Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[Ceiliazul]

I would value it a lot more if they weren't almost entirely irrelevant in terms of competitiveness. I'm on the fence here.

If they weren't irrelevant, the price of #4 would be much much higher. Heck, we gave The Pyramids to team CFC... what's a couple of maces?

I also like that Seven's draft leaves #4 completely vague. And there's no way for either team to define it until the war is mostly played out.

[Sullla]

I'm not in favor of promising much of anything to WPC beyond vague pleasantries, but I think that's because I'm well known for toeing a hard line when it comes to anything military in this game. I also do not expect WPC to contribute anything meaningful to this war; if they actually pull their weight and do something, then I'd be much more open to granting them more of the spoils. I would just hate for us to promise them something good and then watch them fall on their face and do nothing while we take all the German cities.

Yes, I would like to remain on friendly terms with WPC if at all possible, but they are just so weak in this game. I have little interest in giving them much of anything when they're a sitting duck for someone else to take out. Please don't promise them any territory in writing, I can sign off on virtually anything else other than that. I'm still dubious that WPC will capture any cities at all from the Germans, in anything other than a "last few turns of the war after we've done all the work" mop-up scenario.

[antisocialmunky]

Overall I think Seven's layout is the best suggestion so far, but man #4 feels not quite right to me. I totally get the idea of wanting to keep them as a friend. I do value that, but I would value it a lot more if they weren't almost entirely irrelevant in terms of competitiveness. I'm on the fence here.

Considering how ridiculously crap their economy is. Producing a maceman for a trade is pennies of our total economy compared to the task it is for them. So trade cheap macemans for:

1) Their gratitude
A) So they side with us in game rule disputes
B) So they don't join a dog pile against us
C) So they can potentially send us intel of some sort
2) So they don't go crying around and offering themselves to others that want to annoy us by proxy
A) So we don't have to murder them and can spend that time murdering someone else.
B) So there's not stupid shenanigans involving us wiping them out and them founding a city in the middle of nowhere protected by other civs so we have permanent WW faces.
C) So they don't vote for the AP Civ to deny us the win.
3) So we can keep a harmless buffer state around.
A) So they don't ROP a dogpile force through.
B) So we don't have to defend land so far away from our core.

And Cities which will play back the cost very quickly.

I guess either way, we're going to end up sending units to WPC. Its just whether or not its for killing or as payment.

[plako]

You seem to have active communication link to WPC. Could you send me the email address you're using. Based on civstats they haven't yet replayed the reloaded turn. Someone needs to remind them and we might need a pause.

[kjn]

You seem to have active communication link to WPC. Could you send me the email address you're using. Based on civstats they haven't yet replayed the reloaded turn. Someone needs to remind them and we might need a pause.

Their turnplayer (Beta) has e-mail brucehynes57{at}cogeco{dot}ca

[scooter]

Ok. I took Seven's draft and made a couple minor adjustments, but I mostly think this is the approach we want to take. Here it is, with comments to follow:

Beta,

Yes, we are definitely #1 in soldiers. We have a lot of Maces and Catapults, and we'll be adding Knights as the war begins.

We are OK with that division in principle, with the caveat that it can only happen if you earn your part through combat. I don't think it would be fair for one of us to get half the spoils while contributing much less to the war effort, and perhaps more importantly, city gifting isn't allowed in this game.

Wars are a big pain and we will be aiming to defeat the Germans as soon as possible. But we can promise a few things if you do the same for us:
1) We won't race you for the cities in your half of the land split.
2) We will prioritize capture of cities in our half over cities in your half.
3) We will be sincerely rooting for your speedy progress and success, and if we have any useful intel to share we will pass it to you.
4) After the war, we will consider seriously any complaints you have about fairness, and be willing to provide fair compensation in the form of gold, units, and/or resources.

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

1) First comment is to answer their kinda bizarre question about soldier counts (is he aware of the power graph screen?). I also think it's worthwhile to note a big army of maces/cats/knights to give them some perspective that our army is clearly bigger and will likely be doing most of the heavy lifting, which leads into the next section.
2) I added a second half to #3. I just felt "we'll sincerely root for you" sounds like not much of a promise compared to the other 3, so promising to share info we stumble upon seems like a very doable promise.

Thoughts?

[kalin]

Scooter, I don't like the draft too much... I am thinking that it may be better to wait a bit and send an intermediate response first, along the lines "we are ok in principle with splitting the land but we are still debating the details".

However here are some suggestions on the draft.

"We are OK with that division in principle" -> "We are OK with a land division in principle"

I don't like #4. It seems that we assume and almost push them to complain after the war. How about: we will act in good faith and be open to discussion about any issues that may arise.

Kalin

[NobleHelium]

I agree with kalin's comments about point 4.

[scooter]

How about we just flat out remove #4... because I pretty much agree with kalin.

[Fintourist]

I like the beginning part of the draft. I would change the points 1 to 3/4 so that they are not in the "we"-form. Currently it kind of implies that we expect to be the ones who do the most job. That is of course true, but if we formulate the points as mutual rules that apply for both civs it sounds more humble.