[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 11:16 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

@IH

All your votes on the against wormhole directive please, as it prevents Blend from getting free tech, and to sweeten the deal I will give you my Trade PN. That's 4 commodities right there.

@Twelve

8 of your votes on the against wormhole directive for 7 of mine on a future agenda AND you can place my wormhole in the next status phase, (not this one, as Tapper has that choice), on the proviso that the placement is non threatening to me.

Even at 4tg that's still effectively a vote for free, I'd lose one CT which costs 3tg, and Nico would loot one of the TG.

You prevent your aggressive neighbour from gaining a tech and it will be the first time I've given out my trade PN too. We cannot trade action cards can we? So what are you suggesting, as I need/want your votes.

[Tattersail_]

You aren't losing out on anything and you gain nothing by voting for.

[Tapper]

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

You aren't losing out on anything and you gain nothing by voting for.

That is not true, Tatts

If Against wins, everyone who voted Against immediately lose a CT from Fleet. It doesn't have to hurt immediately, but unless replenished, it still affects the production cap a player has.

To maintain the fleet cap at the level they currently have, every would-be vote-against-er has to put one of their 2 or 3 Status-phase CTs into the Fleet Pool (with no current guarantee of success on the vote: if they lose the vote, that pre-emptive CT is stuck in the Fleet pool).

That cuts the amount of CT they can put into Tactical short by 1, meaning there is suddenly a little bit of a risk that they are forced into a Pass before Leadership is played, which is the next opportunity when they can add more tokens. I think I could run it to 2 or 3 rounds easily before I'd be forced to play Leadership.
If Morgoth rearranges his CTs between Tactical and Strategic just a tiny bit, he takes Leadership and tweaks his pools a little, there might be 3 Tacticals before he plays it - or up to 6 if Technology is played early.

[Tattersail_]

Khell back round to you.

[Morgoth]

Yes! Something worked!

This post has been edited by Morgoth: 30 May 2018 - 12:31 PM

[Tattersail_]

Tapper, on 30 May 2018 - 12:17 PM, said:

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

You aren't losing out on anything and you gain nothing by voting for.

That is not true, Tatts

If Against wins, everyone who voted Against immediately lose a CT from Fleet. It doesn't have to hurt immediately, but unless replenished, it still affects the production cap a player has.

To maintain the fleet cap at the level they currently have, every would-be vote-against-er has to put one of their 2 or 3 Status-phase CTs into the Fleet Pool (with no current guarantee of success on the vote: if they lose the vote, that pre-emptive CT is stuck in the Fleet pool).

That cuts the amount of CT they can put into Tactical short by 1, meaning there is suddenly a little bit of a risk that they are forced into a Pass before Leadership is played, which is the next opportunity when they can add more tokens. I think I could run it to 2 or 3 rounds easily before I'd be forced to play Leadership.
If Morgoth rearranges his CTs between Tactical and Strategic just a tiny bit, he takes Leadership and tweaks his pools a little, there might be 3 Tacticals before he plays it - or up to 6 if Technology is played early.

It is true as of our deal, like IH said, he'd be getting that command token cost back via my trade PN. Twelve and Khell will both be getting something too. What are the people who want a free tech offering? Destroying my ships isn't in IH's plans, but Blend gaining an extra tech may be for him. especially after Blend looked like he was entering IH's space last round.

You are talking about Leadership being played, is that what you or Morgoth are after strategy wise? I mean if I had Leadership I wouldn't hold it just to screw IH over. I played it first go last round.

[Khellendros]

Lol. That AC - no one ever lets me carry out my awesome manoeuvres.

[Khellendros]

I'm ready to speak about a truce Morgoth

[D'rek]

Alrighty, everyone's passed. But it'll take me a little bit to check stuff, update the map, and post the start of status phase in-between actually working, so bear with me.

[Imperial Historian]

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 11:16 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

@IH

All your votes on the against wormhole directive please, as it prevents Blend from getting free tech, and to sweeten the deal I will give you my Trade PN. That's 4 commodities right there.

@Twelve

8 of your votes on the against wormhole directive for 7 of mine on a future agenda AND you can place my wormhole in the next status phase, (not this one, as Tapper has that choice), on the proviso that the placement is non threatening to me.

Even at 4tg that's still effectively a vote for free, I'd lose one CT which costs 3tg, and Nico would loot one of the TG.

You prevent your aggressive neighbour from gaining a tech and it will be the first time I've given out my trade PN too. We cannot trade action cards can we? So what are you suggesting, as I need/want your votes.

For my votes? Hmm I think I'd need a multi-round ceasefire/votes on future agendas on top of what you are offering.

Blend might gain tech but he'd lose ships and become more of a target for Morgoth as a result.

I'd abstain from the wormhole agenda for what you are currently offering if that helps.

[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 12:58 PM, said:

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 11:16 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

@IH

All your votes on the against wormhole directive please, as it prevents Blend from getting free tech, and to sweeten the deal I will give you my Trade PN. That's 4 commodities right there.

@Twelve

8 of your votes on the against wormhole directive for 7 of mine on a future agenda AND you can place my wormhole in the next status phase, (not this one, as Tapper has that choice), on the proviso that the placement is non threatening to me.

Even at 4tg that's still effectively a vote for free, I'd lose one CT which costs 3tg, and Nico would loot one of the TG.

You prevent your aggressive neighbour from gaining a tech and it will be the first time I've given out my trade PN too. We cannot trade action cards can we? So what are you suggesting, as I need/want your votes.

For my votes? Hmm I think I'd need a multi-round ceasefire/votes on future agendas on top of what you are offering.

Blend might gain tech but he'd lose ships and become more of a target for Morgoth as a result.

I'd abstain from the wormhole agenda for what you are currently offering if that helps.

2 round ceasefire and my votes on a future agenda then? Obviously I am offering my votes to Twelve as well but you both may not need my votes at the same time.

[Imperial Historian]

Wish I'd seen the deal you made with khell before as well as I could just make your problem go away for the right price.

[Imperial Historian]

If I made the wormhole agenda go away what would you offer?

[Blend]

IH - don't make any deals until the agenda phase. I'll have an offer for you that I think you'll like, but I'm not making any offers or any negotiations until I see where Morgoth puts his rider.

[Blend]

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 01:16 PM, said:

If I made the wormhole agenda go away what would you offer?

Seriously, please don't make this deal yet - unless you have to make it go away BEFORE the agenda phase, at which point I will negotiate now.

[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 01:09 PM, said:

Wish I'd seen the deal you made with khell before as well as I could just make your problem go away for the right price.

You can take the agenda away? swap it?

Maybe that's why he wanted it done so quickly. I was standing to lose those TG's in the Agenda phase anyway to be fair so didn't mind the cost.

What can I offer you, a game length cease fire, my trade PN Twice, and future votes on 2 agendas.

[Tattersail_]

Tattersail_, on 30 May 2018 - 01:18 PM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 01:09 PM, said:

Wish I'd seen the deal you made with khell before as well as I could just make your problem go away for the right price.

You can take the agenda away? swap it?

Maybe that's why he wanted it done so quickly. I was standing to lose those TG's in the Agenda phase anyway to be fair so didn't mind the cost.

What can I offer you, a game length cease fire, my trade PN Twice, and future votes on 2 agendas.

Add to this, next status, not this one, you can put the wormhole were you want.

[Imperial Historian]

Yes I think I can get rid of the wormhole trade agenda and it swaps for a new one before the agenda phase. Need to confirm the timings with Drek, but that sounds like a good deal Tatts. Do you have your ceasefire PN or any others to act as collateral as a lot of that is on trust?

Blend I'll listen to counteroffers but that's a seriously good deal from Tatts.

[Morgoth]

Khellendros, on 30 May 2018 - 12:33 PM, said:

I'm ready to speak about a truce Morgoth

Music to my ears. Our several rounds long war resulted in absolutely nothing. It is the Virus’ Way

[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 30 May 2018 - 01:21 PM, said:

Yes I think I can get rid of the wormhole trade agenda and it swaps for a new one before the agenda phase. Need to confirm the timings with Drek, but that sounds like a good deal Tatts. Do you have your ceasefire PN or any others to act as collateral as a lot of that is on trust?

Blend I'll listen to counteroffers but that's a seriously good deal from Tatts.

Right now Gnaw holds my ceasefire PN, i'm working within the limits of what I have. I have not broken my word this game. You can see that with Tapper and my deal, if the wormhole agenda passed and I lost my flagship that'd mean I'd need my wormhole placed closer to home, but instead of reneging that deal with Tapper, I kept my promise in good faith. He chooses where it goes next.