Login

**Drogo** · 01-11-2021, 05:17 PM

NE ----> AN Agreed. Putting in a trade of 30K gold for 50K food. Very diplomatic of you.

Also, willing to make this a 3 turn deal if you wish.

**Dwellomir** · 01-11-2021, 05:40 PM

(01-11-2021, 05:17 PM)Drogo Wrote: NE ----> AN Agreed. Putting in a trade of 30K gold for 50K food. Very diplomatic of you.

Also, willing to make this a 3 turn deal if you wish.

Trade order completed here as well. For now the elders have decided to trade only this one time. Please get back to us after three moons and we can then negotiate for the upcoming season.

**AlatarTBW** · 01-13-2021, 10:28 PM

Sorry for the late turns, I have been out of town and missed a few turns and only summitted a few orders to a some. I am back now and will be getting these in faster. I have not looked at the forum at all so will be catching up a little.

**Airetar** · 01-23-2021, 02:09 PM

Last time I mention this, as no one else seems to think it matters. The DU has supplied the RD with "a large amount of food" every turn since turn 2. It is now about to be turn 26. My understanding is food is typically a concern for the RD, but not in this game.

There hasn't even been forum agreement on this evergreen trade since the end of December, 2020. It's just standing orders in perpetuity. Apparently, that is fine. Not an alliance, not a NAP, not forum communication. Back to the old days. So a player can make an agreement on turn 2 to trade every turn for the whole game by standing order and not bother with forum agreement each winter. Why not then just go back to no restriction on communication? My opinion is any trade lasting more than three turns is an alliance.

**HabeusCorpus** · 01-23-2021, 04:17 PM

UN - All

I personally have no concern with patterns of trade. There are some kingdoms where there is a natural fit for trade (DU and RD for example) and when a position relies on trade as part of its competitive advantage (HA). Trade is a key feature of the game that adds interest/complexity.

Good form would be put it up for discussion every late winter and let highest bid take it. That said others could take the initiative to make an offer for the food if so inclined.

Now back to my women.

HabeusCorpus

**Lord Thanatos** · 01-23-2021, 07:09 PM

RD - DU

Contrary to assertions being made food continues to be a problem for the RD.

I implore you to continue our 9k gold for 20k food trade. Further, I offer to purchase another 3 blocks of 20k food for 9k gold each from you? Please let me know soonest.

RD - ALL

1) Forum only communication was always intended to limit coordination AGAINST a specific player by making such coordination transparent to all.

2) I offer to purchase blocks of 20k worth of food for 9k gold. Anyone interested?

**Lord Thanatos** · 01-23-2021, 07:26 PM

RD - EL

Is your concern about trade a general concern for all? If so, you have not made a convincing argument why such an agreement is a negative for our game.

Or, as I believe, is your concern about trade only concerning to you because you attacked the RD? You were aware of the trade when you initiated hostilities and we have openly discussed it every turn with the exception of turn 22 when nobody wrote anything.

The difference between these two motivations matters immensely.

As a player who often, if not routinely, had to face three or more coordinated opponents I chose to leave Alamaze. For players who share my concern Forum Only Communication attempts to address this issue. I promise you I never cared where my opponents were getting their food so long as a third player didn't move his groups in coordination with the two opponents I already had.

P.S. During this last Summer I had to waste orders making certain I rotated which groups did not get paid. Between the Do Not Pay order and Combining groups so the same group number was not unfed in consecutive turns there were lots of orders "wasted" in my defense against the EL attack.

P.S.S. I am greatly enjoying this contest as I remember how to play.

**Airetar** · 01-23-2021, 08:11 PM

EL -> RD and All

I believe the reason this seems to be first getting my attention is that it is the first time anyone has had a perpetual trade with the same partner that I have seen. Just wasn't done before, which I think is what was intended to stop the gang attacks and gave those long time traders ensured peaceful borders. Some players might like that, but I don't and I think it leads to that power gaming style of bullying players "not on board".

I think it is hard to argue having a perpetual trade, so much expected to just continue that the trading partners stopped posting about the standing order to trade on December 31 (Turn 14, 12 turns ago), is not an alliance, let alone not even a NAP. Simply changing the terms of a trade between the same two doesn't alter the underlying alliance.

You do not share that opinion. So, I would ask, what do you think makes an alliance, or constitutes a NAP? Is one trading partner going to attack the other trading partner who has traded for 6 straight turns, let alone 26? What could be a clearer sign in forum communication of a non-aggression agreement than that?

Other players need to express themselves. Otherwise from this game it seems like anything goes except typing "Do you agree to a game long alliance?" The talk when this forum diplomacy started was that to avoid even the appearance of that wink and a nod alliance was that no trade between the same two kingdoms was to last longer than three turns.

Just think it is best that all players have the same understanding, whatever it ends up being and that the terms don't require a judge to arbitrate whether it is an alliance. Otherwise the envelope is going to keep getting pushed as to what is allowed and what went from gray area to black.

**Lord Thanatos** · 01-23-2021, 09:34 PM

To me, only speaking for myself, it has always been clear: do not coordinate an ATTACK.

We are all experienced gamers that know the difference between "You attack the Orcs while I attack the Giants" and "Let's both attack the Giants."

If I trade you food (to use present facts) as your groups attack the Giants and simultaneously send emissaries to the pcs your groups can't reach that is coordinating an attack. Nobody needs to tell us this. It is self-evident.

If I trade you food as you move against a target unknown to me that is, also self-evidently, not coordinating.

I have no idea of anything the DU has done in this game except trade me food. Has the DU taken any action against the EL so that the EL might think we have an alliance?

I think after turn 1 the EL offered food to the RD, but the DU offered more favorable terms. Trade, by itself, does not remotely constitute an alliance. Nor a NAP. If I had traded food with EL after turn 1 would that in any fashion have impeded his decision to attack me?

**HabeusCorpus** · 01-28-2021, 03:37 AM

UN - RD

Greetings Dragon Lord. I see you have lost your trading partner. Are you interested in a Season trade of Food for Gold Trade? 30K Food for 15K Gold. Unfortunately I cannot do more, or for longer, as the Necro Wizards were busy with their cursed Summon Death spells and I have an army to rebuild.

It was with great satisfaction that my Agents dispatched the last of their wizards however -- they learned not to steal from the Underworld.

Let me know on the trade.

HabeusCorpus