Hahaha. Unreal. India tries to force their "ally" to pay tribute. Dantski is understandably annoyed at this and really doesn't want to pay, but doesn't see much choice with the Holy Roman Rifles bearing down on him. And then into this situation..
HRE offers Dantski peace. Giving Dantski an escape to this horrible little war, and letting him survive.
If India lose Dantski's support it really is their own fault for trying to squeeze him for change. That was really two simple mistakes.
1.The amount is going to be peanuts to them, but a lot to Dantski. Putting a shaky alliance under pressure for little reason isn't good diplomacy.
2. Doing it retroactively. If India wanted compensation for going into this conflict then they should have mentioned it before hand. This is like some sort of protection scheme. Arranging something before hand is honest(if not friendly), doing it afterwards is just exploitative.
Couple this with the rapid breakdown of the Korea relationship as Plako wonders how to subsidize a HRE defence against India, and the outright cold war with Slaze and it looks like India's diplomatic fortunes are at their lowest ebb. They've got more than enough raw material to work with however.. so even that shouldn't stop them. It is interesting how even here, when they should have a rock solid alliance of three teams, diplomacy is their biggest failing.
These events have kind of served as a microcosm for Indian diplomacy as a whole. As I recall it was a similar situation that first soured Korea on the alliance, when after the war with Rome India came looking for reimbursement for their help. That set the tone that it wasn't a friendship, merely a business relationship, which is now playing to its conclusion. It was also that which marred their early game diplomacy with their erstwhile enemies. Looking for tiny edges in everything has served them very well in terms of gameplay, but very poorly in terms of diplomacy. In broad strokes I would say that India has done all the right things, but by acting to secure tiny edges they've given people the impression that they can't be trusted. I'm not sure that impression is right, India has always broadly worked towards the interests of their allies(albeit in a somewhat self serving way), but it is the impression that is important.
DMOC Wrote:7. Offered peace to Dantski along with the city of Walata - we gain nothing by continuing the war with him. If he accepts then it would be a great stroke of luck for us as we could teleport our units back to our territory, bypassing the mountains.
HRE offers Dantski peace. Giving Dantski an escape to this horrible little war, and letting him survive.
If India lose Dantski's support it really is their own fault for trying to squeeze him for change. That was really two simple mistakes.
1.The amount is going to be peanuts to them, but a lot to Dantski. Putting a shaky alliance under pressure for little reason isn't good diplomacy.
2. Doing it retroactively. If India wanted compensation for going into this conflict then they should have mentioned it before hand. This is like some sort of protection scheme. Arranging something before hand is honest(if not friendly), doing it afterwards is just exploitative.
Couple this with the rapid breakdown of the Korea relationship as Plako wonders how to subsidize a HRE defence against India, and the outright cold war with Slaze and it looks like India's diplomatic fortunes are at their lowest ebb. They've got more than enough raw material to work with however.. so even that shouldn't stop them. It is interesting how even here, when they should have a rock solid alliance of three teams, diplomacy is their biggest failing.
These events have kind of served as a microcosm for Indian diplomacy as a whole. As I recall it was a similar situation that first soured Korea on the alliance, when after the war with Rome India came looking for reimbursement for their help. That set the tone that it wasn't a friendship, merely a business relationship, which is now playing to its conclusion. It was also that which marred their early game diplomacy with their erstwhile enemies. Looking for tiny edges in everything has served them very well in terms of gameplay, but very poorly in terms of diplomacy. In broad strokes I would say that India has done all the right things, but by acting to secure tiny edges they've given people the impression that they can't be trusted. I'm not sure that impression is right, India has always broadly worked towards the interests of their allies(albeit in a somewhat self serving way), but it is the impression that is important.