Diplomacy Correspondence Tracking thread

[scooter]

Sent to WPC:

Beta,

Thanks for the update! So I wanted to talk to you about the current situation. Right now we are on track to be able to capture all of the remaining cities with no trouble - many Knights and Maces still live. We've worked hard to capture only cities on our side first according to our agreement, so we have carefully followed that. However, we don't want you guys to feel totally shafted. Is there anything we can do to make you feel like we've treated you fairly in terms of war spoils?

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[scooter]

Sent to CFC:

Yossarian/CFC,

Hey guys, I chatted with Yossarian a couple days ago, and we briefly discussed an idea for a short-term NAP extension. I wanted to send you a message now with an official offer so you guys can discuss it as a team. Currently our agreement runs out on T175. I know you guys wanted us to pay for a longer NAP like last time, but we currently feel less need to do that, so an agreement is a little challenging right now. So I'd like to present this as an alternative short-term deal just to get us both through our current conflicts, after which we can both get a more accurate picture of where we stand:

1) Straight short-term NAP from T175-T200.
2) If either of us declares war on a new team during this window, the other team is given a 3 turn window in which they would be permitted to opt out of the NAP. This gives us both the flexibility to hold each other in check. So for example, if we sign this and then on T185 we declare war on one of our other neighbors, at any point between T185-188 you could freely opt out of the NAP if you thought it was in your interest to do so.
3) This lets us both finish our respective conflicts without fear of each other, and also gives us both time to consolidate our gains and gain a better picture of our respective positions in the game.

That's the basic outline. Of course we would add in loophole-closing provisions on the NAP, but I'm hoping this idea will be appealing to your team. I understand your desire to gain more than just peace out of the NAP, but the reality is we're both adding land and adjusting to new borders right now, so it's difficult to measure what a fair deal would be. I think we are also both a little concerned that the other would use peace to run over a weak neighbor, so I think the "opt out" clause goes a long way to balancing that fear. Anyway, let me know what you think once you've had some time to discuss, and feel free to send any questions my way!

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[Lord Parkin]

From WePlayCiv:

Hi Scooter.

It would appear that the Germans are pulling a last ditch Kamikaze move on us. Check out the picture.

As allies, what we would apppreciate, is that you take the remaining German cities (ie the ones that were slated for us).

You keep the gold you get from them, and any workers you capture. When all this is over, you gift the captured cities to us. Or sooner if it is a matter of maintenance costs for you.

As we discussed at the start of the war, the scenario we are facing was a possibility. So, we will play it out and take on the fury of the Incan hostility. I gather they did not know of our prior agreement, and it is probably best that they don't. We can handle them better on defence.

Does this sound Ok?

Cheers! Beta of WPC

ps on the pic:

A: Warendorf: 2 war elephants, 3 horse archers, 2 longbows, 1 axe, 1 chariot

B: 1 war elephant, 1 longbow, 6 catapults, 2 axe and 2 workers

C: 7 war elephants, 2 horse archers, 1 longbow, 2 cats, 1 chariot, 1 spear, 1 worker, 1 quechua

[scooter]

Sent to WPC:

Beta,

So this is embarrassing, but we were wrong again. The team member who noted that the city gifting might be okay was looking at the wrong game ruleset. The actual rules do ban city gifting in any format. I don't see an easy way out of this, especially since we want to finish this war ASAP. Do you have any suggestions?

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[Ruff_Hi]

Scooter, good day time

Hereby notifying you that we are going to stop auto-extension of our NAP agreement with your team from now.

I know that you will ask for reasoning. It is quite simple. You have grown too strong and we do not feel it appropriate to provide you security, while we are small and are just doing fine at our own. We fully understand that by this we can pull your rage attack on us. Do what you have to do.

Thank you for keeping all of your obligations and not violating its spirit.

P.S: Do you consider 170 as the last turn of guaranteed peace or it is 169?

Good luck!
OT4E
CivPlayers team

[scooter]

Tried to check with CivPlayers about a NAP alternative:


scooter: Hey, thanks for the notice about the NAP. I'll get back to you on the T170 or T169 thing, it's a little unclear to me too
I do know you and apolyton have a bit of an understanding where you guys do not sign NAPs with us so that you can protect each other if needed. Would you reconsider a NAP extension if we offered the same one to both of you?
OT4E: hi, I am a bit busy now sorry.
I will answer during the week-end
scooter: No problem

[scooter]

From WPC:

Hi Scooter.

Yep. We checked the rules as well. Clearly city gifting is out.

Proviisori had this suggestion:

"We can do it so that they pound the cities to near death, and then we do the "final strike" for taking the city.
After that we can gift the gold we got from the city to RB to make it worthwhile for them too."

The other option is that you take all the cities, and then we declare war on you and take them back. But that seems like waaay too much of an exploit. So Provi's idea seems like the best.

But first we need to deal with theall out attack on our lands. If RB is up for it, I would suggest you move up past Wilhemshaven and to a position behind the stacks closing our territory. That would A: make sure no reinforcemnets come through, and B: you would be in a position to cut off any retreat.

I suspect they will go for Huron River. It will be messy as most of our units were up north. But we will defeat theirr attack.

And, we will likely move on Warendorf next turn as well.

The other complication we have is that you took Wittenbirge last turn. That was a city sheduled for us.We will have to figure somthing out about that. But first things first. Raging war elephants.

Cheers! Beta

ps - thank you again for the stone trade. We will send it back as soon as we can.

[scooter]

Sent to WPC:

Beta,

Well it looks like the German team has given us an opening to help try to save your city! We are able to take Warendorf and Wilhelm both this turn, which will make the cultural borders disappear. That will allow our main 1-moving stack to move along roads in neutral territory and hopefully defeat the group that is on the pigs tile. How safe is Huron River right now?

I do feel like there is a misunderstanding between us about the nature of our agreement. We said going into the war our goal was to end it as soon as possible. We wouldn't race you, in that we would take only our half first, and from there move west to east. For instance, if you can take a city this turn, we would be happy to let you go first. However, we do urgently need to finish this war ASAP because our western neighbors recently informed us they will be ending their NAP agreements with us. We need to be able to defend that front very soon, so we're trying to move as quickly as possible.

Let us know if there's anything at all we can do to help you in protecting against the Incan team. I'm not sure where their primary stack is at right now since we can't see it quite yet.

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[scooter]

From WPC:

Hi Scooter. The Germans have gone "all in", moving many of their units out of Warendorf as well.

If you can take Wilhelmshaven, please do. As to Warendorf, we have one chariot which can attack the city this turn, (we have moved our stack adjacent to it), so if you can beat the longbows down to the point where our chariot can take it, that would be great. We will send any gold we get from the capture.

As to Huron River, it will be close. They will probably try and take it this turn, so they can move on. If they pause one turn, we can flood many more defenders into the city.

So maybe we need to stay in close touch during this turn. I am around most of the day (est ie: gmt-5) and can log in as needed.

As to the overall strategy and agreement, our understanding was that you get certain cities, and we get certain cities. That got 'buggered' up by the Germans defence against us, and now their kamikaze run. So, not sure what to say. With the no city-trading clause, this means we are not going to get much out of the war, which is what the Germans clearly wanted.

And we certainly agree that there is need to get it over with. I understand your concerns there as well.

So, let's just take it turn by turn for now. If we can take Warendorf, with your assiatnce, that would be great. If you can take Wilhelmshaven and accomplish the same thing regarding the units on the pigs hill, and leave Warendorf for next turn, that would work as well.

Let me know how we wnat to play this.

Thanks! And cheers! Beta of WPC

[scooter]

This is sort of a big deal. From UniversCiv:

Hi Scooter,

As you maybe know, our empire is diplomatically relatively isolated. We like to handle our problems by ourselves and don't see the need for entering an alliances system.
However we hear more and more frequently rumours about teams teaming up against you and WPC.
We are not really sure of what would be our place in their world order.
The world looks like to be split in 2 sides... We can either join them, remain neutral or join you.
Remaining neutral is maybe not the best strategy at the moment.
If we were to join "your" side, what would we find?

Yuufo