RB Pitboss #2 [SPOILERS] - Pacal II of Greece! (Jowy & Yazilliclick)

[Jowy]

Hey Jowy,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you - not sure where you're
physically located but it's a holiday weekend here in the US so I've been
somewhat busy.

(he quoted this from me)
[COLOR="PaleGreen"]That river is awfully close to our capital and would be a shame to leave it
be as a financial leader. I haven't scouted enough yet to say for sure, but
I do feel that the river was "meant" to be on our lands. Hopefully we can
work out a better way to divide the lands. I'll of course have to scout east
myself before setting anything in stone. Maybe forget about the river and
use other landmarks once we have enough information. Anyway I do agree that
we should leave some spare space there to prevent 'our borders to spark
tension'.
[/COLOR](he quoted this from me)

I don't think that we mean to say that this river is ours, or even
necessarily split between us. We recognize that you also have a claim in
this area. You are correct that it is 5 or so tiles from your capital at
its closest point - it is also close to our capital (I believe 6 tiles? Not
looking at a map right now). From what I can remember, where it comes out
on the coast is closer to your lands, and the headwaters are closer to us.

I guess at this point we have 2 choices. What I proposed is that we each
don't send our first settler or two to this river valley. There is no
copper over there, as I'm sure you already know. That allows us to
potentially stake a more aggressive claim in other directions, while still
counting on our mutual agreement to allow a "fair" settlement plan between
us. Overall, that maximizes both of our land, if we can both be counted on
as trustworthy.

The alternative is that one of us rushes an aggressive settlement towards
this river valley. The problem with that is that a) it kind of reduces
trust between us, which is bad, and b) it will likely cause the other civ to
also rush a settler in that direction, etc, etc. All the while, our other
neighbors are settling towards both of our other borders.

So what do you think? We are willing to agree to not settle our first 1 or
2 cities towards the river valley if you are - let me know

dan.
regoarrarr
Byzantium

Commenting on everything tomorrow :3

[Jowy]

Dear Jowy and Yaz,

With regards to your desire to meet Dantski, we have passed on your message
and requested that he send a unit of some kind around our territory to come
meet with your scout. If Cover and Duck continues to head east around our
borders, and then moves directly south of our capital, you will eventually
reach Dantski's capital of Timbuktu. Unfortunately neither of you can move
through our territory because Writing tech and Open Borders are still some
distance away. We will be happy to sign an Open Borders agreement when one
of us discovers the tech.

On the subject of some kind of borders demarcation, we would first like to
request some more time for our scouting units to move around and get the lay
of the land. We still have not actually found your capital yet, although I
believe that our warrior is getting close (?) Keep in mind that we are
forced to rely on one-move units like warriors for scouting, so we probably
have a lot less terrain defogged than you do.

More importantly, we want to deal with you honestly and fairly, and on that
note both Speaker and I are not particularly keen on the whole idea of a
borders agreement - at least not at this very early stage of the game. We
haven't even reached 2000BC, and it seems silly to legislate who gets what
land at this point in time. Many, many things could change over the course
of the next 50 turns; we don't really want to be locked into inflexible
arrangements so soon. Your team said much the same thing to us when we
negotiated our original Non-Aggression Pact, you may recall.

We could have stalled you and gone around in diplo circles with borders
agreement talk, but we decided that we'd rather be open and honest, because
we do value having a friendly working relationship with your team. I think
it's allowed both of our teams to be able to concentrate on growth rather
than military expansion so far (losses to barb animals not withstanding!)

This shouldn't be read as a declaration of hostile intentions. Rather, what
we'd like is for both teams to pledge not to settle aggressively towards the
other, as we already discussed earlier in the game. For example, your scout
no doubt saw that our second city was placed near our capital, in a
non-threatening position. If we can both agree to do this, we can let the
borders form up naturally over time, with the understanding that neither
side is going to screw over the other. Of course, you guys are absolutely
free to beeline early cities over in sunrise's direction, as aggressively as
possible.

Sorry for the wall of text, but we thought you deserved a full response.
Cheers.

Sullla
The Killer Angels

[Jowy]

Shouldn't you be allowed to found a city with overlap with your own capital?

Also, definitely whip the settler. Your third city can pick up iron.

Exactly my point. He replied that he'd only be one tile further from the river than I am, but that is incorrect, he is atleast 3-4 tiles further. Anyway, I'm going to settle there no matter what and I think they understand that. Haven't decided what to do with the rest of the river though.

I whipped the settler this turn. (2-pop down)

I think it was mentioned earlier too, but if you want stonehenge or the great wall you could settle a very strong city on the stone and chop it out very fast. (Would also work for the pyramids of course, but presumably there wouldn't be the same urgency).

Not saying it's a good plan or anything, but perhaps worth considering.

We discussed it earlier, but I ended up not being in the favour of that plan. Sure it's a good thing to have, but it's definately not a must-have. With 9 teams in the game (well, now 8) the race for wonders will be tougher. I might have gone for great wall if spies weren't disallowed and if we had raging barbarians on. Will use that stone for later wonders.

Had a look at the dotmap, and it looks very 'single player'. You will surely fight one or both of your neighbours at some point (and potentially a point not of your choosing). Here's my ideas:

Black - will anger team rego, and can be 'boated'. I'd move it two south to get sheep & horses in the 1st ring. Getting horses online is probably more important than metals at this stage because of the extra movement.

We will get horses online when Athens borders pop soon. But might do this anyway, I had also thought about 2S.

Red - even more aggressive than black, and if you intened to settle it, it simply must go on the hill 1E for defensive bonus and to deny team rego hill-safety. I'd skip it (unless you end up making combat settler move like Krill did with Killing Knife in PB1).

Maybe. Red was supposed to be my front city. They would have to go through it to get to black. But if they go yellow, it's a bit far away and I could probably land a counter attack from red to their lands... Still not sure what to do with this one. And Rego definately wouldn't like me to settle this one.

Yellow - pretty good defensively with the river, but I'd move 1W to settle on the sugar, and grab the rice from black.

Might just do this.


Overall: Much will depend on the other teams. The plan is flexible imo, it wouldn't hurt to settle the border cities a tile or two back towards my lands.

[Jowy]

Diplo long-term?

I don't trust Rego. He lies and bends the rules of the game, not really acting in good faith (RPB1, and I almost got screwed the same way with the worker situation here). He's going to be my ally only as long as it's beneficial to him. It's just a matter of time until he will betray me. I don't really want an ally that can stab me in the back just for short term benefit. Doesn't make a difference am I an ally or an enemy, but atleast as an enemy I would know that he's coming for me. But on the other hand, he did spare my worker and diplomacy feels more relaxed and is faster with him. I know I've mostly talked about Rego, but he is their diplomat pretty much. Sunrise backing him up as a military advisor gives me another good reason to atleast try to have them as my ally.

As for Sullla and Speaker, everything seems so formal and you know, fake. It feels like they take their time with the replies and think carefully of every word. I don't trust them yet, but I don't see them as manipulative or backstabbing. Maybe I can convince them that Rego's team is not to be trusted and we could attack him together at some point of the game.. But does that make me as bad as Rego is?

Worst case scenario is that they both decide to attack me together. I could see that happening because both of their teams have long time RB members, while I'm a stranger here.

[Jowy]

Reply to Rego's team.

Hey Dan

No worries, 2 days to reply isn't really slow in my books I live in Finland so we don't have thanksgiving here, though I have many friends from the US so I know it's quite a big deal there.

While I still plan to settle atleast one city east of my capital near the river, as a friendly gesture I have decided to go for a secondary site in another location for my second city. I haven't yet decided where to settle the next one after that. Anyway I hope you appreciate this and follow up by also expanding elsewhere.

Ah so you do have other neighbours? May I ask which way from your capital do you presume these other neighbours might be?

~ Jowy

They pretty much confirmed that they have a same kind of situation with two fronts that I have. I want to meet the neighbours ASAP. Btw I'm indeed settling the blue dot first. It's actually a very strong site, might have settled there first even without Rego harrassing me about the river city.

[Jowy]

Hello KA

Good to hear back from you. That outdated message was not really informative Thanks for passing on my plea. Cover And Duck is atm just east of your second city. He ended up next to a lion this turn. Hopefully this lion won't beat the odds like it's predessors.

Thanks for being honest. I'm not a big fan of border deals either. I was just being a little too paranoid in the start of this game and wanted to have everything in paper. I feel like I can trust your team and that you won't do anything drastic.

I wouldn't say that a city settled right next to a copper would be non-threatening I do get your point though. I wasn't planning to settle aggressively against you anyway. Let me be honest, I have pretty much planned my future city sites. You would have space for some cities north of your capital and the new city, but not for another line after those. What do you think of this, fair enough for you?

I'm sure you wouldn't mind us expanding towards Sunrise, as much as they wouldn't mind us expanding towards you Now that you did mention Sunrise's team (Rego, sunrise, darrel), what do you think of them?

~ Jowy
PS. Yaz will be away for about two months. He is travelling for work.

[Cyneheard]

Diplo long-term?

Maybe I can convince them [Spullla] that Rego's team is not to be trusted and we could attack him together at some point of the game.. But does that make me as bad as Rego is?

I don't see how this would make you as bad as Rego. Long-term peace with everybody is impossible in this type of game. If you sign a short-term deal with Rego, and then once that's over and done with, you attack, then that's fine. As long as you're upfront about when you're pulling out of any deals with him, then that's clean. Especially if you don't back out of anything that you owe him. If everyone played nice, there wouldn't be any fun at all.

[Jowy]

Sparta settled and looks like it really is connected to the river. Awesome.

[Jowy]

Dear Greek Friends,

Well what can I say, the copper was there a half-dozen tiles from our
capital, it was pretty much begging for an accompanying city.

I'm glad to hear that you have no plans to settle aggressively against us.
As we said before, we feel the same way, and have no plans to do the same to
your team either. That's an excellent basis for future cooperation between
our teams. We really appreciate your statement of trust in our team, and
feel the same way about you guys as well.

As far as sunrise's team, well, we don't know that much about them having
not made contact yet. We did see them sneak in the founding of their second
city right before the last turn rolled over. (regoarrarr almost managed to
disguise it on CivStats.) You probably know more than we do at this point.
If we do meet them, and get Demographics bar graph visibility, we'd be happy
to share whatever info we find with you. We think that sunrise will likely
be a difficult military tactician to contend with, should we ever have to
cross swords with them.

Cheers,
Sullla
The Killer Angels

I don't know how to respond yet. I'm thinking about going "all-in", either they would agree to work with me to get rid of Rego after our NAP is finished, or they'll disagree and maybe even tell Rego, which means I would be pretty much screwed. Maybe I shouldn't rush it, haven't even met Rego's other neighbour.

Props to Sullla for noticing Rego's new city. I was wondering why Rego's team were holding their turns, I guess this is why. Just another trick playing with the game mechanics for your own advantage. And I'm not talking about intended gameplay mechanics.

[Jowy]

Hey Jowy,

Thanks for your reply. There was some confusion in our team whether "second
city" in your email meant the actual second city (i.e. the one founded by
your first settler), or the second city founded (third total city). It was
my belief from reading your email that you were referring to the actual 2nd
city (first settler) but we weren't sure.

So, with all that being said, here's some thoughts on the river valley
between us. I am not sure how much you were able to scout, so if any of
these descriptions don't match for you, let me know and I can describe them
better. Obvously we would prefer the coastal spot at the river's mouth that
grabs the Sheep and Deer, however we recognize that this is the prime spot
and in the interests of reaching a deal quickly so we can plop our cities
down, we're willing to give you that spot as long as you settle on the west
bank of the river (i.e. NW of the Sheep). This will allow us to squeeze an
admittedly subpar city in to claim the Deer without crashing your borders.
We each get one of the Food resources, and with so many grassland tiles
that's more than enough.

To be honest, we see this as a fairly big concession on our part, since we
are basically giving up all the river tiles on the best city spot. However,
you were the only team that signed a long term NAP with us and you have at
least appeared to act in good faith by also offering to settle in the
opposite direction. We think a key to this game is securing well intentioned
neighbors; a secure border allows for a more focused military. I would hope
that as we negotiate sites further down the river, there is an opportunity
for you guys to offer some concessions of your own ;-).

As for our other neighbors, have you not met Athlete / Kalin of the
Ottomans? Their scouting warrior passed by our lands a few turns ago and we
gave them directions to your city, so if they have not yet met you, they
probably will be soon. I believe they are to our east, and I believe that
the Incas are somewhere to our south.

dan.
regoarrarr
Byzantium

Sounds too good to pass up. I really didn't think they would give us any land just like that. It's also good to hear their other neighbours didn't accept a NAP. If I stay in good terms with Rego while others don't, it will strengthen our relationship and there's a far smaller chance that they turn on us. If I decide not to trust Rego, or if something else comes between us, then good to know that there might be some pressure from the other side(s). Answering both the diplos tomorrow.

The locations they gave for the other civs would match with the donut hypothesis. Something like this perhaps?:



EDIT: Just realised that Dantski (Mali) should be the ? under India.