February 27th, 2010, 17:20
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
BTW as discussed in that email, Exploit just discovered Writing this past turn (T52). I'm not sure if he's heading for Alphabet now, but I asked for an ETA - I think worst case we should have it 10-15 turns beforehand
February 27th, 2010, 19:15
Posts: 8,842
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
You know...we really need more Workers. They might not have a ton to do now, but pretty soon they will be overwhelmed. I think we should chop/whip out 3-4 more.
Darrell
February 27th, 2010, 21:57
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
Email from Exploit. Surprise, surprise, he's not amused by us settling on the stone
Quote:Hi DJ Civ,
Based upon your borders and using the stone tile in question as a reference point, I place Happy Hour at 5 south/1 west while the DJ Civ capital is 4 south/4 east of the stone tile. The two tiles which we would be culturally competing for, if DJ Civ were to settle on the stone tile, are therefore closer to the Tech capital and should rightfully belong to Tech assuming we divide the land between us equally.
I can understand why DJ Civ would like to settle on the stone tile since it gives you a bonus hammer in your city, access to the wine and it does not overlap with any of your existing cities big fat crosses. The only downside would be the two tiles that we would culturally compete for and if you were to win the cultural competition then you would be gaining two extra Tech tiles so you have a possible upside with no real downside. From the Tech perspective however we would now have to culturally compete for two tiles which we believe rightfully belong to us so we have a downside but no real upside to the stone tile settlement location.
If DJ Civ were to instead settle in the flood plain south of the stone tile then you would still have access to the wine, you would be able to work the stone tile for the production bonus and there would be no cultural overlap between our civs. The only downside would be that the new city would overlap 2 tiles with Happy Hour. Either way the new city will be overlapping 2 tiles with another city, it is the Tech position that it is fairer for the overlapping two tiles be the Happy Hour tiles.
Please note as part of this deal Tech is already conceding a prime settlement location that includes a stone and a wine which means that this boundary deal favours DJ Civ.
We seem to be in agreement on the NAP and open borders agreements so once this settlement location is resolved I see no obstacles to proceeding with those.
Tech can commit to having a road built from its capital to the hill 2 south/1 east of Bison Pass by Turn 60 if DJ Civ will commit to having the road built from your capital to the tile 3 south/2 east of Bison Pass by the same turn. If DJ Civ needs longer time to build this road then please specify a turn that you would be willing to commit to and Tech will match that date. Tech's objective is to obtain the foreign trade bonus as early as possible.
Tech is currently researching Alphabet. There are still a lot of variables as to when the Alphabet research will be completed however Tech expects to be the first civ to research Alphabet. If we are not the first then we will not be far behind the leader.
Tech's trading philosophy is based upon trading items of equal value. The basic unit of trade would be the beaker (since most trades are expected to revolve around technology). At its simplest Tech intends to trade beaker for beaker (i.e. 100 beakers of tech for 100 beakers of tech). Tech intends to negotiate an agreed upon exchange rate with each civ for beakers to hammers and beakers to gold (example 5 beakers = 1 hammer = 3 gold). Each civ may end up with different exchange rates depending upon negotiations. Mercenary units will be bought and sold using the same exchange rate.
There are a number of other possible trade types that will be negotiated on a case by case basis (for instance trading cities, trading settlement rights, gpt payments instead of immediate gold payment, bribes for declarations of war, premiums beyond base hammer cost for promoted or unique units etc). Trades may also require some flexibility in regards to carryover between trades (ie. 90 beaker for 100 beaker tech trade with a 10 beaker credit applied to the next trade).
I have never tried this type of trading in a multiplayer game before but it is something I am willing to try since it makes the game feel more like a single player game (with human instead of AI opponents) to me. We will see how it goes.
February 27th, 2010, 22:02
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
We also had an email form Ruff - wanting to know details on the incan quechua that we just met. He's convinced that they are coming after him. They just double whipped again. quechua is currently 4E1S.
February 27th, 2010, 22:29
Posts: 8,842
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
Well, I think sunrise and sooooo need to give input as well, but I say we still settle the Stone. Its best for our dotmap.. We can say we won't "hotly" contest the culture for those tiles, meaning we won't build any building that just generates culture (e.g. Theater) but would build buildings that had other uses (e.g. Temple). Just let him know we don't have any interest in those tiles basically.
Darrell
February 27th, 2010, 22:30
Posts: 8,842
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
I also suggest we ask Rome what they think of Exploit, maybe give them a leading comment that we would love to get in a 2v1 against him.
Feel bad for Ruff if that is the case; not sure why he went for Archery on defense. Does he have a metal?
Darrell
February 27th, 2010, 22:35
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
darrelljs Wrote:I also suggest we ask Rome what they think of Exploit, maybe give them a leading comment that we would love to get in a 2v1 against him.
Feel bad for Ruff if that is the case; not sure why he went for Archery on defense. Does he have a metal?
Darrell
I am composing a draft which I will post in here for feedback.
As for ruff, I think he is trying to get usage of an Ottoman chariot. I think he'll have copper hooked up in 10t but doesn't know if he'll have that long
February 27th, 2010, 22:42
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
Okay this is the draft- need comments.
We really want this settled before next turn so we can settle the city
Quote:Hello Exploit,
First of all, the stuff we seem to agree on. Thank you for your explanation of your trading philosophies. They seem reasonable to us, at least at first glance, so hopefully it will lead to many fruitful trades of beakers / gold / hammers. You're right that it does seem to make things more like a SP game, so it certainly should be interesting.
As for the road, those tiles to road sound good and I will have to check with our road planners to see when we can get that done. At first glance, I think T60 might be ambitious for us. But it shouldn't be too much after that and I will get back to you on that.
As for tech trades, let's say 20 turns out (just as a rough guess since Alpha is 540 beakers and you just discovered Writing this turn). What kind of techs are you going to be wanting to trade for? Have you lined up any other trades already? I assume that you have AH and BW and Wheel, but we might be able to offer IW or Math as well as some filler like Mysticism. Obviously you don't have to tell us what techs you have or don't have, but if you could let us know what you might be interested in trading for, that woudl be helpful.
Okay so on to the settling location. Rapoleon_Hi of the Aztecs has suggested that we use our capital as the "center" of the universe since it has Stonehenge after all, and since it does make it easier to at least have SOMETHING as a reference point, that's what we have started using.
You were 1 tile off on our capital's location - it is actually 4E and 3S of the stone, or to put it the other way, the stone tile is at 4W3N. It is our understanding that your capital city is at 12W 6N, though of course that could be wrong. So the stone tile is about 50% closer to our capital than yours, so we don't think it's quite accurate to say that you are conceding the site, since it's much closer.
You are proposing to place a city at 7W6N. The 2 tiles that would overlap are at 6W4N and 5W5N. So using the Civ distances of 1.5 for a diagonal tile and 1 for linear tile, they are 8 and 7.5 from our capital, and 7 and 7.5 from yours. So the one tile is 1 tile closer to you than us, but the other is equidistant.
In addition for us, we lose 1 floodplain (by settling on it), give up a 2 hammer plant and additionally, as well as lose 2 hills.
We are willing to not "hotly" contest the culture for those tiles, meaning we won't build any building that just generates culture (e.g. Theater) but would build buildings that had other uses (e.g. Temple). Basically, we don't have any interest in those tiles and are happy for you to culturally own them. The stone city just fits our dotmap much better.
Hope to hear from you soon and PARTY ON
DJ Civ
February 27th, 2010, 22:59
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
Email from Portugal
Quote:Hi DJ Civ,
We have a few thoughts we would like to share with you.
Our people are very excited about the approaching Crazy Tech Day (T63 at last word), but we are also wary that in the midst of our celebrations we may have to deal with gatecrashers from the Tech Peddlers. We are still trying to get Rome onboard (have you established contact with them yet?), if we do Exploit will be faced with 3 neighbouring civs all with Alphabet + other techs who are mysteriously refusing to trade with him. I think he may be backed into a bit of a corner and could go for any one of us out of desperation and frustration. Did you have any plans in this regard? Exploit's capital Tech is 15N1E of our capital and 8N7W of Happy Hour.
On the topic of civ locations could you give us the exact location of HRE and Aztecs. Rome's capital is 8N13W of our capital. Our current understanding of map layout is as follows
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
-------------------
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
With a 17th civ somewhere. If we call ourselves 14 that would make you possibly 11 or 15, exploit either 10 or 11, Rome being either 9 10 or 13, Egypt being 3, and France being 2. The uneven placement of civs and the varying offset from each other makes this confusing. Could you confirm if this matches your understanding of the map?
Also we are indeed heading for sailing then we plan to save some gold.
February 27th, 2010, 23:07
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
Draft back to Portugal
Quote:Hi Dantski and Muhka,
We did meet Rome a turn or two ago - their warrior made it to our borders. We are also trying to get them on board and think that we can bring that to pass. As for Exploit, I think, assuming these trades go off (and we think that they will), that he is going to have to go. Between the 3 of us, it shouldn't be that hard, right?
HRE are at 31W 15S and Aztecs are at 12E 5N
And your map layout is about what we have thought of too. 3 rows of 4 civs and a 4th row (I think the row with us, Rome, Sumeria, Aztecs and Inca) of 5 civs.
Party on!
DJ Civ
|
