Niccolò Machiavelli's Thread

[zakalwe]

So we should perhaps say that the NAP ends on OUR turn 100.

[plako]

Chat with Lewwyn - They want settler + 2 workers. Does this sound reasonable to you. WE also get intresting map from them:

me: hi

Lewwyn: hey
I haven't really written up anything since we talked
so I guess I'm glad the turn hasn't been moving

me: Since you haven't activated. I've given it a though
We get Losing immediately

Lewwyn: have you talked to anyone else on your team about the settler two workers?

me: WE'll give you option to capture 1 worker now
and next settler finishes on T59 would be yours
To direct where you like (we can settle it for you)
NAP until T100
Border: We will settle a city 7W of the gold. That city, Bitter, and Losing will form our northern border and they can settle all the land north and east of those cities, as long as their first ring doesn't overlap with our second ring.
East meaning not further south than Losing though
replce they with you . I took it from our forum

Lewwyn: mnnnn
so you want the marble sheep deer copper

me: Yes

Lewwyn: so we would never get marble
because there is no marble north of that

me: I suspect we could agree on a deal you having it e.g. for 10T during our NAP.
WE could also consider NAP having a some other duration
This is only marble we've seen so I suppose MArble isn't available to everyone

Lewwyn: there's marble 6 tiles away from that marble
towards M3

me: ok. there is probably 2 of them in the main continent

Lewwyn: I think commodore set it in the middle for fights
which is precisely why we fought with you actually
the marble

me: But still settled on other direction . You would probably have it, if yo would have gone there

Lewwyn: well
one more turn
but thats neither here nor there
I think we can give up the marble but I'm not sure we can agree to give both the deer and the sheep

me: both of them are our 2nd ring so you would have a chance getting them

Lewwyn: I'd rather not be "fighting" for a "chance at getting them
what your asking would simply create more friction and basically force us to come after you again after the NAP is up
if we were to give you that site
the east would need some working out

me: What would you suggest as our border city there?

Lewwyn: how much of that area do you have mapped?

me: I think we have all that is relevant

Lewwyn: the problem is that its sort of peninsulaly
theres ivory and furs both there
and theres the stone

me: Not seen the marble, but I guess we've pretty much everything east from there
You mean east from Losing?

Lewwyn: yes
I am referring to east of losing

me: ok. there we've gaps
We were blindly setting the border as you 1st suggested. That doesn't work well I suppose

Lewwyn: I don't think we suggested a border
I think you did
anyway its a bit like an Italy boot
anyone who settles near the opening seals off the whole thing
problem is we haven't scouted the botom of the boot either
I believe commodore has done a bit of a wheel and he's set stone between each civ, so there should be 4 stone on the map 1 between each civ

me: Ok - So that might be´come a problem. Without seeingit. Hard to comment

Lewwyn: on these spokes he's also put furs and ivory between each civ
in the center he's put the two marble and the food

me: Most of the useful things seem to be in the middle yes
between nations

Lewwyn: the marble is much closer to us than you

me: Yes - One of our complaints of this map

Lewwyn: so would you rather have stone or marble?
I fucking hat ethis map

me: Well our prefrence is to have a city in hte center so Marble
Not sure how we can agree upon east. I think we can accpet that border line would be on Losing, but based on your desciprion that is not very good for you

Lewwyn: ah we can't accept a border line based on losing
you know how you have that land to the south?
our counterpart is that land east of losing
think of it like a lopsided pizza
our land scoots down south along the coast
your proposed border currently cuts basically all our land in your direction off

me: WE can be reasonable concerning the borer there. Could you send us screenshot or was that prohibited until paper or something

Lewwyn: yeah we can trade maps
My proposal
is that if you're taking marble we'll take stone
we'll take the furs since their closer to us and you take the ivory and sugar

me: In princible alright, but we had to see the area

Lewwyn: understandable
I can't log in right now to take a picture or I'll have to turn off this chat

me: We can take a pause and continue after you've taken the shot
I might had to present it to the team though

Lewwyn: the issue is that we havem't defogged all the sea tiles and the bottom of the peninsula

me: We can left out some parts from the deal and agree not to settle there during the NAP without a new deal

Lewwyn: sent you a ss from an earlier turn report
it doesn't have Losing on it but you can see what I mean
the wheat in that picture is the wheat SE of Losing

me: Sure - Seems prety natural to try to split in half. It is wide enough
at least from here

Lewwyn: yeah just barely
I'm hoping theres more seafood in the fog
if there is we could keep the crab and you could have the other

me: Crabs will be contested no matter what

Lewwyn: you'd get the sugar and the ivory we'd try to grab the furs in a second ring

me: But maybe we could agree upon settling order

Lewwyn: right but I'd like to possibly settle so we'd have the crab in the first ring

me: 1W of stone? Anything else would make our entrance to peninsula challenging

Lewwyn: and grab the fog + sugar + ivory which would remain uncontested from us

me: WE could perhaps settle 2S from furs

Lewwyn: thats hard because it makes the furs so contested

me: Only visible food for us would be then crabs
Even that Wheat is already shared with Losing
and is obvivously unirrigated

Lewwyn: you can see the dilemna

me: Sure. Could we just make a general deal at this point staing you'll have stone, but neither of us can settle here until we reasses the area after scouting it fully
If nothing else works we can fight over it after T100

Lewwyn: I think so I'm still worried about the extra food we're giving up at marble
it's just a bit much to give up so close to home

me: That placement can be also discussed. I think also hill 1SE could be ok in case we can plant in the west claiming the marble

Lewwyn: when we're already giving up Losing gambit plus extra

me: That would leave Sheep totally yours

Lewwyn: I think that would be inifintiely better
and make us Much Much less likely to start fighting again which I'd rather not worry about

me: Nut then I'd like to se you not putting pressure on Deer

Lewwyn: wait
1 S of the marble put the sheep in your range but the deer out
so you mean no pressure on the sheep

me: That might be better yes. Border would be nicer
The best postiooinig for you we'll put pressure on the Deer no matter what
Sheep is a bit further and near the lake
Our dot mapping will be tougher though

Lewwyn: Ours too XD

me: Would it be ok, if we swettle on top of Marble. That way we could squeeze one reasonable city south from there

Lewwyn: yeah I think that might be okay, one thing is that we'd like to settle for the deer 2 East of it

me: That is a mega city for you

Lewwyn: that would put Losing's deer in its second ring though
problem is if we settle it one tile north of that it make s a city between it and the capital nearly impossible

me: If gifted immediately We could live with it I think

Lewwyn: okay I think we can make it work
and yes we'dd make sure you had full control over the forested deer so that it would be technically uncontested

me: actually I think our original suggestion would be quite alright. You'll probably easily keep the Deer tile as long as you settle the city before us and that surely is a very high priority spot to you

Lewwyn: yes
hmmm
okay I'll think about that as well then

me: I think we could also live with most of hte suggested other positionings

Lewwyn: I also think that we can likely work out a bit of deal where we swap the marble and the stone so we both benefit from it

me: Sure - and I was already promising you a 10T of Marble earlier

Lewwyn: yeah and I'll extend that back with the stome

me: No team approval though
Thx

Lewwyn: right same here
how close are you to writing if you don't minf me asking?
I'm curious because of timing of possible worker deal

me: we're accumulating gold and has it getting the 1 beaker. If we go there next under 10T
You can capture the worker now
Before we sign peace

Lewwyn: right

me: It is converted no normal worker though so up to you, if you want to wait

Lewwyn: does it stay a fast worker if capure it?
right
one sec
your team was wary of giving us 2 workers right?
do they feel better if one is captured and made normal and then gift a fast one?

me: You want 2 workers instead of settler?
I think everythign is negotiable
WE're not totally against giving fast workers

Lewwyn: well we wanted 2 workers and a settler

me: That starts to be stretching it
We've also plentiful of Axes

Lewwyn: XD

me: You should take them instead - lol

Lewwyn: you're offering axes lol?
I've sort of been told not to accept less than 2 workers and a settler for gifting away Losing
what if the second worker was much further down the line?

me: well delaying delivery might make it work

Lewwyn: I think we would be in favor of that, it makes the worker less difficult to give away for you, but should still be helpful for us
even if the snowball is delayed
you are saying 10T until writing yes?
at the least

me: These things can change, but preliminarily our next goal has been Writing

Lewwyn: right

me: No palns to change it though so 10T is highly likely

Lewwyn: I think what we have discussed so afr in terms of capture the worker this turn and gift then having you settle and gift your next settler should be solid
then possibly we wait until its more convient for you for the next worker
I'm not sure when you think that would be
20T?

me: The 2nd workers is something I haven't discussed with a team. I could probably try to sell them ~25T

Lewwyn: Okay I think I might be able to sell that to Krill

me: Alright. We've now plenty of things to present our Teams.
It seems that reload hasn't happened yet so we've plenty of time to get all details agreed

So what do you think too expensive or alright. Clearly it will be better than current situation, but not sure, if we're giving too mcuh for the TEAM.

[plako]

Deal draft from Lewwyn:

NAP to T100
Open Borders, No RoP without additional agreement.

TEAM:
Capture worker T54 and offer Peace + Gift Losing

Trolls:
Build Settler T59 and settle site 2 East of northern deer after. Gift city that turn.
Gift worker ~T80

Border Agreement:
Trolls will settle Marble site, TEAM will settle Stone site, to wit:

Trolls settle 2 S of northern Sheep. 2nd ring food (sheep, deer) may not be 1st ring settled. Sheep and Deer may be 2nd ring contested.

TEAM will have a city 2 East of the deer.

No settling on the peninsula area East of Losing before T100 unless a deal is reached.
Current tentative settling plan includes Trolls on PH 2S of furs and having the furs being contested. Possibly having TEAM settle the hill west of the stone and then having Trolls settle south of that again if food is present.

Trades:
Possible 10T marble and stone trades back and forth.

I'm ok with this.

[zakalwe]

Good job, Plako. I will read and think more carefully before I comment, but one initial thought is that would be nice is to have a guarantee that our border city's sheep won't be contested at all. In that case, we can delay settling that city until after gold, if we wish. Otherwise we might have to rush to settle it, just to stake our claim. (We might decide to do that anyway, who knows.)

Having thought some more: Overall, I like the deal. We could perhaps cause them more pain, but this is the only way to really accelerate our own development. We get city #4 quite a few turns earlier than otherwise possible, at the cost of a worker. There is also a nontrivial chance that our attack on Losing founders due to bad dice rolls.

I am trying to predict the diplo game down the line. We might benefit from an even longer NAP. But I guess we could always renegotiate down the line. I expect Gillette to be pulling ahead quite significantly before too long.

On a side note, Ivory and Furs will be nice for happiness. We have plenty of calendar resources in range, too.

[pling]

(As you might've noticed by now, I have trouble visualising things like dotmaps from the words, it's why I make graphics for them )




That's what the border agreement would be, I think? I put the eastern cities on as well as the western even tho the east is more tentative.

[darrelljs]

Nicely done plako.

I'm okay with this...I would like a provision that the Fast Worker cannot be used against us militarily. I'd prefer a longer duration to the NAP (20t more) because I just don't trust them. I also think we should ask for the two Archers in Losing, but be willing to accept one.

Darrell

[darrelljs]

I'd rather they move their Cows city 1N .

Darrell

[zakalwe]

The definition of "used against us militarily" is so vague anyway that I wouldn't bother with that.

20t more NAP would be good, and the archers would be nice too of course. (When does our NAP with Gillette expire?)

Looks like they actually don't need the horses, since they haven't mentioned them. So I guess it was mostly just about claiming territory, then.

[zakalwe]

I'd rather they move their Cows city 1N .

Darrell

Yeah... or if they insist on that location, we definitely need the NAP to end on OUR turn. Otherwise, they can threaten to hit TWO of our cities directly with 2-movers. If they agree to move the city 1N, we can haggle it down to "NAP can be canceled at any point after turn X, but whoever cancels must let the other move first".

[pling]

(When does our NAP with Gillette expire?)

T70. I don't think we ever explicitly discussed if that was our T70, their T70. But the phrase used was "through T70 inclusive" so I think that will mean the end of our T70.