I really like Kalin's suggested amendments to the message.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
|
Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves
|
Quote:But I would argue the exact opposite conclusion about this dumb attack: a foolish attack from WPC is great news for us! We should absolutely encourage them to send their army off into the wilderness and achieve nothing of note, while we happily capture everything of strategic value. Look at it this way: both WPC and the Germans have a giant stack of axes and catapults. At some point, they are going to clash against one another, and it's going to be extremely bloody on both sides. There's no avoiding that, both sides will take heavy casualties since they have exactly the same level of technology. We want to encourage this as much as possible. I disagree, I rather have WPC suicide a ton of their army on entrenched German fortifications to take them there by eliminating a decent chunk of both player's armies.
In Soviet Russia, Civilization Micros You!
"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.” 
Massive historical WPC diplo review:
(April 7th, 2013, 12:51)Ceiliazul Wrote: I looked back thru the tracking thread to find all diplo with WPC: Key quote: (February 9th, 2013, 19:40)scooter Wrote: "...We do trust you guys enough that we can divide workload + cities up pretty fairly, so that's not a major issue either. " We're pretty darn sure we're going to do more of the "workload" i.e. capturing of cities. So we have a solid base for keeping what we catch.
Can we propose that we should divide the cities by each civ's starting power ratio? IE. Get what we put into this war?
Maybe mention that while we like WPC, they wouldn't be able to execute this attack without us.
In Soviet Russia, Civilization Micros You!
"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”
May 23rd, 2013, 03:07
(This post was last modified: May 23rd, 2013, 03:07 by Fintourist.)
I think we could formulate our answer regarding the split somehow like this:
I don't think it is a good idea to say 'sure that sounds fair' and then add in corollaries that will obviously favor us. What you're proposing Fintourist is a fairly transparent loop hole that favors us that any reasonable person will be able to spot coming from a mile away. We might as well be up front about us disagreeing with them. It shows that we respect them. The way I see it is we can either try communicating with WPC and trying to resolve this issue in good faith or we can piss them off later when we pull the rug out from under them. I'm hard pressed trying to come up with a scenario where the expected value of us trying to communicate our issue about the land split is worse than a guaranteed pissing off of WPC.
Maybe we could just try haggling. Say we want cites X, Y, and Z and see what they say. Maybe we can offer them units or something?
In Soviet Russia, Civilization Micros You!
"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”
I honestly rather like scooter's draft that ignores the land split issue for now. I'd say only if they bring it up a second time do we go into that stuff.
I agree that we should ignore the land split issue for now but it will come up sooner or later.
The problem is that taking any more cities would lead to very ugly borders. Wittenberge, Wilhelmshaven, and Warendorf are all the minimum three tiles from each other and, between them, share about 10 river tiles. I can't see them working under multiple ownership. Wien, meanwhile, is Buddhist and will probably have to be razed. It's also three tiles from Wittenberge. The other two cities are arctic backwaters, not worth haggling over. Being honest with WPC only works if we can suggest an alternative land split that we consider more fair. (We'd just say: look, our power dwarfs yours, we've invested more into this war, here's a screenshot of one of our stacks, we don't think a 50/50 split is fair, how about we also get Wien?) Otherwise, it becomes tricky. We could say that we consider ending the war quickly to be our top priority and will take cities as fast as we can and sort out the land split later; then "discover" that the rules shockingly prohibit city gifts, and offer captured workers and nearly-obsolete medieval units as compensation. I'm not sure how pissed WPC would be at this. They might see as it as a collective failure. They've clearly not looked at the game rules recently, because their last message assumes city gifts are possible. (Note that they suggest that capture gold be reimbursed if one team takes a city slated for the other.) |
