[Spoiler] RB Pitboss #2 - Shaka of Rome

[Swiss Pauli]

I can understand your frustration, but I don't think either party is being particularly unreasonable (they don't want to get Praet-rushed, you don't want to give massive concessions). The core problem is that you are natural enemies (in-game) and your respective needs are therefore incompatible, hence the fruitless negotiations.

If you still have the chance to retreat to your city then I would do so, otherwise you may need to make the risky DoW on the same tile manouevre to teleport Korea's unit 1 tile further away.

[novice]

It looks like you can end up with the "military buildup pact" you wanted

EDIT: Diplomacy-wise, it might be better to just exchange emails rather than chat when one of you is half asleep.

[RefSteel]

What am I doing wrong here that I am not realizing, that makes this such a horrible pain?

I don't think you're doing anything wrong, really (in fact, for what it's worth, I think you're totally in the right). I loved your "Watch me be bad at diplomacy!" way of looking at the situation, and it's hard to watch that light-heartedness take a hit from a frustrating chat exchange. I think the best (maybe lame) advice I can give is: Keep that sense of humor and fun going, know that lots of lurkers (to judge by many recent posts in your thread) seem to be on your side, and if things start to get frustrating, try to inject some humor back into the situation somehow, so at least you can laugh about the impasse.

One help to this might be to go for e-mail in lieu of chat, by the way. (When people try to chat, you can say something like, "Really sorry - no time; I do all my diplo by e-mail" or the like.) One advantage is, you won't be talking to people when somebody needs sleep and is feeling cranky. Another is that it's sometimes easier to step back from an e-mail and have a good laugh about your civ's diplomatic headaches before sending a reply. A big disadvantage is that it takes longer to send and get a reply..... But that might be an advantage, as it might force all concerned parties to come to the point more quickly ... or just mean less diplo occurs in between actually playing the game! (I'm not sure if I'm serious or not on that one; you tell me!) (Of course, if you're on good terms with someone and don't have a stressful relationship with them, you might prefer to chat anyway....)

At all events, good luck!


[Edit: Double crosspost because I'm slow. @Swiss: LiPing is not afraid to lose the game. That is probably her greatest strength in the current situation (though the C1 on her warrior helps a lot!) - retreating to the capital is exactly what she doesn't want to do: Sacrifice scouting and civ development (since the warrior can sit on the game tile and more warriors will likely be needed) in order to not die right away - in other words, drag out what would already at that point be a losing game. It's also the reason Korea's demands are totally unreasonable. Since LiPing is willing to accept war, they have no leverage. They need to declare war or agree to peace, not argue Templar-style about border agreements for land that hasn't even been scouted. In my limited-knowledge-of-CIV opinion.]

[zakalwe]

I like your reporting style, seems like you've got a great attitude to the game. Please don't get discouraged, it is after all just a game so treat it as such.

I think you're handling the diplomacy well, but it does seem like they are simply having a hard time seeing your point of view. That's another reason why e-mail might be a good idea, since you'd have more time to carefully formulate your message to try to make it as clear as possible (abundantly clear, if possible) .

Even though it might be "rude", and somewhat risky, you can also simplify the diplomacy by playing a bit more hardball. I.e. just give them a couple of options and stick to it, such as "move your warrior such and such or I will declare on you and attack it". (This is just a generic example, not necessarily my advice for this specific situation.) If you are having trouble communicating, simpler but less "polite" messages just might do the trick. And it sounds like you've already decided to consider them a long-term enemy so in that sense there's nothing to lose.

Feel free to disregard all of the above, just my two cents.

[LiPing]

First up, pleasurable diplomacy.

From Mortius, to me:

Hi LiPing,

Sure it is difficult to negotiate anything, being aggressive Rome, especially when you are 8 tiles from someone else's capital I assume that they are now seeing through the eyes of imagination praetorians storming their walls and are not prone to any concessions.

As for intelligence. The real analysis starts when I have someone’s full demographic data.
So far I know that everyone, with the exception of Sulla, and perhaps you have the coastal capitals. I know that at least two your tiles are lakes, but I also know that you have other two water tiles, but it’s hard to tell whether this is a coast or a further part of the lake, which I see.

I also know that the four civilizations including me, have found one of the cheapest techs last turn, probably all discovered fishing. I also know that Iowy discovered mining this turn. The other possible tech is mysticism, but I do not presume he try to chase a religion that way

Oh and one strange fact gave me something to think about. Nobody has the production of more than 3, and this means that none of the expansive civs (including you) will build a Worker in 12 turns.

If you know something else I will be grateful for more information

With regard to the NAP/alliance.
Personally, I hope to cooperate to the end of the game. Is the initial NAP until turn 200 sufficiently radical, or should it be longer?

Probably most people would have thought that close cooperation among civilizations in this game is not critical, because techs cannot be exchanged. I believe that such thinking is wrong, because it is much easier to defend or attack taking advantage of 2 vs 1 and thus gain the upper hand early in the game.

As for the border I do not see a problem to draw it as you are saying.

Mortius

----
From Me, to Mortius:

Hello Mortius,

Until T200 is perfectly fine, but as I said, I would be happy to go longer if you would like for us to commit to more.

In case I die this turn and turn out to be a very disappointing ally, I am happy to include info which I hope should be accurate, in the event that it turns out I was unable to do anything more. I try to disregard moves that would seem inefficient, so I can't guarantee the accuracy, but hopefully, it is close. I won't be able to keep this going for much longer though, once population starts to grow, it becomes too inaccurate, but I think it's the most useful to know about people's initial moves and openings, so hopefully this turns out to be of use.

At least 3 people have 3-food unimproved tiles, which are adjacent to their capital.
At least 5 people have 3-food unimproved tiles available to their capital.

On turn 5:
Someone decided to build a turn 5 warrior, using a 1/2/x tile, and it wasn't Mali, Korea, India, or myself. That person then likely changed to a 3 food tile when the build was completed, so probably they were not someone who researched Fishing on turn 6, assuming they plan to build a boat next, unless they don't have a 2/1/x tile to use in the first ring.
No one besides me was working anything bigger than a 1 hammer tile on this turn, so if Greece is trying to build a boat, they're not trying to get it out very quickly, or are just unable to.

On turn 6: You, the Ottomans and the Incas researched fishing, and I think also, so did Mali, finishing a warrior on the same turn (their soldier count rose by 2000, the number of people working 2 hammer tiles changed during these early turns, and it seems correct with the amount of hammers needed by t6 to complete a warrior, and boat from t7 onwards, without ending up with hammer stuck in a weird project that might be lost later) but possibly he took Hunting instead, and was banking hammers into the warrior first, to complete in case of threat, since the map is small enough, and people are close enough together that it's dangerous, and decided to build Worker only after guaranteeing their safety.
Sullla's border expanded to cover 20 land tiles, so India is inland, with a lake.

Turn 7: Greece most likely took Mining, and no one built any units. I didn't calculate beyond that because I was expecting having to do the 68.1% battle and I thought I'd wait to see if it was necessary that I calculate anything else, or if I was dead

Also I do actually have the ability to make T12 Worker, but it's not very clearly shown - one of the tiles in my inner ring is plains-forest-deer, which is why I was willing to go for the two-turn move. I am inland with two tiles of useless sea, it is unfortunate, but the only way I could get the gold and the food in the capital's tiles.

Also, what look like my tech selections will probably look weird from your view in the next few turns, please don't worry upon seeing them, I have a plan, and I am not actually doing anything too horrible like the example you suggested, although it might appear to be the case. If it happens you were not the person who made the turn 5 warrior, and do not have one on the way, it might also look (depending on which player is looking at their demographics) like it is possible that you did choose to build one, if anyone walks up to you with aggressive intent with a similar situation that I have - perhaps they will get put off the idea of attacking you if they see it (I can explain further if needed), but it might still be good to have one partially ready that can be completed in time, just in case.

LiPing

[LiPing]

Next up, unpleasurable diplomacy:

Korea decided they do not like coinflips. They moved SW instead and took the 10T (+50T) 'enforced peace' I suggested, I went N.

Plako to me:

Alright I did as you wished and declared war and offered peace.

Best way to get pleasant game without too much contoversy is to sign long term deals and keep communication lines up. When both parties know about others intentions and agree upon things, stress level will be way lower. Broker33's opinion was just based on information available at that point. If we sign long NAP, both of us have time to show our trustworthiness and we've new basis to form our opinions.

I suggest we sign as long NAP as you like between 60 and 100 turns. I would prefer 100 turns, but 60 turns is also alright. We don't have to agree upon our border before you see all the tiles (we'll had to do some scouting also), but I suggest no settling at this point and we agree upon settling after we both see all relevant tiles. The silk resources are between us and cow is 2 tiles north from the river corner your warrior can see currently from the hill. I would say that without agreement we shouldn't found cities that would claim any of these resources and to the area south from the silk on this continent.

plako

Still with the lousy NAP, yeeesh.

[LiPing]

Also before we go on, more importantly, is there anyone who is reading only this thread, and can possibly play? I think Elkad is, and I have asked, but I am not sure, and I will likely have a problem coming up later this month. (and again, in December)

[zakalwe]

At least you're not dead, and you already have an ally.

[LiPing]

Re: Swiss - If I had declared with their unit on the tile still, it'd be my unit that would have gotten bounced (I think SE), so it'd be useful for avoiding the flip short term (although they could still force it if they wanted it), but I couldn't really shift them by doing so...

Oh and I found something to do with that empty post I had right back on the first page, although it's mostly tongue-in-cheek...

[zakalwe]

Oh and I found something to do with that empty post I had right back on the first page, although it's mostly tongue-in-cheek...