Tweet
Bad news, folks. Had a long chat with vondrack and he basically lays down the line hard that Legoland isn't going to be switching sides.
I'm certainly going to follow up with Sharpe, Nimitz, Kloreep, and ZargonX to make sure this isn't just vondrack speaking for the rest of his team, but I'd say t his is a very bad sign.
The fact that vondrack admits that they could be making a mistake does leave open tiny tiny tiny glimmer of hope, but it's not much of one.
Assuming this is entirely legit from vondrack, this closes the matter.
I'm going to be sending the save now.
I'm certainly going to follow up with Sharpe, Nimitz, Kloreep, and ZargonX to make sure this isn't just vondrack speaking for the rest of his team, but I'd say t his is a very bad sign.
The fact that vondrack admits that they could be making a mistake does leave open tiny tiny tiny glimmer of hope, but it's not much of one.
Assuming this is entirely legit from vondrack, this closes the matter.
I'm going to be sending the save now.
vondrack> Hello!
Arnelos> hey
vondrack> sorry for the delay, my nick got unregistered and I have had to fix things up
..................... (censored ISDG material)......................
vondrack> anyway
vondrack> that's not what you want me to talk about
Arnelos> of course
vondrack> I have no good news for you
Arnelos> so I figured
vondrack> said very briefly, Legoland is not going to help
vondrack> actually
vondrack> more or less, the only help possible would be direct military intervention
Arnelos> I seem to think that Gunpowder would give us a fighting chance
vondrack> and we are not going to do that
vondrack> I understand you would believe so
vondrack> but it's not true
Arnelos> at the very least, it might bleed GoW and ND some more UUs
Arnelos> and that can't hurt anyone but them
vondrack> the map generator screwed some teams big time
Arnelos> so I have been lead to believe
vondrack> speaking about saltpeter, that is
vondrack> though... I am actually disclosing something that is not all that relevant
vondrack> the thing is that the whole problem with the world's saltpeter deposits
Arnelos> is that legoland has the lion's share of them, no?
vondrack> has nothing to do with our involvement in the war
vondrack> ah, no... not lion's share, I would not put it that way
vondrack> enough
vondrack> though quite inconveniently located
vondrack> but that's, as I said, not the reason for withholding our help
Arnelos> you're allied to GoW
Arnelos> which, if I dare say so, will eventually come back to bite you
vondrack> I am sorry, I cannot answer questions regarding alliances Legoland may or may not be part of
Arnelos>
vondrack> if it was a question, that is...
Arnelos> We've actually believed you were allied with GoW for quite some time now
Arnelos> QUITE some time
Arnelos> here's the thing... you guys helping GoW made a ton of sense, I will admit, when GS entered the war to help us
Arnelos> but that's no longer true
Arnelos> GS and RP are not winning this war
Arnelos> until GoW and ND are re-contained, you run the very real risk that you will help them break out and eventually even threaten you
Arnelos> keeping Bob weak and divided would seem the superior optio
Arnelos> *option
vondrack> it's difficult for me to discuss these things - as I have said, I can't confirm nor dent that we may or may not be allied/friendly/unfriendly/hostile towards another team
vondrack> *deny
vondrack> so, let's talk academic
Arnelos> you do, so for me it's beside the point
vondrack> I do what?
vondrack> talk academic? confirm? deny?
Arnelos> my team is on the brink of either surviving or being killed off... I have no time for academic discussions... you're allied with GoW. I'm trying to tell you, reasonably, that this is no longer a policy which fits your interests. That it happens to be hurting us as well is why I'm saying it, of course.
Arnelos> but that doesn't prevent it from being true, either
Arnelos> fact is, if ND and GoW actually *win* this war, which is looking much more likely, they will have the power to start looking for other targets
Arnelos> and, to be perfectly honest, Legoland is the rusty third wheel of the ND-GoW relationship
vondrack> Arnelos, let's not get into this, please
vondrack> there is, I am sorry, nothing you can do to change things
Arnelos> there is, you're simply choosing not to exercise it
Arnelos> the bone-crushing momentum of previous policy
vondrack> I meant that you, Arnelos (and for that matter, even me, vondrack), cannot do anything to change the Legoland's decision
Arnelos> YOU can't change it?
vondrack> it's not that we would be hesitating, still waging pros and cons
Arnelos> I have been lead to believe otherwise. It's not that you can't, it's that you won't
vondrack> explain, please
vondrack> do you think I have any special powers in Legoland?
Arnelos> Legoland retains the power of freedom of action... you have it within your power to change course. That you are choosing not to is a choice of your own volition. No-one is forcing you to hold to the present course, with the dangers that lay ahead.
vondrack> oh, yes, that's true
Arnelos> I happen to believe that you are one of the principle individuals opposed to changing course... multiple individuals from Legoland have mentioned this... that the main obstacle to changing Legoland policy is you.
vondrack> ummm... things in Legoland are decided by polls
vondrack> my vote is as important as any other
Arnelos> while true, apparently you hold more weight over other people's votes than you might assume
vondrack> like I can influence them?
Arnelos> votes are decided as much by convincing arguments as by anything else
vondrack> well, that is often true
Arnelos> look... I understand that I come to you as a highly biased source. I obviously have a vested interest in my own team's survival.... that said...
Arnelos> that said, it's still true, as I see it, that Legoland is encouraging a dangerous future for itself by continuing to support the Glory of War. It has the rather troubling potential of comign back to bite you.
Arnelos> I'm not making that up
I understand your concerns. But Legoland is not taking its future lightly. We have been discussing the situation quite a bit.
vondrack> And the result was
vondrack> (it changed radically after GS entered the war)
vondrack> that we chose to not assist you
Arnelos> the point is... there is an option you could exercise that would have significantly less chance of biting you back. The word of Gathering Storm is their bond. We have found that they have performed to every letter of our treaties with
vondrack> it may have been the wrong thing to do
vondrack> (that was about the "not assist you" part)
Arnelos> I have discussed the matter with Gathering Storm and they seem willing to sign a treaty with Legoland in which they would bind themselves to an honorable non-aggression agreement if Legoland would cease support for GoW and instead work with us
Arnelos> the key of the matter is that where GoW would violate such an agreement in a heartbeat if the opportunity presented itself, our teams would not
Arnelos> I believe we can achieve a genuine commitment to ending the game in a peaceable fashion
vondrack> Arnelos, I am sorry I cannot give you an answer that would make you happier - but I am here communicating the stance of my team (though not denying it's my own, too)
vondrack> we heard your proposals, your arguments
vondrack> you may be right
vondrack> we admit that
vondrack> but still, we made our minds
vondrack> and we are not going to change the decision
............. (removed some irrelevant meta-DG discussion)................
vondrack> I have to admit that my interest in DGs
vondrack> is getting weaker and weaker...
vondrack> I find it difficult
vondrack> to pitch myself against other people - not only ingame enemies, but even against my teammates
vondrack> if we disagree on something
vondrack> (and there were a LOT of times this happened in Lego)
Arnelos> indeed
Arnelos> on any team
Arnelos> hell, we've had two attempted revolutions on this team
vondrack> I just hate it when I have to tell you, Arnelos, things I have told you today - yet I have no choice
................ (censored ISDG turn reports discussion)...................
................ (removed some discussion of Legoland members gone inactive)..............
Arnelos> and vondrack... something else to mention...
vondrack> not too active recently
vondrack> yes?
Arnelos> I was gone from the time RP and Lego made contact to the GoW-RP war and I know I'm missing whatever element of that may be playing into the current situation.
Arnelos> it seems to me that a lot of history happpened in there
Arnelos> most of it not good
vondrack> most of, actually...
vondrack> yes
vondrack> that's why I understand that you are trying to fix things now and feel bad for not being able to help you out
Arnelos> ah
vondrack> but things moved a lot while you were away
vondrack> an awful lot happened
Arnelos> yeah, it sounds to me like the start-of-game agreement became a rather nasty bone of contention.... it may not be a good idea to sign those in future games... a good leason to learn
vondrack> well - the only problem I can see
vondrack> might be that you thought the deal was something different from what we thought it was
vondrack> we though it was two-way, mutual
Arnelos> it was a bit vague
Arnelos> ah....
Arnelos> I see
vondrack> yes, it must have been, I guess
Arnelos> the whole thing was like 4 lines
vondrack> but the thing is that many times, we felt as if RP saw it as one-way (as in "you still pay for getting Carthage")
vondrack> I made a very lame attempt at explaining that in the ISDG thread - but spoiled the whole thing by the part on Togas
Arnelos> in effect, the agreement was the "price" for Legoland getting Carthage... which is my point. Looking back, I don't think establishing a debter-debtee relationship like that at the start of the game was productive for relations.
vondrack> I later regretted that post a lot
vondrack> ah, so - RP _did_ see it as a debter-debtee?
Arnelos> yes
vondrack> just a sec
Arnelos> that was the team's understanding of the treaty
Arnelos> that it was the price for Carthage
vondrack> do you have the wording of the treaty somewhere?
Arnelos> sure... lemme get that
Arnelos> We, the Roleplay team, hereby promise that we will give the Legoland team the civilization of Carthage and we will cooperate with research (each team researching different paths and then trading).
Arnelos> In exchange, Legoland promises to not declare war on or join in any war against the Roleplay Civilization at any time prior to 1000 AD, to give the Roleplay Civilization "Most Favored Nation" trade status (which shall include selling us techs at a lower price than any other civ), and cooperate with research as explained above.
Arnelos> Both teams also pledge to try to maintain good relations throughout the game and to attempt to cooperate for the mutual protection and success of our civilizations.
Arnelos> Signed in 4000 BC
vondrack> yes, that's the text I have always been referring to as well
vondrack> so that was not the problem
vondrack> the problem is - when you read through it
vondrack> what actually came to fruition?
Arnelos> I'd agree that RP made more of the "most favored nation" thing than you guys believed it meant... probably plyed on that line a bit hard. That said, many on RP remain resentful in the present conflict of the non-aggression portion (not joining another at war with RP). So all around, there's a resentment that Legoland did not fulfill the treaty, yes.
Arnelos> in all, the treaty just didn't work
vondrack> the problem is it is not a war of RP against GoW+ND
vondrack> not only
Arnelos> too vague and too binding on future action
vondrack> the GS bit messed things badly
vondrack> agreed
vondrack> trading civs pre-game for something ingame is just no-no for any future games
Arnelos> agreed
vondrack> especially if that something is vaguely defined
Arnelos> a good lesson learned, as I said
vondrack> pity you have to pay so many hours for such a lesson
Arnelos> well, I should probably get going, since I have other things to do today. As for you, it's what? 10:30 or 11:30 p.m. there?
vondrack> 11:30pm
Arnelos> EEST?
vondrack> yep
vondrack> the time should shift back to normal soon, I think
Arnelos> alright, thanks for the chat, even if it didn't work out as hoped
vondrack> yeah - take care
........(censored bit of ISDG discussion)...........
Arnelos> hey
vondrack> sorry for the delay, my nick got unregistered and I have had to fix things up
..................... (censored ISDG material)......................
vondrack> anyway
vondrack> that's not what you want me to talk about
Arnelos> of course
vondrack> I have no good news for you
Arnelos> so I figured
vondrack> said very briefly, Legoland is not going to help
vondrack> actually
vondrack> more or less, the only help possible would be direct military intervention
Arnelos> I seem to think that Gunpowder would give us a fighting chance
vondrack> and we are not going to do that
vondrack> I understand you would believe so
vondrack> but it's not true
Arnelos> at the very least, it might bleed GoW and ND some more UUs
Arnelos> and that can't hurt anyone but them
vondrack> the map generator screwed some teams big time
Arnelos> so I have been lead to believe
vondrack> speaking about saltpeter, that is
vondrack> though... I am actually disclosing something that is not all that relevant
vondrack> the thing is that the whole problem with the world's saltpeter deposits
Arnelos> is that legoland has the lion's share of them, no?
vondrack> has nothing to do with our involvement in the war
vondrack> ah, no... not lion's share, I would not put it that way
vondrack> enough
vondrack> though quite inconveniently located
vondrack> but that's, as I said, not the reason for withholding our help
Arnelos> you're allied to GoW
Arnelos> which, if I dare say so, will eventually come back to bite you
vondrack> I am sorry, I cannot answer questions regarding alliances Legoland may or may not be part of
Arnelos>
vondrack> if it was a question, that is...
Arnelos> We've actually believed you were allied with GoW for quite some time now
Arnelos> QUITE some time
Arnelos> here's the thing... you guys helping GoW made a ton of sense, I will admit, when GS entered the war to help us
Arnelos> but that's no longer true
Arnelos> GS and RP are not winning this war
Arnelos> until GoW and ND are re-contained, you run the very real risk that you will help them break out and eventually even threaten you
Arnelos> keeping Bob weak and divided would seem the superior optio
Arnelos> *option
vondrack> it's difficult for me to discuss these things - as I have said, I can't confirm nor dent that we may or may not be allied/friendly/unfriendly/hostile towards another team
vondrack> *deny
vondrack> so, let's talk academic
Arnelos> you do, so for me it's beside the point
vondrack> I do what?
vondrack> talk academic? confirm? deny?
Arnelos> my team is on the brink of either surviving or being killed off... I have no time for academic discussions... you're allied with GoW. I'm trying to tell you, reasonably, that this is no longer a policy which fits your interests. That it happens to be hurting us as well is why I'm saying it, of course.
Arnelos> but that doesn't prevent it from being true, either
Arnelos> fact is, if ND and GoW actually *win* this war, which is looking much more likely, they will have the power to start looking for other targets
Arnelos> and, to be perfectly honest, Legoland is the rusty third wheel of the ND-GoW relationship
vondrack> Arnelos, let's not get into this, please
vondrack> there is, I am sorry, nothing you can do to change things
Arnelos> there is, you're simply choosing not to exercise it
Arnelos> the bone-crushing momentum of previous policy
vondrack> I meant that you, Arnelos (and for that matter, even me, vondrack), cannot do anything to change the Legoland's decision
Arnelos> YOU can't change it?
vondrack> it's not that we would be hesitating, still waging pros and cons
Arnelos> I have been lead to believe otherwise. It's not that you can't, it's that you won't
vondrack> explain, please
vondrack> do you think I have any special powers in Legoland?
Arnelos> Legoland retains the power of freedom of action... you have it within your power to change course. That you are choosing not to is a choice of your own volition. No-one is forcing you to hold to the present course, with the dangers that lay ahead.
vondrack> oh, yes, that's true
Arnelos> I happen to believe that you are one of the principle individuals opposed to changing course... multiple individuals from Legoland have mentioned this... that the main obstacle to changing Legoland policy is you.
vondrack> ummm... things in Legoland are decided by polls
vondrack> my vote is as important as any other
Arnelos> while true, apparently you hold more weight over other people's votes than you might assume
vondrack> like I can influence them?
Arnelos> votes are decided as much by convincing arguments as by anything else
vondrack> well, that is often true
Arnelos> look... I understand that I come to you as a highly biased source. I obviously have a vested interest in my own team's survival.... that said...
Arnelos> that said, it's still true, as I see it, that Legoland is encouraging a dangerous future for itself by continuing to support the Glory of War. It has the rather troubling potential of comign back to bite you.
Arnelos> I'm not making that up
vondrack> And the result was
vondrack> (it changed radically after GS entered the war)
vondrack> that we chose to not assist you
Arnelos> the point is... there is an option you could exercise that would have significantly less chance of biting you back. The word of Gathering Storm is their bond. We have found that they have performed to every letter of our treaties with
vondrack> it may have been the wrong thing to do
vondrack> (that was about the "not assist you" part)
Arnelos> I have discussed the matter with Gathering Storm and they seem willing to sign a treaty with Legoland in which they would bind themselves to an honorable non-aggression agreement if Legoland would cease support for GoW and instead work with us
Arnelos> the key of the matter is that where GoW would violate such an agreement in a heartbeat if the opportunity presented itself, our teams would not
Arnelos> I believe we can achieve a genuine commitment to ending the game in a peaceable fashion
vondrack> Arnelos, I am sorry I cannot give you an answer that would make you happier - but I am here communicating the stance of my team (though not denying it's my own, too)
vondrack> we heard your proposals, your arguments
vondrack> you may be right
vondrack> we admit that
vondrack> but still, we made our minds
vondrack> and we are not going to change the decision
............. (removed some irrelevant meta-DG discussion)................
vondrack> I have to admit that my interest in DGs
vondrack> is getting weaker and weaker...
vondrack> I find it difficult
vondrack> to pitch myself against other people - not only ingame enemies, but even against my teammates
vondrack> if we disagree on something
vondrack> (and there were a LOT of times this happened in Lego)
Arnelos> indeed
Arnelos> on any team
Arnelos> hell, we've had two attempted revolutions on this team
vondrack> I just hate it when I have to tell you, Arnelos, things I have told you today - yet I have no choice
................ (censored ISDG turn reports discussion)...................
................ (removed some discussion of Legoland members gone inactive)..............
Arnelos> and vondrack... something else to mention...
vondrack> not too active recently
vondrack> yes?
Arnelos> I was gone from the time RP and Lego made contact to the GoW-RP war and I know I'm missing whatever element of that may be playing into the current situation.
Arnelos> it seems to me that a lot of history happpened in there
Arnelos> most of it not good
vondrack> most of, actually...
vondrack> yes
vondrack> that's why I understand that you are trying to fix things now and feel bad for not being able to help you out
Arnelos> ah
vondrack> but things moved a lot while you were away
vondrack> an awful lot happened
Arnelos> yeah, it sounds to me like the start-of-game agreement became a rather nasty bone of contention.... it may not be a good idea to sign those in future games... a good leason to learn
vondrack> well - the only problem I can see
vondrack> might be that you thought the deal was something different from what we thought it was
vondrack> we though it was two-way, mutual
Arnelos> it was a bit vague
Arnelos> ah....
Arnelos> I see
vondrack> yes, it must have been, I guess
Arnelos> the whole thing was like 4 lines
vondrack> but the thing is that many times, we felt as if RP saw it as one-way (as in "you still pay for getting Carthage")
vondrack> I made a very lame attempt at explaining that in the ISDG thread - but spoiled the whole thing by the part on Togas
Arnelos> in effect, the agreement was the "price" for Legoland getting Carthage... which is my point. Looking back, I don't think establishing a debter-debtee relationship like that at the start of the game was productive for relations.
vondrack> I later regretted that post a lot
vondrack> ah, so - RP _did_ see it as a debter-debtee?
Arnelos> yes
vondrack> just a sec
Arnelos> that was the team's understanding of the treaty
Arnelos> that it was the price for Carthage
vondrack> do you have the wording of the treaty somewhere?
Arnelos> sure... lemme get that
Arnelos> We, the Roleplay team, hereby promise that we will give the Legoland team the civilization of Carthage and we will cooperate with research (each team researching different paths and then trading).
Arnelos> In exchange, Legoland promises to not declare war on or join in any war against the Roleplay Civilization at any time prior to 1000 AD, to give the Roleplay Civilization "Most Favored Nation" trade status (which shall include selling us techs at a lower price than any other civ), and cooperate with research as explained above.
Arnelos> Both teams also pledge to try to maintain good relations throughout the game and to attempt to cooperate for the mutual protection and success of our civilizations.
Arnelos> Signed in 4000 BC
vondrack> yes, that's the text I have always been referring to as well
vondrack> so that was not the problem
vondrack> the problem is - when you read through it
vondrack> what actually came to fruition?
Arnelos> I'd agree that RP made more of the "most favored nation" thing than you guys believed it meant... probably plyed on that line a bit hard. That said, many on RP remain resentful in the present conflict of the non-aggression portion (not joining another at war with RP). So all around, there's a resentment that Legoland did not fulfill the treaty, yes.
Arnelos> in all, the treaty just didn't work
vondrack> the problem is it is not a war of RP against GoW+ND
vondrack> not only
Arnelos> too vague and too binding on future action
vondrack> the GS bit messed things badly
vondrack> agreed
vondrack> trading civs pre-game for something ingame is just no-no for any future games
Arnelos> agreed
vondrack> especially if that something is vaguely defined
Arnelos> a good lesson learned, as I said
vondrack> pity you have to pay so many hours for such a lesson
Arnelos> well, I should probably get going, since I have other things to do today. As for you, it's what? 10:30 or 11:30 p.m. there?
vondrack> 11:30pm
Arnelos> EEST?
vondrack> yep
vondrack> the time should shift back to normal soon, I think
Arnelos> alright, thanks for the chat, even if it didn't work out as hoped
vondrack> yeah - take care
........(censored bit of ISDG discussion)...........
"
Comment