Gathering Storm - correspondence & foreign affairs

[Sharpe]

My opinion : This is mostly old news to us - GoW has relayed to us that GS was trying to talk and convince them to move against ND.

From talking with other GoW members, I doubt that they are wanting to move against ND now. In fact many of them despise GS and may not ever to ally with them and many want to invade Stormia.

Personally I think that there is still a small opening to avoid war here as clearly GS is aware that RP is finished. Perhaps we can try to suggest a RP withdrawal to North Stormia (with their remaining defensive forces intact) and a guarantee that we will support them if GoW and ND invade Stormia and move from there.

Either way at least GS now won't go into attacking GoW's territory ignorant of the implications of doing so.

And personally I agree, ND is a big threat... and I really don't want a non-Poly civ to win this game.

[Tiberius]

I personally don't like any scenario discussed here, because all of them involved GS taking a good part of Bob, which would mean a GS victory. Is this so difficult to see? You don't even have to guess it, they alone said it: they want a part of Bob, because otherwise they can't win. They said it not once.

They realized they can't beat GoW+ND so now they are trying to hire GoW against ND. It was your fear Sharpe a Bob divided between ND and GoW, you said you are concerned about such a possibility. Now imagine a Bob divided between GoW (the bigger part) and GS (the south, probably). How about this for a threat? This is probably the worst scenario that could happen.

I don't see ND any more of a threat than GS with more significantly more land, or GoW owning 2/3 of Bob, etc.
What we are trying to achieve now is much more balanced: a two civ Bob, equally divided, and GS on Stormia only.

I honestly cannot fathom where this sudden love for GS come from. Why would we ally with them? They are our most important rival. Their economy is still well above ours. Give them soutehrn Bob and a FP and they will skyrocket in term of production and commerce. Giving them a good part of Bob means losing the game. They are fighting almost equally with two other civs being in their golden ages. They have themendous potential, don't let them unleash it!
So why this eagerness to avoid fighting with GS? OK, I'd rather avoid war too, but not with the price of letting them winning on Bob.

It is an entirely different question that we would help them if ND+GoW wanted to invade them, but only because this would again hinder the balance of power in the world.

We can outresearch ND anytime later, with the help of GS and Vox. Why are they such a great threat?

Make me understand why would we support GS? To not let a non-Poly win the game? Oh common! This must be the most pathetic argument I've heard so far (sorry!). Honestly as long as it is not us winning, I don't care who does.

[Tiberius]

One more thing: what would we win if we accepted the proposed alliance (GS+GoW+Vox+us against ND)? 2 or 3 useless cities on Bob? Even if we got a luxury city, this still doesn't even come close to what GS would win: a second productive core.

[vondrack]

I.... have... to... chill...

I can't believe my eyes. I have been, up to this point in the game, repeatedly reminded of that this was meant to be a team effort and that anything done on behalf of Legoland was supposed to be discussed and approved by the team. On the rare occasions I did something on my own, assuming this or that, I was heavily criticised.

And now... all of a sudden, two "saviours" emerge, Sharpe and Nimitz. They know best what it is we have to do to avoid the war with GS, thus they do not consult their idea of chatting with GS and just go ahead, acting on their own (or did I miss something?). I am sure that had I done anything remotely similar to this, I would be sentenced to death here. Guys (Sharpe & Nimitz), what the hell did you think you were doing? He? How the hell did you dare to arrange such a chat without letting others know in advance? Without discussing what we are going to tell them and what we are going to keep secret?

Jesus Christ, am I pissed off.

How come you openly discuss scenarios that are not along the lines we have agreed to in this forum? As far as I know, the plan is to have Bob divided between GoW & ND. No change to this plan was ever approved, despite revisiting the issue - last time not very long ago.

How come you openly tell GS we are allied to GoW/ND, expressly labelling our pact as defensive? How come you openly tell GS we would side with them should they be invaded on Stormia? How come you "explain" to GS why we allied with GoW/ND (not mentioning that what you told them was NOT what our reasons were)? Were these facts made public information?

WTF did you want to achieve? Our message to GS was very clear (and thoroughly debated & polled on here): keep off the homeland of GoW/ND or we declare war on you. THAT is how they (and we) avoid getting into a war. I honestly don't know what else you hoped to "come up with" - all you did was that you seriously weakened the effect of our message by stressing how much we wanted to avoid the war with them, making it look like the ultimatum was just a hollow threat. Plus, of course, you fed them with all kind of information they really did not need to know.

In case there still is someone not getting this: GoW is NOT going to backstab ND. I am totally lost how you can "seriously" discuss scenarios that are based upon the assumption they will (save the bull**** about "the chat with GS being just an academic discussion of all theoretical possibilities").

Where did GoW tell us about "things being open after RP is gone"? GoW made it very clear the goal was to split Bob evenly between them and ND, including transfers of cities from ND to GoW once the war is over (just read the chatlogs). Not a single word, not a slightest hint about stabbing ND in their back. EVER. Why did you make it look like they had suggested a possible betrayal?

How come you tell GS "we would be willing to send troops to defend Stormia, if there was an easy way" - was this ever proposed or discussed here??? He??? How come you told GS we would want a piece of Bob if blah blah blah... Again: when did we discuss this? Our stance has always been that Legoland is going to stay on Legos, not expand outside of it (that's, BTW, the reason for preferring Bob split between GoW & ND - because that is a setup that does not require us to go over the sea... everything else, which includes GS on Bob, does). So how come you discuss options that are the direct opposite of our approved team strategy?

I cannot possibly express how I feel now...

Let me say something very clearly: If we do not honour our alliance with GoW & ND, I am going to quit from this team immediately. There is something to be said for honour (besides, there is also something to be said for common sense...).

I would like to hear an explanation how it was possible that you, Sharpe & Nimitz, went ahead and without telling anyone or discussing anything, simply arranged an official chat with GS, discussing all the things that were discussed. I would also like to hear the rest of the team about whether this is considered acceptable - if it does, I might also become more active regarding our foreign relations, as there would clearly be a lot of opportunities.

[Tiberius]

To be honest I was also shocked when I saw the content of the chat; two legos talking with GS, none of them holding any official position AFAIK, nor a mandate from the team; and so openly discussing with GS what we want and what we don't want, and why, etc. I thought such talks are the responsability of the FAM, and Nimitz is not yet FAM. Besides he didn't even talk too much.

However I didn't want to make waves about it, but thinking about it, Vondrack is right: we jumped on him when/after he had talked about non-approved issues in his chats. This one was clearly more than an "informal chat" and way too much info was given away, both real things and also lies. (yes, lies; we don't have a defence pact with GoW, we have an alliance with them and we are not seeking a way to not honour it; or so I knew).

For one thing, I absolutely agree with Radek: this chat clearly weakened our position vis-a-vis GS: the ultimatum we sent them now sounds like a joke.

I know Sharpe has concernes about this alliance of ours, but his doubts were discussed and the team policy wasn't changed in this regard. This chat clearly goes beyond of what an individual member of our team should be allowed to discuss with other teams; especially if those views are his own and not the same with the approved, official team policy. This is why we have a FAM, to handle such sensitive negotiations.

What are we going to say now if GS hints GoW that we might be able to join their proposed alliance?

Maybe I'm not so pissed as Radek, but that doesn't make him less righteous about this. The course of our foreign relations is so important, that changing it without the team's approval is worse than playing a save in a different manner than approved.

[redstar1]

Hmmmm, while I don't in essense have a problem with Sharpe and Nimitz chatting with GS members, and in fact I've said before that I'm in favour of keeping communication open..... I think the chat last night went a bit beyond what should maybe have been said.

But listen guys, theres little point in assigning blame or arguing about it... whats done is done...

There is obviously still some 'debate' over what our long term policy shoudl be, so perhaps we need to discuss it a bit further...

[Tiberius]

The fact that some team members still have doubts about our foreign policy doesn't mean that they can carry these disagreements in our external relations. On the contrary, we should be more cautious until we decide what to do.

Besides I thought we decided what to do. The fact that not everybody agreed with it doesn't make it less official, as long as the majority approved it.

[redstar1]

I know I'm just saying that there obviously appears to be some confusion

[Sharpe]

As I said in the FAM election thread, it was me that arranged the chat not Nimitz - I would have invited in anyone who was online at the time. Several of us have asked repeated that we should talk with GS , but Vondrack has seemed to ignore that request.

As for being pissed Vondrack , how DARE YOU! some of us are not happy with your actions. I have tried all game to get more involvement in the team and yet still you try to control everything - the foreign policy, the military, the build and movement orders, the tech choices... you have been a virtual dictator on Legoland - when I was MB you ignored my orders more than once and you tore a strip off of Zargon whenever he did anything when he played the turn in a way that you didn't like - you have done things on your own more times than I can count (giving Vox the map of Bob, agreeing to waive GoW paying for gunpowder, agreeing to give saltpeter to GoW,etc.)

As for my concerns re the foreign policy, I did raise them for discussion and Vondrack quickly cut off any debate.

[vondrack]

Alright, if there is a confusion, let's do our best to clear the air. May I ask that everybody expresses clearly what his stance is, so that we can move on, please?

My personal stance is that I want this war to end with what we decided long ago, for good reasons - with Bob divided equally between GoW & ND, RP dead or in exile on Stormia, and GS contained on Stormia. I want us to use all our power to achieve this balance of power - whatever it takes. I am stressing this, because it might include helping GoW/ND against GS if they get into troubles, but it may also include helping GoW against ND (in the unlikely case that ND betrays GoW and decides to keep all of the Bob) or helping GS against GoW/ND, if Bobians decide to invade Stormia.

My reason is that I believe this will be a setup giving us the best shot at winning the game without any needs for future overseas invasions/interventions - be them offensive (attacking someone that will have gained too much ground on Bob) or defensive (preventing someone from gaining too much ground on Bob).

The only "but" to all this is that I want us to fight and treat GS honourably - to avoid needless grudges that might hamper our post-war coexistence/cooperation. That is NOT to say I am not ready to fight them - that is to say I want everything done "by the book". No sneak attacks, no double play, no lies, no false promises, no false hopes raised. Fair fight. We have our goal. We want to achieve it. This goal collides with what they want. Bad luck. Beyond this goal, there is no hatred between our teams - just the contrary. Once our goal is achieved, we might and probably will actually get much closer, counterbalancing the combined power of Bob.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Sharpe
As I said in the FAM election thread, it was me that arranged the chat not Nimitz - I would have invited in anyone who was online at the time. Several of us have asked repeated that we should talk with GS , but Vondrack has seemed to ignore that request.

As for being pissed Vondrack , how DARE YOU! some of us are not happy with your actions. I have tried all game to get more involvement in the team and yet still you try to control everything - the foreign policy, the military, the build and movement orders, the tech choices... you have been a virtual dictator on Legoland - when I was MB you ignored my orders more than once and you tore a strip off of Zargon whenever he did anything when he played the turn in a way that you didn't like - you have done things on your own more times than I can count (giving Vox the map of Bob, agreeing to waive GoW paying for gunpowder, agreeing to give saltpeter to GoW,etc.)

Why don't you answer to the real concerns raised here?
Such as:
1. why did you organize a chat involving Lego's foreign policies without the knowledge of the FAM (whoever that is) and conduct it using your own personal beliefs rather than Lego's official policies?
2. why did you give away info to GS that was confidential?
3. why did you lie them ???

As for your concerns, they were discussed and rejected by the majority of the team (such as giving saltpeter to GoW; no one except you was against it). Since when is your opinion more important than mine or anyone else's in this team?

As for my concerns re the foreign policy, I did raise them for discussion and Vondrack quickly cut off any debate.

Have you proposed a well thought out alternative plan and organized a poll to have it approved? The fact that you have concerns doesn't mean that they are valid or shared by the majority of people here.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by Sharpe
As I said in the FAM election thread, it was me that arranged the chat not Nimitz - I would have invited in anyone who was online at the time. Several of us have asked repeated that we should talk with GS , but Vondrack has seemed to ignore that request.

See my response in the FAM election thread. If there is nothing to tell to the other party, if there is nothing else we would like them to know, there is no need to talk to them. Period.

Besides, there was no REQUEST. Two or three of our members said it might be a good idea to talk to them. Well, I believed that the message we sent them said what they needed to know. Nothing omitted, nothing extra. And in a very acceptable way.

I would like you to plainly answer my questions:

What it was you wanted to tell them?
What it was you did tell them?
What part of what you told them was approved by the team?

Originally posted by Sharpe
As for being pissed Vondrack , how DARE YOU! some of us are not happy with your actions. I have tried all game to get more involvement in the team and yet still you try to control everything - the foreign policy, the military, the build and movement orders, the tech choices... you have been a virtual dictator on Legoland - when I was MB you ignored my orders more than once and you tore a strip off of Zargon whenever he did anything when he played the turn in a way that you didn't like - you have done things on your own more times than I can count (giving Vox the map of Bob, agreeing to waive GoW paying for gunpowder, agreeing to give saltpeter to GoW,etc.)

Right. Wanna wage a flamewar. Cool.

"Some of you" might actually move their a$$es and finally do something for Lego. You call me a dictator? How ridiculous.

If I happen to be short of time and the turn plan does not get posted within two or three days since we play the previous one, does anyone step ahead and post one? Nope. It must always be me spending an hour or two putting everything together, so that everybody has an idea what's going to happen and so that everybody can comment, suggest, object etc. (as opposed to being a true dictator just playing turns on the fly, just maybe posting turnlogs). Note: I actually recall times where at least some of you contributed by posting turn plans or at least part of them. It was way easier for me to just put three posts together checking everything was fine and optimal, than it is to do the whole thing from scratch.

I started a GA oriented thread with detailed analyses of some of our cities - what they need, what their optimal setup would be etc. Did ANYONE helped me out there? Nope, not a single one of you - and the thread was started what, maybe two months ago? It is already off the first page because of being too old... I might remind "some of you" that there are still some 20 odd cities that might need a few minutes spent planning their future development and GA setup.

I choose techs? Huh? Since when? Can you show me anywhere where "I" eventually chose a tech that was different from what we agreed upon? SHOW ME!

I control military? Care to explain? Do you mean that it was me putting together a detailed defense plan? Which later got polished and amended according to the feedback from the rest of the team? Or do you mean that I care to shuffle units as needed when we move a garrison here or there to escort a settler or worker? WTF are you talking about? You talking about sending troops over to Bob? That was heavily discussed many times and I challenge you to point out anywhere in the forum where the eventual troop orders (or rather, the very intention to send them over) were not agreed upon by the majority of the team.

Surprised I did not like Zargon letting Legopolis riot? Surprised I did not like Zargon forgetting to start our gunpowder research? Are you serious? Will you, please, point out any other opportunity I expressed dislike with how he handled a turn? I have criticised mistakes that cost us or could have cost us, nothing else.

You say I control the foreign policy? Geeze... as the FAM, I guess I am supposed to take care of it, am I not? But there is a certain distinction between "taking care of" and "controlling". When GS lands near Yellowknife, everybody promptly suggests we should send them a message, warning, something... but again, I must put a draft together, so that others can comment and suggest changes (disclaimer: redstar did a brilliant job with his version, later on - even though only after being provoked by my version which I suspect he was not entirely happy with ) And I would like to point out that I myself later voted for including his message along with mine, as I considered it perfectly suited for the purpose.

Care to explain why it's always just me attending the chat with GoW and ND (instead of just taking rest on Thursday evening)? AFAIK, when we were there for the first time, somehow, several of our members found the time to be there. Now it's just me, with only redstar dropping in from time to time. And hardly anybody comments the chatlogs, even if I post them (it is for the first time today I hear that "some of you" weren't happy with me lowering and later cancelling the rest of the gunpowder payment for GoW - as if the gold they saved that way was not used for riders that fight GS & RP).

As soon as you start posting meaningful, well thought plans that will be more than "your concerns", I am going to consider them. But so far, I have seen very little from you. You are quick to disagree with this and that - but when it comes to doing an analysis, putting together a detailed schedule, you seem to back off.

So far, with very few notable exceptions, where I screwed by e.g. rushing too much (like the Vox map thing), I believe I was able to gain support for what I planned to do - be it economy, military, research, or foreign affairs.

If not and if what I am actually doing displeases majority of this team, I beg everybody to tell me. A solution would be just few clicks away.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Sharpe
you have been a virtual dictator on Legoland

That's completely and utterly ridiculous.

A leader? Yes. I don't know where would be Legoland now without Vondrack's involvement and hard work. (yes, hard work). Some people don't work so much for a cause even when they are on the payroll.

A dictator? If being a dictator involves working so much and always arguing with others about what has to be done and why, and receiving so little help in actually doing stuff, then never ever in my life do I want to be a dictator (not that I could ).

I brought Radek in this team and I'm sorry for him for doing it. Though admitedly he had fun sometimes and he learned much from this game, I'm sure he could have spent his spare free time in a much more enjoyable way.

Just my 2 cents. For those who deserve it.

[ZargonX]

Ok, I already had to do this once in the ISDG, looks like I'm going to have to do it here.

Vondrack: shut up.
Sharpe: shut up.
Tibierius: shut up.
Redstar:

This argument has degraded into an absolutely pointless miasma of overly harsh words. The chat happened, there is no undoing that. Perhaps it wasn't handled in the best way, but there is no undoing that either. Every other team has "unofficial" chats between members on occasion, it's just part of the game. At no point did Sharpe or Nimitz say they were officially determining Lego's position; quite the opposite: Sharpe says we are sharply () divided. Granted, some excess information was given away, but nothing that GS probably hadn't determined on their own.

As for weakening Lego's position, I think that's a bit of stretch. If GS considers this one chat the end-all, be-all of diplomatic relations with us, then they are quite dense. The relation is one that will be worked out through official channels, and is still quite fluid.

"Unplanned" chats can be risky, but they can also be quite beneficial. I know I have gained info for the team through them on occasion. If anything, this chat is a bump on the road; we'll get over it, and we'll carry on down the road to victory unhindered

[Tiberius]

Whoever is the FAM, it is not good to hold chats without his knowledge. Let's say you were FAM and I told GS in a chat that they are screwed and don't have saltpeter (as apparently someone actually did). What would you think and say?

It is important to clear up these issues, otherwise it will happen again.

I'm not against unofficial chats. I'm against leaking important info in unofficial chats.

I'm not against personal views. I'm against using personal views in these chats, as opposed to agreed, official team policies.

Don't you think these issues are worth to be discussed?

Don't tell me to shut up.