Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[Azza]

What does the Taj Mahal have to do with anything? I thought you offered it as soon as the Spanish agreed to peace and you were able to connect it.

I really like this line.

[fluffyflyingpig]

I like ASM's draft. Cute, nicely calls them out on their bullshit.

[sooooo]

In all seriousness, I believe that our best options are:

1) scooter grabs their diplo guy and put them on the spot in a chat about their obvious ignoring of the NAP part of our last message.

2) If we can't make that happen, then we send a message with a direct question about whether they we should be expecting a war declaration on Turn 175, something to that effect.

I think that we've been fairly polite and generous up to this point in time, while all of their messages have been presented in the form of ultimatums that we were forced to accept. We probably do need to start pushing back a bit.

Yes I think this is the best plan. I also think we should get the marble issue out of the way, and say that we will accept it now. I've had enough of dicsussing the marble!

[SevenSpirits]

Yes I think this is the best plan. I also think we should get the marble issue out of the way, and say that we will accept it now. I've had enough of dicsussing the marble!

+1

[fluffyflyingpig]

The marble was the token concession CFC made to give the NAP some semblance of fairness. If we throw that out we might as well cancel the patently unfair resource trades too.

[kjn]

I'd really like to have some sort of concession out of CFC, due to their deliberate failure to provide marble when we asked for it.

A lenghtened NAP would be fine, them paying for the spice or the stone would be more than fine.

[Ruff_Hi]

I don't see us getting any further NAP extension from CFC. We take the marble, we don't take it - makes no difference. We should not cancel the stone or spices as that would violate the NAP and give CFC cause to DOW on us. At least now we know when they are not coming (ie before T175).

[SleepingMoogle]

I disagree.. they turn up and keep giving us 'take it or leave it' offers in what what was signed to be a good faith agreement, and then ignore our counteroffer completely. If anyone is breaking the spirit if not the terms of the agreement it's them. We have cause and reason to start pushing back a little, and we really should.

So, keep pushing for a NAP extension and force them to respond to that before we let them force their Marble on us.

[kalin]

I think we should take a step back and re-evaluate what we want from CFC (other than kill them ). It seems to me that we want a NAP extension, say until T200. Forget the marble as soooo and 7 mentioned. How about something cool and simple like this:

We'd prefer to take the marble on T165.

You ignored our request for a NAP until T200. Should we assume you agreed to that? If not, we want to ask you directly if you want to have a simple NAP agreement until T200. This would be just a NAP with no additional deals, and subject to all the previous conditions (no 3rd party help, no spies, etc.)

The point is to take the marble out of the way, then to straight ask for what we want. I doubt they give us the NAP but as others mentioned would clarify things. At the moment I think it's pretty clear that we should expect them to attack T175. Speaking of that I was wondering if we could get a couple of galleys in the water to threaten their Moai city.

Kalin

[Fintourist]

I support the direct approach! Of course, we can formulate that draft with more friendly, demanding, angry or whatever tone if desired.