Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[Ceiliazul]

I understand opening with niceties, but we need to get to an agreement quickly, while the axe gives us some kind of leverage. Even 2t is too long, imo.

How about, "Unfortunately, I see we face an immediate puzzle on our combined border, as our dotmaps clash pretty badly. Would you be interested in a quarantine zone along the river for say 20t while we work out a long term plan? No military or settlers move out of either of our culture in this sensitive area. If you accept, our axe will head directly away from your front city."

[kalin]

Scooter, very good call on the quick email to CFC! Costs us little, shows good will that may come handy when we talk about pink dot.

I said this in another thread, but what are your thoughts on letting Civplayers initiate contact? Otherwise, I wouldn't suggest a NAP in the first message, but say something more vague about entering some agreements. I would also not mention the fact we spotted their borders in the fog. It doesn't help us that much and our axe moved after contact towards their city in what I think is an aggressive move (which is good for us). Given the current situation on the field, and assuming/hoping they don't have a chariot in the fog, they should be quite relieved that we want peace.

Kalin

[kjn]

How about, "Unfortunately, I see we face an immediate puzzle on our combined border, as our dotmaps clash pretty badly. Would you be interested in a quarantine zone along the river for say 20t while we work out a long term plan? No military or settlers move out of either of our culture in this sensitive area. If you accept, our axe will head directly away from your front city."

Bad idea. Very bad idea.

CivPlayers know Meditation and Writing, and are in OR. Their city of Xochicalco (white dot on Sullla's map) is new, but has at least three forests in its first ring.

First thing is that they will rush a missionary to the city. Then they will chop out first a buddhist monastery and then a library in the city, just like we did at Tree Huggers, maybe adding a monument and a temple in the bargain. In 20t the city will be close to blocking off the entire southwest shore of the sea, if it hasn't done so already.

[Ceiliazul]

I think you're worried about a road connection to the South. That's totally legitimate. What I'm more worried about is a settler planted 3W1S of BbB. That city also has 3 first ring forests. THAT city would do more to make BbB indefensible than blocking our road.

So, any NAP needs to include no settling in that area.

Edit: I think, if we want a Southern lake city, the clock is already ticking. We need to prioritize it (after CFC pink dot) or not plan it at all. This is regardless of diplo, for the cultural reasons you identified.

[kjn]

I think you're worried about a road connection to the South. That's totally legitimate. What I'm more worried about is a settler planted 3W1S of BbB. That city also has 3 first ring forests. THAT city would do more to make BbB indefensible than blocking our road.

So, any NAP needs to include no settling in that area.

Edit: I think, if we want a Southern lake city, the clock is already ticking. We need to prioritize it (after CFC pink dot) or not plan it at all. This is regardless of diplo, for the cultural reasons you identified.

Oh, that too. But a city 3W of 3W1S of BbB would be blocked by your idea. Also, with 3-ring borders in white dot and Tlaxcala (which they will rush towards) they will have a salient towards our cities, from which they can strike not only at BbB, but Seven Tribes and Gourmet Menu as well.

Our settler for the (now invalid) site 1S of the wines is due to be whipped T94, so we do have a settler available in just a few more turns. Or we can whip Gourmet Menu at size 7, ie next turn. Not sure how that will impact our Currency run, however.

[Old Harry]

Just so it's mentioned in this thread too, I don't think Civplayers know that we've settled Brick By Brick yet. We can only see their southern city because of our peak and their northern city hasn't got any hills on the border nearest BbB. Can someone with better game-mechanic knowledge than me confirm or deny this?

If this is true we have a very short window (how long until the southern city's borders pop?) where they don't realise just how close together we are. I think talking about border agreements is likely to tip them off that we're nearby, while sneaking around in the dark might get us a better border.

So perhaps don't mention BbB or borders in the greeting?

[novice]

Just so it's mentioned in this thread too, I don't think Civplayers know that we've settled Brick By Brick yet. We can only see their southern city because of our peak and their northern city hasn't got any hills on the border nearest BbB. Can someone with better game-mechanic knowledge than me confirm or deny this?

If this is true we have a very short window (how long until the southern city's borders pop?) where they don't realise just how close together we are. I think talking about border agreements is likely to tip them off that we're nearby, while sneaking around in the dark might get us a better border.

So perhaps don't mention BbB or borders in the greeting?

This is true and a very important point.

[novice]

If Civplayers have scouted the stone and have masonry, they can tell that we've settled there from the tile's mouseover text. Similarly for the horse tile once we improve that.

[NobleHelium]

I wouldn't expect them to immediately notice that. That's more of a "knowing where to look" kind of thing.

[Old Harry]

Yeah, they could also have a unit somewhere in the fog that we haven't seen. So it is only a chance they haven't seen BbB yet.