Alright, Yossarian poked me on chat earlier today. It was idle chit-chat at first, but it turned into something vaguely noteworthy. It's not really important in that I don't believe it really changes our current situation, but I feel like I'm learning a lot about what CFC is aiming to do and what they've been up to. Here it is.
Chat with Yossarian/CFC Wrote:scooter
so are you still going to insist on not telling me why you declared war on one of the strongest teams in the game?
or are you just playing hard to get? haha YossarianLives
Have you asked them yet? [he's referring to CivFr here] scooter
Hah, I asked first :P YossarianLives
Alright, alright, if you keep insisting, I will go back and ask the team how much info I can divulge about that war
But I will say this. They are definitely not one of the strongest teams in the game, at least not soldier-wise scooter
Hah, ok, fair enough.
and maybe not in current soldier counts, but in potential they're right there. but I see what you mean YossarianLives
So wouldn't that be the best time to make our move? Before the potential is realized
Instead of giving them 25-30 turns to prepare scooter
You can do whatever you'd like. But there's no way I'll believe you'll send your army marching into CivFr knowing that your NAP with us expires in less than 25T
that would be pretty interesting if you did though. Much popcorn would be eaten at RB YossarianLives
Well like I said, we're most likely not going to sign another NAP extension that doesn't have anything in it for us. We know how this game works. If you get a NAP and all the German lands, you'll just sit back and build up to a victory
We need something to sweeten the deal for us if we're going to consider it scooter
Probably not happening, so don't get your hopes up too high YossarianLives
Did you get my message the other day? Not a Pee Wee fan?
Ok, well that's good to know then scooter
your message? YossarianLives
I just asked if you found a basement :D scooter
oh. man the new gmail chat is obnoxious, I have no idea why it didnt show that to me
but I don't get the reference YossarianLives
But if you're so keen on a NAP, I'm just trying to say it wouldn't be impossible. You just have to work with us. We can't give you this game on a silver platter. But we don't have a problem continuing to work with your team if it's also in our interest
Regarding your conquest of the Alamo. There's a bike down in the basement, scooter
and by "probably not happening" - I just mean don't expect some crazy offer involving us gifting you land or something in exchange for a NAP anytime soon. I don't think a NAP is impossible, but I suspect you would want more than we would give. but you've never asked either, so I wouldn't know for sure
that's fair enough. I just get the impression you don't know what would be worth a NAP extension to you. maybe I'm wrong, I don't know YossarianLives
Well, my negotiating tactic has been to try to get you to put something on the table first
But off the top of my head (and without discussing it with the team), ideally something that comes to mind is help with research (a significant GPT or arrangement to let us steal your techs)
Ideally, we would get some land that is by all rights closer to our capital than yours, which we told you we intended to settle and tried to make an equitable land split agreement before you secretly sent settlers there, but it sounds like you just said you wouldn't agree to that scooter
haha wait, where did we secretly send settlers? YossarianLives
Bygones and whatnot. None of the team has mentioned it since it happened. But personally I was very upset when you took the stone spot scooter
How so? it was a spot up for grabs, and we just happened to get there first. We definitely didn't violate anything that was agreed on YossarianLives
No, nothing had been agreed to, but we brought it up once or twice and you said you weren't ready to talk about land splits because you hadn't explored the area yet. We told you to come back to us when you were ready to talk about it. And then next thing we know you have a city settled there, and another further east north of there scooter
furhter northeast was a barb city capture fyi, not a settler YossarianLives
But we definitely said we intended to settle in the area but would table it until you were ready to discuss it scooter
anyway, expansive game is getting more land than your non-exp neighbors because it's a useless trait after 100T. if you fail to do that, that's a major error YossarianLives
Anyways, it really is bygones. We obviously were able to have really great relations well after that happened. scooter
Yeah of course. I'm just surprised because this is the first I've heard of this being an issue YossarianLives
Team decision was to not let it be an issue. You won the spot fair and square
And it really isn't an issue. But since I couldn't get you to put anything on the table first, I thought I'd make the strongest case possible why including a little land in a NAP extension makes sense for both sides
I think the city was settled before we received an email you "forgot" to send letting us know you'd be settling there scooter
I can say this for sure: any offer that involves us giving up land we've settled is a non-starter. that's nothing personal, I just know for sure that would not be considered seriously YossarianLives
But captured barb cities are maybe something different?
Or also a non-starter? scooter
I honestly don't remember the timeline, I'd have to go back and look.
Even if I wanted to accept something like that (I don't), there's no way on earth I could convince the team to agree to that YossarianLives
Ok, good to know
I'm playing hardball here, but the point is that a NAP extension is not out of the question. I threw out a few starting suggestions. It sounds like we're not close right now, but who knows where we might get over the next 25 turns
I'm just trying to say it's not my team that is insistent that the NAP expires at T175. We've worked well with you in the past, we want to keep working with you, but we also don't want you to run away with the game before T200 scooter
Yep, understood. Things are still changing rapidly so there's still time. I think I understand better how your team is thinking. I got the impression the situation was "give us a great NAP deal or else dogpile war" which is obviously not a positive situation YossarianLives
Yeah, I get that. But in our view, a NAP extensions ia "a great NAP deal" for you, so we need something to even things back out scooter
Yeah fair enough. I don't have anything to offer at the moment. Maybe that will change in the future, maybe it won't, we'll have to see
we're both involved in crucial wars right now so I'd like to see how those go YossarianLives
Well, like you said earlier. If your war goes poorly and your army is still tied up in the opposite direction, don't expect us to still be viewing a NAP with the same interest
But something tells me your war is about to go as smoothly as ours have been scooter
Yep, understood. and it looks like we both picked easy targets. Guess we should challenge ourselves a little more next time
My general thoughts right now.
1) CFC doesn't have a rock solid dogpile, and they know it. That's been our experience from asking around. Everybody, including CFC, is in wait and see mode right now. There are some tentatively willing participants (CivPlayers primarily), but everybody knows it depends on how the next 10-15 turns happens first.
2) They don't want a straight-up NAP with us because they know that's signing our victory. So that makes sense. They also don't want to fight us 1v1 because they know that's a loss, so that also makes sense. That leaves them with two options. They need to negotiate a NAP with us that results in them gaining a lot, or they need to fight us with at least one other team on board. I don't see another valid option for them.
3) I think this is a team that will do exactly what they believe will maximize their chances of winning. Maybe that sounds like an obvious statement, but I know a lot of players who will throw their game away for sake of a grudge. We have some that post in this thread :P. This team seems only interested in winning, which is generally how our team is oriented as well. Putting ourselves in their shoes may actually be a valuable exercise is what I'm getting at.
4) That said, I can't see a NAP extension with CFC happening unless something changes, so we should just carry on as we are doing. No need to fret about this right now.
This is why I'm cautioning against the "we will be in a hot war with CFC on T175" talk. That's highly possible, but it's not a done deal by any stretch. Thus my attempts to make sure that, while yes we have the matches and lighter fluid ready to go, we don't want to set the bridge on fire just yet.
Besides, we need to be the one keeping out options open right now while we see if things go anywhere with CivFr.
(June 10th, 2013, 16:04)novice Wrote: Kalin, Zak suggested this edit:
Ok, I like that. I saw that but with several versions around was not sure what's the most current and I think scooter quoted an older one which threw me off. What I wanted is to be more forthcoming and less doubtful since we largely agree we want to help them.
Ahh, so that's their reasoning for why we are the bad guys.
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
