Another IMPERIALISM 1870 - Page 22

Darius871 · June 9, 2003, 20:59

Making pictures is fun, yay!

Eivind IV · June 9, 2003, 21:05

For christ sake, man. I am giving you a fair compromise here. Give me Kuwait so we can end this nonsense. I am reluctantly trying to solve the 'Baghdad issue', (simply because I'm such a nice guy

) and you now start it over again. It will either be Baghdad or Kuwait. I need one of those cities to link India to my colonies in the Middle East.

In the beginning I was to take the whole region, but now I am compromising. You give some you get some.

Darius871 · June 9, 2003, 21:12

It was never the 'Baghdad Issue', I said weeks ago that I was referring to southern Iraq. Why is Kuwait worth so much to you? You own the seas; you have no need for a 'land link'. It would be important in real life, but in this game it would be inherently useless except that it might look purdy.

According to the casualties report, you've lost 10 warships, when you start the scenario with 15. Continental ports will complete half a dozen warships this turn, and another half-dozen in the next, and so on. Our home cities are impossible to take with your weaponry. You know you can't win this war.

JamesJKirk · June 10, 2003, 01:48

Russia has sent her conditions to Britain.

We hope this can be solved pretty quickly and all of us can get back to mutually beneficial endeavors.

Kobra, Darius was being merciful and understanding when he refused your offer of 500 gold, so I think it's only fair to give him a port there, when as he said, it was part of his initial claim and you have them all over the globe.

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 06:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
It was never the 'Baghdad Issue', I said weeks ago that I was referring to southern Iraq. Why is Kuwait worth so much to you? You own the seas; you have no need for a 'land link'. It would be important in real life, but in this game it would be inherently useless except that it might look purdy.

According to the casualties report, you've lost 10 warships, when you start the scenario with 15. Continental ports will complete half a dozen warships this turn, and another half-dozen in the next, and so on. Our home cities are impossible to take with your weaponry. You know you can't win this war.

To Germany:
It came as a shock to you that I had stationed so many ships in Mediterranean last month. This is one of my best kept military secrets, but I can asure you that the Med is full of British ships again. You don't even know how many ships I have in the Atlantic, protecting British ports. How can you, with an absolute sureness, say that your cities are not captureable for me, despite the Continental mobilization?

I serously want peace, and a land link is important, whether you reckognize it or not. I had plans of constructing a giant railway system throughout Asia to safely bring military supplies to India, from mainland Britannia. You said it yourself, the Continentals are building several dozens warships and will compromise my ruling of the waves.

If it is the port that you want, why can't I then keep Baghdad?`I don't really care for Kuwait. To show you that my intentions are good I will help you to build a road down to Kuwait between Baghdad and Teheran. My road to India will then cross your road down to the Indian Ocean. This really would be a positive project and it is doable. (We can call it the road of peace

) The sybol of eternal peace between Gemany and Britain (and France and Russia of course!)

To Russia:
I recived your message with joy, Kurkhov. The only problem is that I have invested a lot of money in Athens the last couple of months. I don't think I am exaggerating when I say 3000 gold in three months. It would hurt me to just hand the city over to you.. But I hope you understand why I maintain an attitude of reserve towards this. I would like to help you though. How about I use my West India Corps to empty Kabul for you?

To France:
Will you accept my peace proposal?

FiGu · June 10, 2003, 06:49

I will think about this matter, first. If my allies accept, then i will accept.

I will say my "demands" later.

(Damn!! i had built over 5 Field Artillerys and 5 warships on my turn!!!

)

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 07:51

Use them against the hated Barbarians and Independants

And oh! Don't misunderstand me, this is no surrender! I simply thought that it was in everybody's interest to end this silly war. I will not accept unreasonable "demands". As said, no surrender, just proposal for unconditional peace for all of us.

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 09:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

It came as a shock to you that I had stationed so many ships in Mediterranean last month.

What does it matter, they're driftwood now.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

You don't even know how many ships I have in the Atlantic, protecting British ports.

I didn't say I did, I only said that your losses on the casualty report are nearly what you started with, so you can't have many.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

How can you, with an absolute sureness, say that your cities are not captureable for me, despite the Continental mobilization?

Are you on crack? You have to land your troops before attacking the cities (since your ships can't beat coastal forts, unless you do to us what you did to Athens), and our artillery will destroy them in our turns, since you don't have engineers to build siege forts for them. By the time you have engineers, we probably will as well, and would be equally able to threaten Britain proper.

Furthermore, it would take an impractical number of artillery even IF your troops managed to survive and attack. Try defeating 3 veteran German troops fortified behind fortifications on a river with your field artillery in SP, and then get back to me.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

You said it yourself, the Continentals are building several dozens warships and will compromise my ruling of the waves.

If you're so supremely confident, then this shouldn't bother you. If you really think we can achieve parity, then you had better accept the proposal.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

If it is the port that you want, why can't I then keep Baghdad?`I don't really care for Kuwait.

*sigh* I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. The words 'southern Iraq' refer to Baghdad and Kuwait. I never said I only wanted Baghdad, and I never said I only wanted a Persian Gulf port. Reread the thread if you have to.

JamesJKirk · June 10, 2003, 13:50

Just so you all know, I'm going to be gone from late Wednesday until Tuesday, so obviously I won't be able to play if my turn comes up then.
So let's hurry up and finish this bickering so you can play your turns while I'm gone

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 15:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
What does it matter, they're driftwood now.

Quoting myself: "...but I can asure you that the Med is full of British ships again."

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
I didn't say I did, I only said that your losses on the casualty report are nearly what you started with, so you can't have many.

My point is that it came as a shock to you and that means that you can't be to sure about this now either.
Quoting myself again: "This is one of my best kept military secrets, but I can asure you that the Med is full of British ships again."

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
Are you on crack? You have to land your troops before attacking the cities (since your ships can't beat coastal forts, unless you do to us what you did to Athens), and our artillery will destroy them in our turns, since you don't have engineers to build siege forts for them. By the time you have engineers, we probably will as well, and would be equally able to threaten Britain proper.

No, I'm high in life

And did you see the

-smily? I am totally aware of this, Darius. I'm not an idiot, though you might think so

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
*sigh* I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. The words 'southern Iraq' refer to Baghdad and Kuwait. I never said I only wanted Baghdad, and I never said I only wanted a Persian Gulf port. Reread the thread if you have to.

And the same would go for you, I guess

We surely have a conflict of interest here. My proposal will stand, I suggest you accept. I need a link to India and there could be a peaceful sollution to this if you could just be able to compromise, just alittle bit...

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 17:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

Quoting myself: "...but I can asure you that the Med is full of British ships again."

My point is that it came as a shock to you and that means that you can't be to sure about this now either.
Quoting myself again: "This is one of my best kept military secrets, but I can asure you that the Med is full of British ships again."

...and you could be bluffing. I'd trust concrete things such as the casualty report and the starting situation in the scenario over British propaganda.

Oh btw, German scientists have perfected nuclear fission, and will have two ICBM's complete in three turns.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

I am totally aware of this, Darius. I'm not an idiot, though you might think so

You must be to have attacked an alliance system with 13 more cities than you (not to mention that so many of your cities are useless islands and colonies), an equal number of units, and nearly three times your industrial capacity, all this while not gaining the support of your only ally and alienating the only neutral nation. I can't believe this is so important to you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

And the same would go for you, I guess

What did I miss? I knew you wanted southern Iraq, while your offer apparently forgot that I did too.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

My proposal will stand, I suggest you accept. I need a link to India and there could be a peaceful sollution to this if you could just be able to compromise, just alittle bit...

You don't 'need' it, you want it. You chose to attack all the Continental powers, and we won't simply forgive and forget without compensation. Germany's compensation (instead of gold) will be a free hand in Mesopotamia. Your compensation will be not having to fight an unwinnable and costly war. Russia and France can post theirs.

If you're so desperate for Kuwait for some reason, then play your turn so that Kirk can play his before he leaves.

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 19:54

Ok, if you're having wet dreams over a stupid railroad, how about this: Mesopotamia and Kuwait are occupied by Germany, but you are still allowed to have an unrestricted railroad from Beirut to Kandahar. Furthermore, we will even assist in building the railroad, or even complete it entirely. I don't see what the problem with this would be.

If you're worried that I'd pillage it in a time of war, remember that if you gave me Baghdad but not Kuwait, I'd be able to pillage it anyway, so you owning Kuwait would make no difference. Besides, even if we were at war I wouldn't pillage it since Russia and Germany would want it intact.

If you're worried about me putting troops on the railroad in a time of war to restrict your movements, the same principle applies: I'd be able to put those troops there from Baghdad, so Kuwait makes no difference.

What do you say? If all you want is some 'link', then you can have it, without a war.

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 20:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
Ok, if you're having wet dreams over a stupid railroad, how about this: Mesopotamia and Kuwait are occupied by Germany, but you are still allowed to have an unrestricted railroad from Beirut to Kandahar. Furthermore, we will even assist in building the railroad, or even complete it entirely. I don't see what the problem with this would be.

If you're worried that I'd pillage it in a time of war, remember that if you gave me Baghdad but not Kuwait, I'd be able to pillage it anyway, so you owning Kuwait would make no difference. Besides, even if we were at war I wouldn't pillage it since Russia and Germany would want it intact.

If you're worried about me putting troops on the railroad in a time of war to restrict your movements, the same principle applies: I'd be able to put those troops there from Baghdad, so Kuwait makes no difference.

What do you say? If all you want is some 'link', then you can have it, without a war.

Well, well, well

Better late than never, Bismarck! I think you made a fairly ok proposal here. Since we seem to come to an agreement I won't go to much into it, but the only problem with your suggestion is that I will have no control what so ever with you keeping your word. That I would have if I had Kuwait

But screw it, I can accept your proposal

BTW, making fun of me will not get you anywere

(

Quote:

Ok, if you're having wet dreams over a stupid railroad

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 20:48

double post

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 20:51

And BTW #2:

Your analysis of my military situation don't scare me :evilgrin

EmuGod · June 10, 2003, 20:57

Let's call it the "Trans-Mediterranen Railway"

.

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 21:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

Since we seem to come to an agreement I won't go to much into it, but the only problem with your suggestion is that I will have no control what so ever with you keeping your word. That I would have if I had Kuwait

Wait, keeping my word on what exactly? What could I have done to the railroad from Kuwait that I couldn't do from Baghdad or even Mosul?

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

Your analysis of my military situation don't scare me

Er, that's about what I expected you to have.

Quote:

Originally posted by EmuGod
Let's call it the "Trans-Mediterranen Railway"

.

I think you mean Mesopotamian.

Dr. Nick · June 10, 2003, 21:20

Who the hell plays next? Enough chatter, more gaming.

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 21:32

This month peace came back to the civilized world. The German and the British Empire could finally settle with the proposed peace plan.

Therefore all British Warships has been ordered back to its home ports. All weapons has been put down and all military operiations has been canceled. The Middle Eastern artillery divisions has set their eyes elsewere. Destination Damascus and Cairo

The trade embargo was lifted, and the long awaited German beer was even alowed again around the kingdom. This was met with so much joy that Eivind announced this day to be 'the German Beer Day'.

He, together with aprooval from the Parliment, made it illegal not to be 'drunk like a German' on this day.

When Russia signs this peace agreement we probably will have to make a 'Vodka day' or something, and 'Champagne day' for the French

This peace agrement also ment the end of British military actions against the Russians ans the French. We hope that this will once again bring peace to the civilized world and for all of us to live in harmony

To celebrate this new peace agreement some crazy British generals went down to the uncivilized world and invaded Spain. All Spanish cities secured.

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 21:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra
This month peace came back to the civilized world. The German and the British Empire could finally settle with the proposed peace plan.

Therefore all British Warships has been ordered back to its home ports. All weapons has been put down and all military operiations has been canceled. The Middle Eastern artillery divisions has set their eyes elsewere. Destination Damascus and Cairo

The trade embargo was lifted, and the long awaited German beer was even alowed again around the kingdom. This was met with so much joy that Eivind announced this day to be 'the German Beer Day'.

He, together with aprooval from the Parliment, made it illegal not to be 'drunk like a German' on this day.

When Russia signs this peace agreement we probably will have to make a 'Vodka day' or something, and 'Champagne day' for the French

This peace agrement also ment the end of British military actions against the Russians ans the French. We hope that this will once again bring peace to the civilized world and for all of us to live in harmony

That's a little presumptuous, don't you think? We haven't heard anything from France or Russia yet!

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobra

To celebrate this new peace agreement some crazy British generals went down to the uncivilized world and invaded Spain. All Spanish cities secured.

Let me be the first to say

!

Eivind IV · June 10, 2003, 22:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
That's a little presumptuous, don't you think? We haven't heard anything from France or Russia yet!

I've heard from both Russia and France. Not that they for sure will sign, but Russia sent some positive impulses.

Quote:

Originally posted by Darius871
Let me be the first to say

!

Thanks?

Actually I have mobilized down there for a while now...

Darius871 · June 10, 2003, 23:20

Just saying good work on taking it all in one turn, before anyone can say a word. Sounds familiar.

Emu asked me to make a new map:

JamesJKirk · June 11, 2003, 02:02

I'm still doing a little bit of negotiating before I post my turn, but first I wanted to float a little proposal by that may help prevent what happened in the run-up to this war.

While it's good that the war's caused us to be more vocal with claims to cities that we consider to be vital to ourselves, I'm still concerned about how viable these claims will always be. As I said before, I could just claim Timbuctu to stop someone else from getting it, when there's no way I could back up my claim.
So, why don't we have "sunset provisions" to all territorial claims? All claims could be valid for say, a year, after they're made, but after that point, the claim's relenquished and the city goes to whoever gets there first. This would stop outrageous claims, and give the claimant an incentive to occupy the place with haste and not to overextend themself.

What do you all think?

FiGu · June 11, 2003, 03:28

France, feels its threaten from South and North

And wishes that the British allow french ships pass the suez canal and also that France is allowed to invade Bangkok/China
+ thoose nice 500 golds

Dr. Nick · June 11, 2003, 06:09

Japan will not tolerate any European encroachment in China. It is our lebensraum, as determined by our Sun Goddess Amaterasu.

FiGu · June 11, 2003, 07:40

Quote:

Originally posted by El Awrence
Japan will not tolerate any European encroachment in China. It is our lebensraum, as determined by our Sun Goddess Amaterasu.

China is big! i will only take a few cities...

Eivind IV · June 11, 2003, 08:00

Quote:

France, feels its threaten from South and North
And wishes that the British allow french ships pass the suez canal and also that France is allowed to invade Bangkok/China
+ thoose nice 500 golds

I'll send the gold over right away, and you will of course be allowed through the Suez Canal.

I think the Americans made a claim for Bankok?

Quote:

All claims could be valid for say, a year, after they're made, but after that point, the claim's relenquished and the city goes to whoever gets there first. This would stop outrageous claims, and give the claimant an incentive to occupy the place with haste and not to overextend themself.

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion. I can agree to that.

Dr. Nick · June 11, 2003, 10:29

We will not allow any European encroachment (or American) in China.

Darius871 · June 11, 2003, 12:42

Personally I'm not too sure about sunset provisions, because we are very likely to more have irreconcilable disagreements over them.

I think each of us should define what are our ironclad and self-evident spheres of influence are (central Asia and Manchuria to Russia, northern China to Japan, Iraq and Turkey to Germany, the Americas to the U.S., etc.), and have everything not specifically in these spheres be first come, first serve.

Darius871 · June 11, 2003, 12:43

Quote:

Originally posted by JamesJKirk

While it's good that the war's caused us to be more vocal with claims to cities

Apparently not, ask the Spanish.