OFFICIAL: Diplomacy: Non-tresspassing treaty

Locutus · January 21, 2003, 03:30

We've already signed a treaty with the Austrians that we would not violate their borders, but they are still free to violate ours. Now that we've given them 100 Gold and made a successfull map-exchange treaty, they should be fairly friendly to us, for the time being.

Should we request a non-tresspassing treaty from them, so they will no longer be free to tresspass our borders? And if so, what should we ask in return (if anything) and should we threaten them if they refuse?

Note that although we have already agreed to withdraw ourselves, we have a unit inside their territory, which might make them more receptive than usual to accept such an offer for the 2nd time.

Note also that we don't have much gold, so offering more than 100 Gold is not a realistic options. Offering less is not possible of course.

This poll will last 3 days (until Friday ~7:30 GMT), but the turn-chat is already tomorrow, so I will probably have to act on it sooner (~36 hours from now). So please vote ASAP.

Immortal Wombat · January 21, 2003, 08:19

Clear as mud.

yes, withdraw, no.

Locutus · January 21, 2003, 14:37

Hmm, 5 votes compared to 10+ for other polls that I started around the same time. Is the poll really so unclear that people can't figure what to vote?

Pedrunn · January 21, 2003, 16:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
Hmm, 5 votes compared to 10+ for other polls that I started around the same time. Is the poll really so unclear that people can't figure what to vote?

It is too big therefore, try (the example was my vote):

"Yes, but offer our withdraw. Do threat"

Should we make an amendment to allow multiple voting poll for the MoDTS after all?

Martin Gühmann · January 21, 2003, 16:48

Well I think we should only request the withdraw thing and nothing else as we don't have to much gold and we already gave them our promise to withdraw. SO we don't have much to offer a peace treaty I don't think they will accept of course that is also worth a trial but for now I go for just the withdraw treaty request and the threat if necessary.

-Martin

Locutus · January 21, 2003, 17:18

This better?

Pedrunn · January 21, 2003, 17:25

Better indeed!

Try to bold the key words "yes", "offer withdraw", "offer gold", "Threaten", "Do not threaten". Although this way looks the good enough so i dont beliee the extra work actually worth.

Dont get worried. My PW thread older than your and only has 9 votes. So the problem must be undecision after all.

child of Thor · January 21, 2003, 18:11

well i've never known the AI to honour such an agreement for long, especially if they are much stronger. So it would just be a delay tactic.

HuangShang · January 21, 2003, 19:51

but at least they are forced to oblige

Tamerlin · January 21, 2003, 20:48

Isn't it a bit too early to threaten them as we are planning to attack them later and we don't have many units to defend our beautiful lands?

Martin Gühmann · January 22, 2003, 13:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Isn't it a bit too early to threaten them as we are planning to attack them later and we don't have many units to defend our beautiful lands?

Now they don't have too many units either so a threat will rather work now then later when they rae stronger. SO threat them and if they accept our threat then it is their decission to give something for no return.

-Martin

Immortal Wombat · January 22, 2003, 15:19

Much better, though the words "in return" are still obsolete I feel.

HuangShang · January 22, 2003, 21:36

oh well they agreed so just let this die