Diplomacy Correspondence Tracking thread

[scooter]

Sent to CivPlayers:

CivPlayers,

Hey, we just wanted to warn you guys real quick. Your wounded chariot is quite close to a barb axe, and we felt we should warn you so you don't lose your chariot! Here's a screenshot since we are now allowed to send those.



Hope that helps you out!
scooter - Team RB

[scooter]

From CivPlayers:

Hi scooter,

We want to thank you and your team for all those efforts to save our chariot. We appreciate it.


OT4E
CivPlayers

[Lord Parkin]

From CFC:

Greetings RB Friends,

We needed our marble until very recently, and we will need our marble for our own plans again in about 15 turns, so we must insist you make a choice: Either you take the marble within the next 5 turns (t140-145), or we will have to waive our original agreed deadline and re-arrange our deal as we will then be outside of the turn 150 window.

We can't delay another ten turns because that is when we will be needing it back. We are prepared to offer it in-game now. If you do not accept it within the timeframe that we had agreed to, then we will have to try to come to a new one. I'm sure you understand as we both agreed that the gift could be arranged around both our teams needs for marble.

Thanks,
Caledorn, Foreign Minister of Team CFC

[scooter]

Sent to CFC:

Caledorn,

We've been thinking about how to come to a more agreeable deal. We don't have much use for the marble right this minute, and it's unfortunate that later in our agreement it's not available. How about we compromise - we extend the NAP portion of our agreement from T175 to T200, and that means expanding the marble trade window so that we can agree on a mutually beneficial trade period. Does that work for you?

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[scooter]

Message from WPC:

Greetings to our brothers in arms,

I hope your preparations are well underway.
Our main turnplayer, Beta, is writing a detailed war plan for your comments at this moment.

While we wait for that, I would like to discuss about the NAP contract between our nations.
We would like to extend the NAP, to lets say turn 200 for starters.
Would you agree with this proposal?

Best regards,
proviisori of WPC

[Ruff_Hi]

From Germany ...

Thanks to your kindly help, we could finally connect our own gems and please our women with presents made of it.

As agreed, you can take back your gems now. We assume that the marble deal is still valid.
Our trade agreement was clean and nicely executed and we thank you for the bargain.

The thankful men of the inca

[scooter]

Sent to WPC:

Tatu,

Hey, thanks for the message. Our preparations are definitely well under way - perhaps you've seen our power graph rising a bit lately . We're definitely looking forward to the Incan conquest!

I'll get back to you on the NAP issue once we've had a chance to discuss it as a team, but I wanted to get this quick reply to you given the circumstances. To aid in your planning, we seem to have found the main Incan stack here:



Hopefully that helps you as you prepare. We will definitely be ready to declare war and move into Incan territory on T150. Will you guys be ready for that as well? I'll send you another email in the next few days with more details of course, as well as a response on the NAP extension offer.

Thanks,
scooter - Team RB

[Lord Parkin]

From UniversCiv:

Hi,
Thanks for your proposal! Unfortunately, we aren't interested in open borders at the moment.

Yuufo

[Lord Parkin]

From WPC:

Great.
The contract is thus extended.

Yes, we talked about it before and our position is the same. All possible peace negotiations with the German team will be a three way event. RB and WPC will discuss and make those treaties together.

Best regards
Tatu of WPC

[scooter]

Well here we go. Beta from WPC sent me a message, first notifying me to communicate directly with him over the next few turns (not a problem). He also attached an 800 word document detailing their idea for upcoming war strategy. Here it is in all its glory:

Proposed Strategy for Upcoming War

Greetings, Scooter and the rest of the gang at Realms Beyond. Beta here. As Proviisori has mentioned, this is a proposed strategy regarding the assault on the German Team (hereafter referred to as the Incas).

The first question is whether we attack as one large force, or two separate ones from our respective civs. From a logistics and ease of co-ordination, the latter makes more sense. If we assume two separate attacking forces, then we have 3 options.

1) We both attack at the same time.

2) You attack before us.

3) We attack before you.

Option one has benefit of forcing them to decide how to defend, but also allows them to plan for that defense. In other words, there are no surprises after the initial attack.

Options 2 and 3 have the benefit of perhaps pulling defenders to one side of the Incan lands, which should help the second team that attacks, and may in fact cripple them sooner and end the war much quicker. The downside is the team that attacks first may take the brunt of the casualties.

I like the delayed second attack – ie option 2 or 3. However, if you attack first, it will probably be no surprise at all to the Inca when we jump in. So, as much as it pains me to say it, I think the best option is that we declare war and attack, and at a pre-determined number of turns later, Realms Beyond (RB) would attack. That seems to have the best chance of catching the Incas off-guard, especially given your recent resource trade with them and your cordial relations to-date.

If we used this option, we would probably go in with two forces. One smaller force westward from Great Plains and Huron River, but a main attack force which would move NW from Great Plains and use the forest and hill tiles to move on Wittenbirge. That has the added advantage of being fairly far north, and as mentioned above, may seriously weaken their southern defences. Thank you for your recent map showing the stack of Incan units. This convinces me even more of the soundness of this strategy to pull their military out of a ‘central’ defensive position.

However, if we adopt this strategy, we need to agree in advance on 1) how soon after we attack that you declare war, and 2) the split of Incan lands after to the war. It is quite possible that we, WPC, will get bogged down in a slug-fest with the majority of the Incan army around Wittenbirge, and then you could ‘waltz’ over their southern cities. Which is fine by us, as it may ultimately shorten the war, as long as we agree on the split.

So, on the first point, we think 3 turns would be a good period to draw the Incan forces northward. Two might even be enough as they will probably react to our approach. So, we would declare war on turn 149, 150, or 151, and you declare two turns after we do.

On the second point, I propose the following. RB gets the southern half of the Incan civ, including the cities of:

1. Wolfrathausen

2. Worms

3. Wassenburg

4. Weilderstadt

5. Wanzelhein

6. Webringen (capitol)



WPC would get the northern half, including the cities of:



1. Westheim

2. Wesselburn

3. Warendorf

4. Wien

5. Wittenbirge

6. Wilhelmshaven

That seems like a fair split. Equal number of cities; ours have slightly more population (from what I can tell); but we are also getting a lot desert and tundra; and you get the capitol. The remaining question is the city of Wismar. If it goes to you, it is fairly close to Wilhemshaven, and if it goes to us, it creates a bit of an uneven border. The best idea may be to raze it and then you can build on the south shore of the lake, say two tiles south of where the city is now.

I would also propose that we evenly split the number of captured workers, if there are any. And finally, that any gold from the capture of a city slated for the other team be turned over to that team. Alternatively, we could agree to a 50/50 split of all captured treasuries.

An unknown variable may be the involvement of other teams. Apolyton comes to mind. Our northern portion of the Incan lands is fairly isolated, but the southern section, as you know, borders Apolyton. If they decide to attack as well, it could upset the ‘fairness’ of the proposed split of land.

I don’t think we need to discuss operational planning; we can each take care of our own. And we will need to stay in close communication during the war to share status, intelligence and ideas.

I look forward to your thoughts on the proposed strategy, and we at WPC look forward to marching beside you, figuratively speaking of course.



Regards, Beta of WPC