Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[novice]

So CivPlayers has a buddhist missionary heading towards us. I think Cornflakes makes a good point that it's probably preparing the ground for cheap tech steals in our border city, and maybe they're hoping for some shrine income on the side. I don't think we mind this, we're just worried about AP cheese.

Hence, I think a good deal for both of us would be that we keep our borders open and welcome buddhism to Egypt, in exchange for CivPlayers not trying for an AP victory or any hostile AP resolutions.

Scooter, can you swing that?

[spacetyrantxenu]

Their obvious reply will probably be that they aren't trying to limit any of our options to win the game via diplomacy. From where we sit we all view the AP as a cheese mechanism, but from their perspective, who knows? It doesn't hurt to share our position on the matter, but I'd rather couch it in terms that there will be diplomatic fallout if they spread their heathen religion in our empire instead of trying to directly restrict their use of the AP. If we didn't manage to get that stuff banned in the pregame then we'll have to handle it more directly, IMO.

[novice]

Their obvious reply will probably be that they aren't trying to limit any of our options to win the game via diplomacy. From where we sit we all view the AP as a cheese mechanism, but from their perspective, who knows? It doesn't hurt to share our position on the matter, but I'd rather couch it in terms that there will be diplomatic fallout if they spread their heathen religion in our empire instead of trying to directly restrict their use of the AP. If we didn't manage to get that stuff banned in the pregame then we'll have to handle it more directly, IMO.

The point is that if we close borders they don't get their shrine money and espionage discount. If they promise not to do something they might not be planning to try anyway, they get what they really want.

[Sullla]

Why would we "welcome" the arrival of missionaries that grant another team gold income, let them spy on us and steal our techs, and can even cause us to lose the game outright if they can line up enough AP cheese votes? I don't see the logic in that.

As I said in the Turn Discussion thread, we politely but firmly tell them not to spread religion in our territory, and if they refuse or don't answer, we close borders next turn.

[novice]

Why would we "welcome" the arrival of missionaries that grant another team gold income, let them spy on us and steal our techs, and can even cause us to lose the game outright if they can line up enough AP cheese votes? I don't see the logic in that.

As I said in the Turn Discussion thread, we politely but firmly tell them not to spread religion in our territory, and if they refuse or don't answer, we close borders next turn.

We might keep a friend this way. The spying and tech steals will happen either way. And part of the deal would be no AP cheese, like I clearly said. This approach also insures us against the consequences of a random buddhism spread. Finally, we get the option of building AP boosted monasteries and temples in our border cities.

[Ceiliazul]

I agree with Sullla. Firmly ask that their missionary not enter our borders. We can continue to discuss the issue with them, but if the missionary enters our culture before we have a clear agreement, we should close borders.

[Ceiliazul]

We might keep a friend this way. The spying and tech steals will happen either way. And part of the deal would be no AP cheese, like I clearly said. This approach also insures us against the consequences of a random buddhism spread. Finally, we get the option of building AP boosted monasteries and temples in our border cities.

Civplayers has (until recently) been very slow in diplo dicussions. Until we have a deal with them we should close borders. If they are allowed to spread first, then we have no leverage to push any deal.

As for a deal, well I suppose the missionary spread could be ok if:
-no AP measures against us (incl start/stop war, assign city, etc)
-no tech stealing from us
-no active espionage in any of our cities (not just the buddhist ones)

It is that last thing that compensates us for the benefits they gain in shrine income and visibility. The easiest way CP could hurt us is to work with CFC to (for example) cause unrest in Starfall in coordination with a CFC stack.

If they weren't planning those things anyway, hey great! We still get that insurance... but for now, close borders as needed.

[novice]

If the missionary enters our culture before we have a clear agreement, we should close borders.

I agree with this part.

My point is that CP are probably not after enabling AP cheese. They probably want the EP discount. We should find out what they want and what they're willing to give when we approach them diplomatically, not just unconditionally tell them to bugger off.

[Ceiliazul]

My point is that CP are probably not after enabling AP cheese. They probably want the EP discount. We should find out what they want and what they're willing to give when we approach them diplomatically, not just unconditionally tell them to bugger off.

[novice]

CP make lightning diplo decisions in chat.

Why would we ask for no tech steals? That defeats the purpose of the spread. Their stealing techs from us doesn't hurt us, in fact I'd say it helps us as it removes EP that's being used for city and research visibility and could be used for hostile spy missions.

I like your other suggestions though.