Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[antisocialmunky]

I think scooter and Sullla have said everything worth saying at this point.

Its kinda dickish that they claim that the pillage gold is crucial for their research though. That's awfully bold. Would be nice to throw that back at them in the future in a NAP nullifying war declaration (though I highly doubt we'll hit the break even point for Germany before the NAP actually expires).

Maybe we should ask the other civs if they have heard from the CivFrench? Maybe its a holiday or they or on strike or something.

Oh yeah, here's a silly option: Pillage the hamlets ourselves. If you can't stop CFC, might as well do it ourselves. CFC can just drag the 'negotiations' over it indefinitely.

[TheHumanHydra]

Sorry, I'm not totally caught up on everything yet, but I've noticed repeated complaints that CivFR is non-communicative. How is their English? Should we try communicating with them in French? I can do some translating or composition.

I'm just remembering how poor communications apparently were with Imperio due to the language barrier and wondering if that's the case again here. Sorry if this is off-base; I'm only reading through all the threads now.

[spacetyrantxenu]

Oh yeah, here's a silly option: Pillage the hamlets ourselves. If you can't stop CFC, might as well do it ourselves. CFC can just drag the 'negotiations' over it indefinitely.

I think that would indeed be a silly option. The whole point is to preserve the developed cottages, we don't care so much about the pillage gold in the long run.

[novice]

CivFr speak english, they're just MP guys who hate diplo.

[kjn]

Sorry, I'm not totally caught up on everything yet, but I've noticed repeated complaints that CivFR is non-communicative. How is their English? Should we try communicating with them in French? I can do some translating or composition.

I'm just remembering how poor communications apparently were with Imperio due to the language barrier and wondering if that's the case again here. Sorry if this is off-base; I'm only reading through all the threads now.

Possible, we thought about doing communication in Spanish/French/German earlier back before the game actually started, and done a bit in Spanish and German. I think all of our correspondence can be found in the Diplomacy Correspondence thread.

I have no idea with CivFr - their English seem a bit clumsy from a stylistic standpoint, but I have no idea if they've had trouble reading what Scooter has sent or they're just standoffish in general.

Univers is the other francophone team, and there we know that Yuufo is their only player who is comfortable with English. If there is one team that can gain by allying up tighter with us, it's probably them. I think the language barrier there has been quite real.

For that matter, and unrelated to this, I think we should be quite generous with WPC after the war is concluded. I think we should definitely send them more happiness (eg silver or spices) and maybe even some gpt. I think we can afford 1% of our GNP in foreign aid, in return for a rock solid ally.

[Boldly Going Nowhere]

Here's the thing with CFC. I've said it before, but it's worth explaining again. CFC is a win-oriented team. They don't seem to put a lot of emphasis on grudges, emotions, feelings, etc. All they care about is making the decision that best maximizes their chances of victory.

Trying to bully/extort the game leader sounds like a better way to be ground into dust (along with said leader) into a sixth place finish rather than a winning strategy.

Generally speaking, things can go sour with their team, but if given sufficient incentive, they would drop that history and work with us.

This need not apply to only CFC. Given sufficient incentive, we could drop our history with them and look forward to a future full of cooperation. Pillaging our tiles will neither win the game for them nor lose it for us, nor further will it improve our diplomatic relations sufficient to get us to help them in any meaningful way that will improve their position in the game. Finally, they can not drag us back to the pack from our position as leader by simply pillaging our conquered tiles. In this light, it is not a rational, win-only strategy.

Now there may not be a sufficient incentive for us to offer, but the statement itself is still true. (If we offered them 5 of our cities they would give us whatever NAP agreement we wanted, to use an extreme example.) The contrast to that is we could be "super best friends" with them or whatever, and the minute that relationship was not helping their chances of winning, they would toss it out the window.

This is almost certainly true. There is very likely nothing we can offer them except that we both finish the game at the bottom of the scoreboard and war for eternity. That said, this should also not appeal to their win-only strategy, and since they're being portrayed as cyborgs that only have binary win-lose decision making abilities, this should not appeal to them. We do not have to, by default, always have to be the reactive (rather than proactive) party in diplomacy. We can ruin their game as easily as they can ruin ours. I'd be willing to bet that win-only is certainly their mindset, but that they'd much rather finish second than sixth.

I like neighbors like that. They're predictable. CFC is a lot more predictable than CivPlayers for that reason. So when thinking about these things, please think through incentives. What incentive does CFC have to take a threat about "act of war" seriously? None, really. It's an empty threat that will probably just irritate them, which gains us nothing.

I hate neighbors like that. Grind them into dust. Finish in sixth place. And, why does it have to be an empty threat, precisely? (YES I KNOW WE ARE AT WAR /ROAR...) I don't like their face.

Our relationship with them and deals have always been letter of the law, not spirit, so we sound like we're just whining by doing that. How about an offer to drop the ivory trade and also a request to keep our bridge from being burned? That's a real incentive to them, hence my approach in the chat. It's a small one, and it's maybe not good enough, but it IS an incentive - enough that Yossarian took it seriously.

The letter of the law:

Section 3. Non Aggression

3.1. The members agree not to conduct actions which will lead to a declaration of war between the members of this pact for the duration of the pact.

On what plane of existence does pillaging the spoils of another sovereign not indicate the kind of action that could lead to a declaration of war? Am I missing something? Just because the game engine doesn't recognize it for what it is doesn't mean we shouldn't. This should not be a simple request to cease and desist. It should be an imperative statement, period. Pack Eastern Dealers and Starfall full of units and issue an ultimatum along the lines of "You may keep what you've already taken, but your presence is no longer required. Further violation of section 3.1 of our agreement will not be tolerated." Should any other liberties be taken, the offending unit should be removed, plain and simple. If you give, and give, and give to a bully, it only learns that it can come back for more and more. All that hot air having been said, don't make it sound whiny. Put some force into it and make them respond. As for the ivory trade, that would be an appropriate thing for us to do, once the 10t period is over. They did not confer with us prior to going to war, and this is a sad byproduct. If only our relations were closer...we could have saved them some difficulty in this matter. Unfortunate circumstances like this happen all the time when teams don't collaborate. Yes, that is a nice revisionist way to view that, but perfectly defensible in diplomacy. Pillaging our tiles is indefensible for any Reagan-esque "I don't recall/couldn't have known" type reasons.

Keep that in mind when dealing with CFC. Right now, they're playing the game exactly how we are, so it's not that difficult to understand their actions when you put yourself in their shoes.

Would we pillage their tiles out of the blue? I can't say I wouldn't think of doing it, but fear of diplomatic fallout or military consequences, or of burning bridges for the rest of the game would more than likely convince me not to do it. I certainly would not use it as a way of extorting the game leader, who, it may have been said, could grind me into dust and a sixth place finish.

--

Our NAP with CFC for reference:

Official proposal from CFC:

Hey Scooter/RB,

The team has decided that we will settle 1S of the rice (this means we are fine with getting stone from t106 and not t105).

Here is the formal agreement I spoke of on GTalk, to be signed by your team (I have included BBCode to make it easier for you to post it on your forums):

---
Section 1. Members of the RB-CFC treaty

1.1. Team Realms Beyond

1.2. Team CivFanatics

Section 2. Pact Duration and Terms

2.1. The pact binds both teams to adhering to all of the clauses of the pact as a whole.

2.2. The pact lasts until the beginning of turn 175.

2.3. The members of this pact cannot enter into agreements with third parties which interfere to any of the clauses of this pact.

Section 3. Non Aggression

3.1. The members agree not to conduct actions which will lead to a declaration of war between the members of this pact for the duration of the pact.

Section 4. Open Borders

4.1. Both members agree to maintain an Open Borders treaty to facilitate trade and unit movement for the length of this pact.

Section 5. Resources and future agreements

5.1. Team Realms Beyond agrees to gift Spices happy resource to Team CivFanatics starting from turn 103 and keep providing it for free for the duration of this pact.

5.2. Team Realms Beyond agrees to gift Stone strategic resource to Team CivFanatics starting from turn 106 and keep providing it for free for the duration of this pact.

5.3 Team Realms Beyond agrees to not get Pyramids and Team CivFanatics agrees to not get Hanging Gardens.

5.4 Both teams agree to offer first dibs to newly acquired/unused resources to the other team at an appropriate price (happy resource for happy resource or for a price of 2 GPT per city count of the team receiving the resource)

Section 6. Espionage

6.1. Both members agree to not spend/gain espionage points against eachother.

6.2. Both members agree to not perform espionage actions against eachother .

Section 7. Temporary Exceptions

7.1. Temporary exceptions can be made to the terms of the pact with the express agreement of both members. This is meant to allow either member to react to unforeseen circumstances or circumstances outside of their control.

Section 8. Amendments

8.1. A proposed amendment may be submitted by either member.

8.2. A proposed amendment will be adopted upon agreement of both members.
-----

I think this sums up exactly what we all want from our deal, and we have no problems accepting and signing it in it's current form.

Keep in mind that any additional protective clauses that may be suggested as amendments will be a two-way deal. Both our teams wish to feel secure, so we are open to suggestions for amendments that are rational and maintains the interests of both our teams. We are working on possible additional clauses of the NAP, and we are sure we can come to an agreement on them as soon as the main body of this pact is signed, without any of our teams feeling the weight of time pressure to get this out of the way. Here are some suggestions that we think are rational to put in as clausules:

-----
3.2. If any of the members is at war with a third party, the other member agrees not to gift units to that third party.
3.3. Both teams agree not to use Great Artists to culture bomb in cities touching culture with culture of the other team.
-----

If you like the suggested amendments, you can include 3.2 and 3.3 in the treaty, and return it to us signed, and we have a deal. We want the main deal without the amendments signed this turn, as we can not afford to postpone settling our city on the isthmus any further, while the deal with the stone from you is still uncertain.

--

Edit: @scooter, don't take the multi-quotes personally. I happen to disagree with the course of diplomacy in this case, not you in particular.

[SevenSpirits]

Irrationality is a big advantage to have in diplomacy.

I think we should be being less self-interested and more interested in rewarding friends and punishing enemies, in general, even if it's not optimal play.

[novice]

We could try to spin it another way, (or rather, I can't be bothered arguing the point), but the intent behind clause 3.1 is clearly "any in-game actions that trigger a war are prohibited". This means alt-clicking, declaring in the diplo window, DoWing on a MPP partner, etc.

[Boldly Going Nowhere]

We could try to spin it another way, (or rather, I can't be bothered arguing the point), but the intent behind clause 3.1 is clearly "any in-game actions that trigger a war are prohibited". This means alt-clicking, declaring in the diplo window, DoWing on a MPP partner, etc.

I don't want to post another book (and no one wants to read it), but why would we spin the agreement any way that is not helpful to our current diplomatic situation? The agreement is the agreement, and subject to the interpretation of the signatories of that agreement. They seem to think that pillaging cottages is acceptable. We need to state that it is not, and use the agreement itself as our basis. As written, virtually anything could lead to a war declaration. Within that all-encompassing set of possibilities, pillaging our cottages is 100% certain to be a possible action that could lead to war, so they must cease, or else they are (further) in violation of the agreement. I see no need to help them clarify the position, it does not help us stop the pillaging. Making them think we'll attack them just might. And, if they call our bluff, they are not a win-only oriented team, and we can grind them into a sixth place finish.

[antisocialmunky]

That's perfectly fine, BGN, but just _Not_Right_Now_ when they have basically ended their war and the German war is barely halfway done.