Public Announcement from Gathering Storm

[nbarclay]

In a surprise naval landing, Gathering Storm forces have succeeded in capturing Vox Controli's sole supply of iron. We ask that any nation considering trading Iron to the Voxians keep in mind their tendencies toward treachery. If they survive, you may someday find yourselves facing pikes and swords made from your own iron. We also ask that you keep in mind that providing military aid to our enemies cannot possibly be good for long-term relations with Gathering Storm. If you do give consideration to a Voxian request for iron, please think carefully about whether any short-term profits Vox might offer are really worth that long-term cost.

Sincerely,

Nathan Barclay,
Chief Economist, Gathering Storm

[Wittlich]

So, nbarclay - what you're REALLY telling everyone else in the game is: "GAME OVER, GS WINS."

Please. Don't get too self confident.

[nbarclay]

We're being forced to waste practically our entire golden age on our military instead of being able to invest in our economy. The other civs haven't even started their GAs yet, and Lego, especially, is in a prime position not to have major military distractions forced on them against their will. As far as land area is concerned, even if GS goes on to take our entire continent rather than negotiating peace (which would distract still further from economic matters), we'll have less land to expand into than Roleplay. And while I know little of Lego's lands, my bet is that they have a pretty immense area to expand into as well. And consider, too, that our continent is so long and thin that corruption is likely to be a huge problem for a long time to come.

So no, your ethnocentrism aside, defeating Vox would not even come close to being the same thing as winning the game for us. We still face major economic competition from Roleplay and Lego, and major military competition from Neu Demogyptica's Ansars and Glory of War's Riders (which have serious potential to create massive shifts in the economic landscape). This game is a long, long way from over.

Nathan

Edit: Transposition of forces corrected. Oops.

[E_T]

Is this the Diplomatic Policy of GS or the postings of one person shouting in the storm?

E_T

[Master Zen]

We still face major economic competition from Roleplay and Lego, and major military competition from Neu Demogyptica's Riders and Glory of War's Ansars

oh... be VERY AFRAID of The Glory of War's ANSARS!!




btw, is this a threat?

[Hot Mustard]

Nathan, you spin a good yarn.

Would GS be so kind as to send us their World Map, so that we can verify your claims?

[BigFree]

MZ, he didn't mention GoW or ND for that matter, so I don't think that they consider you or ND a factor. You might as well give up and gift your cities over to one of the remaining teams.

[Hot Mustard]

Am I the only one that finds it amusing (arrogant, presumptious?) that the one team that has remained almost completely isolationist the entire game so far, is now making requests (demands, threats?) of all the other teams?

Note: Just a personal observation, I do not represent RP diplomatically.

[Master Zen]

I'm sure Roleplay's Panzers will also be considered a threat...

[nbarclay]

There is definitely a strong consensus that we will not be pleased if our enemies are supplied with raw materials that have no other purpose than to help them kill our troops. If we were the aggressors, helping Vox defend themselves would be completely understandable. But considering Vox's treachery and surprise attack, the current situation would bear far more resemblance to seeing someone provide military assistance to Germany or Japan after World War II turned against them. (Even the in-game governments, Despotism vs. Republic, reflect that analogy. )

I'm certainly not making any kind of specific threats. But put yourselves in our shoes and consider how you would feel about having someone provide military assistance to a civ that lied to you, attacked you, and forced you to waste most of your golden age on military matters when you were trying to build. Having a civ provide direct military assistance to an enemy, especially a lying, back-stabbing enemy, is almost bound to color relations.

Nathan

[E_T]

So, I take it that you are now speaking (with the "strong Consensus" of your team) to the rest of the world in a Diplomatic Capacity, the Policy of GS.

So GS is making threats to the rest of the world now. Interesting...

E_T

[Master Zen]

Ever thought that someone may well provide raw materials simply for the sake of economic profit? Why so much paranoia to assume that everyone is just ganging up on GS by providing your enemy with resources?

During WW2 the US did not embargo Axis goods until well into the conflict. Would that have been reason enough for Britain to feel the US betrayed them? Case in point for WW1 too.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by dejon
Am I the only one that finds it amusing (arrogant, presumptious?) that the one team that has remained almost completely isolationist the entire game so far, is now making requests (demands, threats?) of all the other teams?

I wish I knew where this accusation of being "isolationist" comes from, unless it's a propaganda mechanation on the part of Roleplay. We don't live on your continent, so there's nothing sinister or overtly "isolationist" about our not being involved in border negotiations and so forth there. But we were very active in the tech market until the rest of the world conspired (or at least that's the effect it had) to shaft us on our Feudalism research and, at the same time, Vox's attack forced us to pour massive amounts of gold into rush building military units. (If you've never had to do that, you have no idea how painful it can be.) And what diplomatic messages from other teams are we ignoring or rebuffing?

In regard to our reluctance to share our map, we feel that keeping that information private adds significantly to our military security. And my understanding is that Lego is not sharing their map either, in which case it's hard to argue that we and we alone are withholding information that the rest of the world agrees should be available to everyone.

If you have specific concerns about our behavior, please present them in a way that will allow us to address your concerns. Otherwise, you are generating a significant amount of heat and very little light.

In regard to our making "demands," as I said, put yourselves in our shoes. Can you honestly say that having another civ provide a key military resource to an enemy that tricked you and launched a surprise attack against you would not have an effect on future diplomatic relations?

Nathan

[Harovan]

I can't see any threat in Nathans posts. He wrote, that we won't be pleased if somebody, for whatever reasons, helped those who betrayed, lied and sneak attacked us. No less and no more. This is a commonplace and could as well be not written, as it is obvious. Who sees this as a threat, must have a reason to think so. And that is interesting indeed.

MZ: Would the United States be pleased if somebody provided Iran and North Korea with Uranium and nuclear technology? You may say yes, but somehow I have my doubts. And they aren't even technically at war.

[DeepO]

It's a bit sad to see these reactions, although I'm not surprised RP's members are screaming hardest when it comes to our isolationism. After all, we all (know or) suspect that it wasn't only Vox' idea to treacherously attack us... Vox isn't so diplomatically isolated as we are, but can you blame it we're getting paranoid, given how we're diplomatically treated?

I think this announcement was fair, and gets misinterpreted. Iron is such a vital resource in this age, we made quite an effort to take Vox's source. It cost us dearly in terms of long term growth, reseach capability, and all other peaceful goals of this game. So can you blame us that we do not want to see that effort nullified by another team simply handing over iron to Vox, to further disrupt our GA?

You shouldn't see this message as a threat, as it is none. But it is a friendly warning to other teams that even if we did not, and are not going to take offense for any support you have given Vox in this war so far, trading iron is too much. It is such a key military resource, that providing it to them can only be seen as a military alliance against us. If you want to go that road, fine, but if that forces us to attack you to take out that support, you can't blame us. It may be clear that we prefer Vox to remain ironless for the remainder of this war, so that we can go as quickly as possible back to a building mode instead of a state of war.

Of course you're free to keep this war going, to help the underdogs against the currently most powerful nation, but be advised we now consider ourselves in an easy position to take over sole control of our continent, and in case we can't go back to peaceful building soon, our still growing military forces need something to do, also after the GS-Vox war is over. And no, we're not planning an invasion of Bob, we just want to be kept alone so we can recuperate. If we need to declare war on a team to keep Vox from getting iron, we will, and we won't consider it an unprovoked attack. Honor forced us to state the obvious: If you provide iron to Vox, you're signing a military alliance against us, even if you don't ship a single unit onto our continent. Don't blame it on us if we later take that reason as justification for a declaration of war.

Just to make it clear: we would very much like to put this GS-Vox war behind us, as both us and Vox knows the outcome. We hope that we finally can get back to be a friendly partner to all nations. Please don't disrupt our friendly intentions towards you, don't ignore this warning and provoke us.

DeepO

BTW, Nathan is absolutely right when it comes to our (future) territory: we're in no position to compete territory wise with teams we can see the map of. The number of tiles on our continent is lower then what RP has secured for themselves, it is lower then what ND or GoW can grow into in a couple of turns, and assumedly is much lower then what Lego has. We don't choke in natural resources, our starting position was maybe the worst of all teams (still adequate, though), and the geography of our continent will mean we'll have plenty of problems with corruption if we want to build a well-functioning empire here. We do not lie about this, and we don't see reason to give our map to proof it. You can decide not to trust our statements, but know that we haven't lied a single time in this game, and that the honor code all GS members adhere to don't allow us to start lying now.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

MZ: Would the United States be pleased if somebody provided Iran and North Korea with Uranium and nuclear technology? You may say yes, but somehow I have my doubts. And they aren't even technically at war.

Many people likewise aren't really pleased at the fact the US provides Israel with so much military aid. Aid works both ways, and which ever way you look at it, someone will get pissed.

But, just look at RL how in the last 50 years the countries which stood for freedom and democracy now stand for imperialist aggression.... and we're at 20 years per turn now?

(not like we have any iron to offer anyway )

[zeit]

GS' so called "demands" are nothing more just being direct and honest with regard to this issue. No one seriously believes that trading Iron to Vox at this point will do nothing to their relationship with the GS. When you add to that the fact that Vox's agression and treachery has brought this war upon us, as Nathan had said, you just can't expect the GS to see it favorably.

I just can't see where the "world-threatening", as E_T so assuredly puts it, comes into this.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Master Zen
Ever thought that someone may well provide raw materials simply for the sake of economic profit? Why so much paranoia to assume that everyone is just ganging up on GS by providing your enemy with resources?

During WW2 the US did not embargo Axis goods until well into the conflict. Would that have been reason enough for Britain to feel the US betrayed them? Case in point for WW1 too.

If you'll check your history, in WWII, the U.S. engaged in gross violations of neutrality in favor of England and Russia with our lend-lease program. I don't know what our policy was with regard to consumer goods and such, but our military trade was very much in favor of the Allies. Germany would have been fully justified in declaring war over those violations, but however offended they were over our violations of neutrality, they were better off with us merely as arms suppliers than with us as active combatants. I seriously doubt that at any time in either world war, America's overall trade policy favored the Axis or Central Powers over England and its allies to any significant degree.

I would have no objection at all to other nations' engaging in clearly non-military economic relations with Vox. But when it comes to supplying overtly military resources, any profits another civ makes come at a price in blood to our forces. The civ conducting the sale profits, and our troops die as a result. Seeking profit without regard to what it costs us does not have the same overt hostility that deliberately trying to help Vox fight us would, but it can hardly be considered good for relations either, can it?

Nathan

[Harovan]

Germany already was at war with the United States since Pearl Harbor (significantly before Lend-Lease), as a part of the treaty it had with its ally Japan. But I think such discussions don't belong in this thread, rather in the OT.

[nbarclay]

Just to clarify what DeepO said, we have contemplated the possibility of using a declaration of war and a naval blockade should that become necessary to cut off a foreign supply of iron for Vox. We are not contemplating active warfare over the matter. (I really hadn't wanted to reveal so much of our military thinking in public, but I consider it necessary lest DeepO's words be viewed as a vastly greater and more explicit threat than they really are.)

Nor are we saying that supplying Vox with iron would, in and of itself, destroy another team's hopes of having good diplomatic relations with us. But it would be quite capable of nudging our attitude a notch or two (e.g. from Polite to Cautious or Annoyed, to use game terms), and that could easily have an impact on close choices in future negotiations.

Nathan

[Aeson]

Would GS be so kind as to send us their World Map, so that we can verify your claims?

If you have everyone else's world map it's pretty easy to figure out how many tiles you can't see. Take the mapsize * (1 - (Waterlevel + .03)) and that will give a pretty good estimate of how many land tiles there are on the map. Then start counting! (and yes, I've already counted, I just don't want to deprive any of you of that joy!)

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Germany already was at war with the United States since Pearl Harbor (significantly before Lend-Lease), as a part of the treaty it had with its ally Japan. But I think such discussions don't belong in this thread, rather in the OT.

I think the matter is relevant in this thread for purposes of analogy. I used to have a strong interest in WWII, especially air and naval aspects, and that included at least a couple books about the Battle for the Atlantic. To clarify the timeline, I'm not sure exactly when Lend-Lease started, but I know it was operating on a major scale by the end of 1940. Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor until December, 1941, and Germany declared war on the U.S. a few days after that. So for more than a year, the U.S. was being "neutral" very much in England's and Russia's favor without there being a legal state of war or active combat between German and U.S. forces.

[BigFree]

HAHAHA

Is it a threat or not a threat?

On one hand GS member's are saying:
"it is a friendly warning to other teams "
"I'm certainly not making any kind of specific threats."
"We also ask that you keep in mind that providing military aid to our enemies cannot possibly be good for long-term relations with Gathering Storm."
"Who sees this as a threat, must have a reason to think so."


On the other they also say:
"It is such a key military resource, that providing it to them can only be seen as a military alliance against us."
"If we need to declare war on a team to keep Vox from getting iron, we will, and we won't consider it an unprovoked attack."
"If you provide iron to Vox, you're signing a military alliance against us, even if you don't ship a single unit onto our continent. Don't blame it on us if we later take that reason as justification for a declaration of war."
"Please don't disrupt our friendly intentions towards you, don't ignore this warning and provoke us."
"when it comes to supplying overtly military resources, any profits another civ makes come at a price in blood to our forces"


I'm not on one side or the other on this issue. I may feel the same way if it were my team, but these statements are contradictory. Is is a friendly warning(whatever that means) or a threat that GS will declar war on any nation who supplies Vox with Iron?

P.S. How would you even find out who did it if they did it? Just curious...

[Harovan]

Originally posted by nbarclay
To clarify the timeline, I'm not sure exactly when Lend-Lease started, but I know it was operating on a major scale by the end of 1940.

Germany attacked the Soviet Union June 22th, 1941. Until this day, they've been allies.

[Aeson]

It's an attempt to show us as a bunch of mentally unstables with way too many pointy sticks and no one (appologies to Vox) to poke with them BigFree.

In answer to your PS... it's very simple.

[nbarclay]

I checked an encyclopedia, and the Lend-Lease act was signed in March, 1941. So what I'm remembering from 1940 was less flagrant (but still not trivial) leanings in favor of England before then. In any case, in WWII, England had every reason to be happy with America's trade practices. It was the Axis powers that had reason to be seriously displeased.

[nbarclay]

BigFree, as I said, DeepO's post includes some language that goes way overboard compared with anything the team as a whole has contemplated. As for my own reference to a "price in blood," I was referring to a price we would pay, not to a price we would attempt to exact from Vox's iron supplier. The point is that supplying Vox with iron is not just a simple economic transaction that has no effect on anyone else, any more than selling someone a gun when you know he'll use it to rob a store is a simple economic transaction with no effect on anyone else. (Yes, my analogy here might be considered a bit extreme, but try telling that to the widows and orphans of Gathering Storm troops killed by iron weapons that Vox could not make without foreign help.)

[Harovan]

Originally posted by nbarclay
I checked an encyclopedia, and the Lend-Lease act was signed in March, 1941. So what I'm remembering from 1940 was less flagrant (but still not trivial) leanings in favor of England before then. In any case, in WWII, England had every reason to be happy with America's trade practices. It was the Axis powers that had reason to be seriously displeased.

Well, I wasn't aware, that Americas help for Great Britain fell also under the Lend-Lease act. I trust your source on this point. The Mutual Aid Agreement between the USA and the Soviet Union (what I was talking about) was signed June 11th, 1942.

[zeit]

Another simple clarification, that might have been overlooked:

War on Iron trader = blockade on Vox possible.

According to my knowledge you have to be at war with the two parties in order to stage such blockade.

[Wittlich]

And here we go folks - GS speading its will on the rest of the world.

But let me leave you with this thought: Only to remeber... this is a warning sign and all civilizations should think deeply about it (read between the lines)..."what pray tell, will GS be demanding of the world next?"