Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
GAME 541 - 5 Player Cut Throat 2
#21
Ruler of the Underworld,

As you surely know, our Lairs overflow with coin and my Liege has chosen a wise path of balanced growth so we have plenty of food even for our vast hordes. We will listen intently to your proposals revolving around your peerless Agents. I assure you that my Liege shall not be outbid for any services...yet it may be a bit early. We shall see how certain discussions progress.


Calidor- Representative of His Highness, King of the Red Dragons
Reply
#22
As far as i know there is no trade or unilateral transfers allowed in this game?
Reply
#23
(02-16-2017, 06:58 PM)Thunderb0lt Wrote: As far as i know there is no trade or unilateral transfers allowed in this game?

You are correct. Disregard all of my trade type offers.

No alliances are allowed but kingdoms might always find common cause I suppose. No trades but there may be other avenues within the rules to provide compensation for services.
Reply
#24
Imperator of the DarkElven,

If we have not heard back by tomorrow, we shall assume that you plan to carry out your threat related to the High Council and plan accordingly. Should you rather withdraw your unilateral demand and revert back to established rules of decorum that have guided the High Council for ages, simply advise us and we shall forget this discussion ever occurred.

Calidor- Representative of His Highness, King of the Red Dragons
Reply
#25
My dearest Red DRagon,

The position of the Darkelf was stated on day 1. It was a simple and reasonable request to share the council to benefit all. You did not state opposition to it. You simply reacted with threats of war after turn 4. Your total disregard for all of the other kingdoms in this game in that regard cannot be overlooked by any of us. Yet i have to wonder. Since we have seen almost no diplomacy whatsover from the Elf or Sorceror, is it because they are not intent on the game itself? Is it because they fear the wrath of the RD? Is it because they are hoping for war between our kingdoms so that they will have a chance to buildup knowing that both your kingdom and mine may both be weakened because of it? The same actually goes for the Underworld. It is a strategy within itself to not acknowledge a dispute and to offer services to either opposing kingdom when they themselves can also benefit from it. 

We propose that the other kingdoms on the map do indeed hope for an early war between the RD and DA. And their strategy is sound if that is the case because although your nation may best the DA in military efforts, we both know there are many other weapons in our arsenal that can hurt you as well.  Since no kingdom appears be sharing my concern, then we offer this suggestion to put this issue behind us. Why do we not simply share the HC? The DA and the RD? We will not vote NAY if the RD allows us the next 2 issues and from that point on we can take turns with our HC issues. This is also fair and not unreasonable and neither kingdom becomes distracted by what we perceive to be an 'emotional' issue. 

That is our proposal that would benefit rather than harm our two kingdoms and made with all due respect to the RD King.
Reply
#26
Imperator of the DarkElven,

I believe that we most strongly stated our opposition to a unilateral imposition of such rules without any negotiation but let us not re-litigate past events which cannot be undone. My Liege has been informed of your new proposal and after serious consideration He proposes the following. As we both agree, a conflict between our Kingdoms only benefits the other 3. So long as you do not vote NAY on this current vote, we the RD shall not raise an issue before the Council for this season and the next and shall not vote against you should you win (unless of course your issue was to directly harm us such as a denigration). Once those two seasons are over (regardless of who wins the votes) we will be free to once again bid to have our issues considered per traditional High Council rules.

Respectfully- Calidor, Representative of His Highness, King of the Red Dragons
Reply
#27
My dear UN friend. I am placing a modest bid for the 4th HC seat this turn, and I am also casting a Nay vote on the current issue. The EL may want to join me in the Nay, or if you out bid me for the seat this turn, then a Nay from you is requested. The DA and the RD seem to think the HC is for them alone, and as 2 of 5 kingdoms, I say let them waste their gold putting forth dead issues! You have now heard from me.

SO
Reply
#28
Ruler of the UN,

Surely you have seen past the transparent attempt to stir conflict between us. The DA and RD were nearly at war but a short discussion ago so the SO attempt to create some sort of alliance against us is... shall we say, misplaced?

I do however have a proposal for you. Over the next turn or two we both shall claim our first region. After that, we the RD will set our sights on Arcania. As you know this is a large region with an abundance of population. I propose to offer you the city of Zarathon and of course any PCs you might already control in order to encourage you to turn your attention elsewhere. Note, since so many seem prickly, that this is not a mandate but rather a proposal. We look forward to your response.

Calidor- Representative of His Highness King of the Red Dragons
Reply
#29
Imperator of the DarkElves,

Despite the attempt of the SO to sow dissension among us, my response to your offer still stands. So long as you do not vote against me on the Council. I shall not bid for the next two turns nor vote against your issues. We ask that you confirm or negate this agreement prior to the close of our diplomatic window.

Calidor- Representative of His Highness King of the Red Dragons
Reply
#30
The DA KIng is pleased that the RD understands the politics that drive Alamaze and we confirm your offer. We want the Elf and So to know that it was the non participation of kingdoms in Alamaze affairs that prompted the offer to share HC. We have no intent to monopolize it, the statement was a subtle attempt to provoke response. Typically, waiting for the last day of negotiations is not a good strategy. Making neutral statements to avoid conflict and the issues is also not a good strategy. The DA intends no disrespect but does ask for better open talks to avoid misunderstandings since there are no one-on-one talks allowed.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)