Posts: 15,387
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
(August 6th, 2013, 10:40)pindicator Wrote: Sorry scooter, I was the cause of the NAP-stab talk. Which is funny because I think I spent more time talking about what to say to CivFr with you last night than I did mentioning NAP-stabbing CFC. Although I couldn't give a care about a loophole, I just think it's silly for us to sit on our hands and wait for our neighbor to build up and attack us. I'm fine being in the minority in that opinion because I really haven't invested much into the game anyway.
I'll try to post more when I'm in agreement with a draft. So far I've just been not saying anything when I think it's fine, but I can see how from your point of view you are getting frustrated at a lack of feedback.
I didn't think I saw you advocating we break any NAPs, but maybe I'm wrong.
To be clear, once T175 gets here, I'm all in favor of doing anything that gives us an advantage. If for whatever reason CFC has not adequately defended that border city on T175, burn it, no question. Same with our other neighbors if they have lightly defended cities on T170.
Posts: 15,387
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
(August 6th, 2013, 10:48)mostly_harmless Wrote: I think lots of people actually read the drafts, going by the list of people browsing the forums, but don't feel the need to comment an "agree" statement, if they don't have anything to add.
And with each message you sent your handling of each team got better and better, so less to criticize. That's a good thing! 
Also, I think we are like a little rabbit staring into the headlights of the approaching truck, transfixed in the middle of the road. At least at the moment.
mh
Thanks, I do try to assume that lack of comments implies it looks fine, but when we get post explosions about other topics it makes me start to be concerned it just got buried.
Posts: 2,569
Threads: 53
Joined: Jan 2006
In general the discussions have died down a bit, since some stuff gets apparently discussed between members on private chat and a lot gets discussed in the stream, which is now in the middle of the night for Europeans. Not complaining, just trying for an explanation.
mh
Posts: 7,658
Threads: 31
Joined: Jun 2011
I don't post very frequently with suggestions, unless I really have one that I think matters, and when I'm in agreement I don't usually post a +1 or any kind of affirmative response unless it seems like there's an active debate going on and it looks like we're trying to build a consensus. When in agreement, it's kind of a silent assent like MH mentioned.
August 6th, 2013, 11:11
(This post was last modified: August 6th, 2013, 11:25 by antisocialmunky.)
Posts: 4,443
Threads: 45
Joined: Nov 2009
(August 6th, 2013, 09:53)scooter Wrote: I was sort of hoping if I just ignored ASM's post nobody would take it seriously, but apparently not. No, we are not NAP-stabbing, period.
I'm not necessarily advocating a stab, just putting all options on the table and no one has had a serious conversation about it. The context of that conversation carried over from chat and was not sufficiently explained, it was: We move in our chariots and see a huge stack of cannons for our Casus belli, this isn't about Yossarion's chat whenever we see it. As of right now, no its not sane to do this because we don't even know if CFC is coming after us. However, I suppose its not going to happen either way given the response.
Sorry Scooter, I apologize for pushing this option and stressing you out.
+1 for Xenu and MH.
In Soviet Russia, Civilization Micros You!
"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."
“I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”
Posts: 9,706
Threads: 69
Joined: Dec 2010
I liked the CivFr message. I think we need to keep it simple with them, since they seem to be very pragmatic. Hopefully they answer something to us.
I don't want to start the CFC NAP discussion yet again, but did we come to a conclusion regarding the closing of borders? That was a part of the agreement, right? Not saying that we should cancel the NAP due to this, but let's at least cancel the resource deals we have with CFC. Not much point in giving them free stuff when they aren't keeping with their side of the deal (I'm assuming here that OB is part of the NAP agreement with CFC and that they closed their borders with us - ignore if that's not the case, i'm not entirely sure on both accounts).
Posts: 15,387
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
(August 6th, 2013, 11:29)Ichabod Wrote: I don't want to start the CFC NAP discussion yet again, but did we come to a conclusion regarding the closing of borders? That was a part of the agreement, right? Not saying that we should cancel the NAP due to this, but let's at least cancel the resource deals we have with CFC. Not much point in giving them free stuff when they aren't keeping with their side of the deal (I'm assuming here that OB is part of the NAP agreement with CFC and that they closed their borders with us - ignore if that's not the case, i'm not entirely sure on both accounts).
Yep, Open Borders are a part of the agreement, so we are locked into them until T175. No, they did not close borders, and I have no reason at all to expect they'll do so. If hypothetically they were to do so, sure that's a violation of our deal and we can deal with that accordingly, but it won't happen.
Posts: 8,786
Threads: 40
Joined: Aug 2012
(August 6th, 2013, 11:29)Ichabod Wrote: I liked the CivFr message. I think we need to keep it simple with them, since they seem to be very pragmatic. Hopefully they answer something to us.
I don't want to start the CFC NAP discussion yet again, but did we come to a conclusion regarding the closing of borders? That was a part of the agreement, right? Not saying that we should cancel the NAP due to this, but let's at least cancel the resource deals we have with CFC. Not much point in giving them free stuff when they aren't keeping with their side of the deal (I'm assuming here that OB is part of the NAP agreement with CFC and that they closed their borders with us - ignore if that's not the case, i'm not entirely sure on both accounts).
CFC have a chariot scouting us right now, Noble is sending a chariot to return the favour next turn.
I liked the CivFr message, but meant to ask if anyone speaks French well enough to translate it (perhaps they'd be more talkative in their own language - unfortunately my French is awful). Then I got distracted because attacking CFC is more interesting. Sorry 
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld
Posts: 6,487
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
I also favor not attacking the CFC border city. Yes they're obviously on a path to war, but my reading of 3.1 is we don't have just cause to DOW them yet.
Posts: 6,141
Threads: 10
Joined: Mar 2012
(August 6th, 2013, 11:07)spacetyrantxenu Wrote: I don't post very frequently with suggestions, unless I really have one that I think matters, and when I'm in agreement I don't usually post a +1 or any kind of affirmative response unless it seems like there's an active debate going on and it looks like we're trying to build a consensus. When in agreement, it's kind of a silent assent like MH mentioned.
scooter needs positive reinforcement. he's sensitive.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
|
