View Single Post
  #11  
Old September 3rd, 2008, 01:06 PM

Kuritza Kuritza is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 651
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Kuritza is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Question about diplomacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by konming View Post
I think this is a good example. One party seems desperate not to be an target and proposed a NAP so the powerful party will attack someone else. When the weaker party became not so desperate (maybe under the protection of said NAP) and maybe even has a chance to win, he finds his previous dealing inconvinient. Well, you be the judge.
Fail. We were not going to be their next target, absolutely. We just knew they are going to win game, I was worried about Agartha/Tien Chi combination since turn 1, and we wanted to have our share of fun as well. And we had.
But other parties asked me to reconsider the truce, urgently and repeatedly. So I did what I though will be right - proposed to break the NAP that allows them to win this game unchallenged, and even give them 3 turns to prepare as if we had a standard agreement.

Anyway - screw this, I'm waiting for turn 60. Not worth the nerves, I have already been called a liar by a liar in this thread.
Oh, and of course as someone's said, I'm not entering long-term agreements anymore. Something to be learned out of this game.

Last edited by Kuritza; September 3rd, 2008 at 01:10 PM..
Reply With Quote