below]


[2:18:54 PM] Decebal ok
[2:18:59 PM] scooter and we don't see a need to settle further southwest
[2:19:05 PM] Decebal because there are still resource to be planted on our side
[2:19:21 PM] scooter east of xochialco?
[2:19:28 PM] Decebal south of it
[2:19:32 PM] Decebal also a deer sw of your city
[2:19:32 PM] scooter ah. well that makes sense
[2:20:08 PM] Decebal we'd like to regard that river as the natural border line, if it's fine with you
[2:20:20 PM] scooter yeah I think that's very reasonable
[2:20:41 PM] scooter we're not concerned about you working land that is rightfully yours
[2:20:48 PM] scooter we're just trying to avoid you settling a city 3 tile from one of our cities
[2:21:21 PM] Decebal as for those 2 floods, although we have made plans to plant for them, consider it the first sign of good will we're making today
[2:21:38 PM] Decebal you seemed very aggresive when it came to discussing borders :P
[2:21:45 PM] Decebal in your emails that is
[2:21:51 PM] scooter haha sorry! it's easy to miscommunicate by email :/. it's hard sometimes


This is the key section for the main portion of our agreement.


[2:23:07 PM] Decebal How does turn 130 sound for the NAP?
[2:23:30 PM] Decebal with the 10 turns buffer that I think we have already agreed upon
[2:23:35 PM] Decebal making it turn 140 in effect
[2:25:06 PM] Decebal And we can start discussions about another one whenever you'd like
[2:26:04 PM] scooter (one sec, still here)
[2:27:32 PM] scooter ok. the NAP sounds good. and to go with it, how about this simple border clause
[2:28:21 PM] scooter 1) during the NAP, RB wil not settle southwest of the two cities we have in the area (so we will not settle across the river)
[2:28:58 PM] scooter 2) during the NAP, CivPlayers will not settle the minimum distance from one of RB's cities (3 tiles) OR settle on the lake coast to threaten our seafood
[2:29:06 PM] scooter does that seems fair to you?
[2:29:17 PM] Decebal yes, we can agree on that
[2:29:47 PM] Decebal Also, do you agree on the 10 turns warning before being able to attack, for either sides?
[2:30:07 PM] Decebal Just so we have it clearly agree between us
[2:30:10 PM] scooter yes. so NAP can be canceled no earlier than T130, and cancellation means 10T buffer
[2:30:11 PM] Decebal agreed
[2:30:33 PM] Decebal I ment the 10 turns buffers stand up in any case
[2:31:19 PM] Decebal If we have a longer NAP in place, it runs after the NAP expires. If we don't, it acts as an "every turn" signed NAP between our 2 nations.
[2:31:55 PM] scooter agreed
[2:31:56 PM] Decebal So, at any given point in time, no side can attack the other without the 10 turns warning
[2:32:01 PM] scooter yes, sounds great
[2:32:11 PM] scooter so if we have no NAP agreement on T131 but nobody has canceled it
[2:32:23 PM] scooter then there could be no attacks prior to T141 in that case
[2:32:25 PM] scooter and so on
[2:32:28 PM] Decebal indeed
[2:32:30 PM] scooter great
[2:33:05 PM] Decebal We can discuss longer NAPs if and when you see fit, after the current one expires.



[2:33:17 PM] Decebal About the Open Borders, as i said, you gain more from it than we do
[2:33:30 PM] scooter yeah we can discuss that further down the line
[2:33:45 PM] scooter for OB - that's actually not true anymore. we have OB with several teams now
[2:33:49 PM] scooter so we have foreign routes in every city
[2:34:29 PM] scooter i'm sure a couple of your cities would yield better routes so we would profit a little bit, but not a lot
[2:35:27 PM] Decebal Ok, I understand that, but I'm still waiting for that little gesture of good will that would tell me that you're seeking our friendship and not only personal gains. So far, we've bargained like 2 business men but nothing more.


I want to make special note of this last message he sent. I think that right there is the heart of why they've been seemingly stubborn with us. They seem quite hesitant to sign agreements, and they read our negotiation so far as business-only. That's accurate, really. Let's keep this in mind with them going forward.


[2:37:21 PM] Decebal So, I'll agree to Open Borders (again! hopefuly you're noticing it ) and I'm also asking a question which will hopefuly be answered straight.
[2:37:23 PM] scooter from our perspective, we would not really gain much from OB as I explained. however, we're definitely willing to sign them if you would profit from routes with us
[2:37:52 PM] scooter this is where I think we got mixed up in our last few emails
[2:38:21 PM] Decebal Do you have any precise military plans for the next period?
[2:38:43 PM] scooter but when it comes to "gains" for us, we don't see OB as a serious gain. but we have some a few large ciites that would yield very nice routes, and I think those would help you guys. (though I can't say for sure as I don't know your trade route situation)
[2:39:02 PM] scooter precise, no. but of course we throw around ideas.
[2:39:21 PM] Decebal I do, trust me, we don't have gains from ob as much as you. (hopefuly not none)
[2:39:30 PM] Decebal but i have already agreed to open the borders for trade


I feel like he's not being totally honest with me here. But they do agree to OB regardless.


[2:39:46 PM] scooter are you interested in mutual Right of Passage? Or is that not something you want?
[2:40:02 PM] Decebal Not right now, we see no reasons for that.
[2:40:16 PM] Decebal And we're not fond of spy explorering either, on any side
[2:40:52 PM] scooter ok, yeah definitely understandable
[2:41:05 PM] Decebal Does your plans include us ?
[2:41:10 PM] Decebal I mean do :P
[2:41:11 PM] Decebal lol
[2:41:38 PM] scooter what type of plans? are you talking peaceful plans or military plans?
[2:41:51 PM] Decebal I said military
[2:42:59 PM] scooter ok. we have no precise military plans like you asked. however, we have 4 immediate neighbors. you are one of them obviously. we do not think you make sense as a target.
[2:43:10 PM] scooter and we hope you feel the same about us in regards to your neighbors



[2:43:40 PM] Decebal What about joint military campaigns?
[2:43:57 PM] scooter we're always open to ideas. have anybody in mind?
[2:44:18 PM] scooter i will keep it confidential between only yoru team and my team if you're concerned about that
[2:45:53 PM] Decebal We're also open to ideas, anyone you wouldn't feel like attacking?


This type of evasiveness does get old. He rarely answers direct questions, but he acts moderately offended when I avoid questions.


[2:46:55 PM] scooter very careful answer . well the issue is I'm not sure who we share borders with. your core cities are further south of the lake, right?
[2:47:14 PM] scooter meaning, your city up by the floodplains is a far north city for you I believe?
[2:47:50 PM] Decebal something like that, we've been careful to keep the heart of our empire in the middle for best defense
[2:48:09 PM] Decebal but we're not talking about us here , are we?
[2:48:39 PM] scooter well it matters because a joint-attack shoudl be someone we both border. and I don't think we do right now. maybe we would in 40-50 turns though?
[2:49:03 PM] scooter for instance, we have neighbors to our north, but you aren't very close to them
[2:49:18 PM] scooter or neighbors to our southwest that you are probably quite far from as well
[2:49:58 PM] Decebal I see
[2:50:14 PM] scooter what I'm saying: a joint-attack could work quite well, but it needs a target. I don't know if we have one that we would both like to hit right now... right? but maybe that would change in the future as we both expand
[2:50:22 PM] Decebal So you wouldn't consider attacking anyone but your neighbours, even if that ment helping out a friend?
[2:50:30 PM] scooter at which point we would be very open to the idea
[2:50:41 PM] scooter well it's more about logistics
[2:50:47 PM] scooter units take a long time to travel at this stage
[2:51:40 PM] scooter I'll put it this way: if you have something specific to propose in which we could help, we would be willing to consider. but you aren't asking for anything specific so it's really hard to answer
[2:52:01 PM] Decebal That's the answer I wanted, that you are willing to consider.

We chatted a couple more minutes after that, but there was nothing concrete. He asked a hypothetical on if we'd be willing to help them if they're attacked, and I basicaly gave a non-committal but positive answer, reminded him of pre-engineer logistical problems, and he seemed satisfied.

I apologize for the length and that I couldn't cut more out, but it seemed necessary given the circumstances.

[Sullla]

Thanks for posting the chat log and cleaning it up / adding some thoughts in the process. That did not feel like the easiest team to have a conversation with. Seriously great work, we're on much better terms now and we secured a real NAP that gives us total freedom to go all-out on infrastructure for the next 25+ turns.

I can't overestimate how important these NAP deals are for our team. All of our neighbors have signed away their last real chance to stop us. By T140 (earliest anyone can attack us), we'll have settled all of the land around our borders, we'll be at roughly 20 cities, we'll have run through a full 12t Golden Age, we should be getting very close to landing Liberalism and opening up a second Taj GA, and once we have Nationhood civic with a vast array of population to draft away, the odds of anyone taking us out militarily will drop to virtually nil. By the time anyone can do anything, it will already be too late. Fortunately for us, none of these other teams appear to have read Parkin's thread from the Pitboss #4 game.

Side note: I predict that CivPlayers will declare war on another one of their neighbors in the next 10-15 turns. It's so obvious what they're doing... Now we just have to hope that they get bogged down and fail to achieve their goals while we continue to expand in peace.

[scooter]

And yes, I'll draft something to WPC soon (tonight), and the missionary idea is a good one, so I'll mention that too.