Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In

War of Norwegian Aggression Talks Options · View
The Professor
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 4:39:36 AM
 General of the Army

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/17/2007
Posts: 8,437
Location: Time
I assume this is what Norway individually is willing to offer to the pot, I'ld be willing to allow Norway to seperate peace out with no to negligable territory loss if they are willing to abandone their allies, none of us in particular have desires on Norway, its continental europe we are interested in. (Although Alaska sounds nice).

I suspect as long as Japan is allowed some form of retalliation against Norway for its illegal obrogation of the nuclear treaty it might be allowed to exit the war scot free.

Norway is free to pm us if this is the case.

Their game can only exist to be won.
Then so be it who else can see it done.
Varyar
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 9:58:33 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
The Professor wrote:
Also due to norway breaking the nuclear treaty we call upon italy to honor its treaty obligations and to punish Norway with atomic attacks.

Same conditions as during the Georgia breach applies, i.e. EastAsia has a freebie nuke to send on Norway.

Considering the circumstances though, I believe a more preferable solution would be exact compensation through the peace treaty which now seems likely to be signed.
Varyar
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 10:07:51 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Foelsgaard wrote:
Well, my point is that if someone is a warmongering opportunistic bastard then deal with him using ingame means rather than calling him a "bad player" and accusing him of ruining the game.

And if dealing with it in-game fails? I do reserve the right to complain if, after one year of playing, I am robbed of my second year of fun because some guy's ego is too big to fit inside the MP game in question. (and by that I mean that the game ends prematurely, not that I personally am eliminated).

Quote:
Part of it is that I sort of want it all to end in apocalyptic nuclear warfare, since I've never actually tried it (in fact, I have only played two MP games before this one the second of which crashed before the war started. I also usually get bored of SP after a year or so of fighting).

Indeed. So now that we have a bunch of skilled players available to keep a good challenging game alive, why destroy that?

EDIT: and please save your nuclear holocaust fantasies for a regular HoI game rather than dragging it into this megacampaign.

Quote:
Also, since we didn't ban them, they are a legitimate part of the game. If I won a game because someone chose not to use nukes even when losing badly, I think it would cheapen the victory since my opponent was really just pulling his punches. "I could have won but I chose not to".

Win or lose, a game with nukes would have none of the last session's strategy and fun. Again, just because something is legit doesn't mean it's suitable. If the alternative to pulling one's punches is to tie up his hands and kick him in the face, then pulling one's punches is not an issue. Everyone is "pulling punches".

Quote:
Lastly, I'm no brilliant player. My HoI skills are average at best. My successes have been due to my Vicky economy and diplomatic luck. My failures have been due primarily to tactical and strategic mistakes.

Your airforce performance in our first war says otherwise Wink

Then again, as a n00b I'm easily impressed One Tooth Grin
Foelsgaard
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 11:18:55 AM
 Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/1/2009
Posts: 943
Varyar wrote:
And if dealing with it in-game fails? I do reserve the right to complain if, after one year of playing, I am robbed of my second year of fun because some guy's ego is too big to fit inside the MP game in question. (and by that I mean that the game ends prematurely, not that I personally am eliminated).


I'm not sure what you mean by "too big an ego".

If ingame measures fail to contain a warmongering player, then shouldn't we just congratulate him with winning the game and start a new one? It's not as if the years already spent on it are wasted or that a new game is hard to start up.

I'm not sure I would want to play a game in which the most powerful player artificially prolongs the game by pulling his punches because he would otherwise be derided for winning "prematurely". Likewise, I would not want to play a game in which the superpower refuses to end it because he enjoys being more powerful than everyone else.

Varyar wrote:
Indeed. So now that we have a bunch of skilled players available to keep a good challenging game alive, why destroy that?


Because it wouldn't be destroyed?

There seems to be a logical disconnect between you both wanting a long game and not wanting nuclear weapons. It seems to me that nukes prolong the game by making players more afraid to attack each other and by generally hurting large powers harder than small ones (since dissent is a percentage). Nukes are the ultimate big stick that keeps players from annexing each other and large powers from overrunning the world.

Varyar wrote:
EDIT: and please save your nuclear holocaust fantasies for a regular HoI game rather than dragging it into this megacampaign.


Frankly, no I will not. You see, I will not use nuclear weapons irrationally just to satisfy "nuclear holocaust fantasies" (as you so eloquently and even slightly condescendingly put it). I will use them if I can benefit from it, just like every other feature of the game. If it ends in apocalypse, then so be it.

If nuclear apocalypse ends up sucking balls, then I know which house rules I would want in the next game.
danomite
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 3:03:07 PM
 Tribunus laticlavius

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/17/2008
Posts: 2,768
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Even if things go nuclear, there isn't enough nukes to wipe everyone out, so those not nuked can help those who have been nuked stay alive while they recover, so not entirely end of the world just yet...

It is said that the future is always born in pain. The history of war is the history of pain.
If we are wise, what is born of that pain matures into the promise of a better world,
because we learn that we can no longer afford the mistakes of the past.
King of Men
Posted: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:51:19 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
Still, some people are more vulnerable than others. Italy is of course the canonical example; but it's worth noting that Japan also has much industry and manpower concentrated in a relatively small set of islands. Likewise Shanxi has a lot of very high-value provinces. Norway, forewarned by uptime knowledge and with a free-market economy in a wide-open space with good communications, has its industries well dispersed, I'm happy to report. Smile

Read my blog.
Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
Varyar
Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:18:36 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Foelsgaard wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by "too big an ego".

By that I mean the need to win the game prematurely (before HoI), i.e. the inability to accept domination/a good position instead of final victory. Victory before fun.

Quote:
If ingame measures fail to contain a warmongering player, then shouldn't we just congratulate him with winning the game and start a new one? It's not as if the years already spent on it are wasted or that a new game is hard to start up.

A megacampaign takes a certain amount of time to play through, and playing through Vicky and HoI is to have a better and more fun gaming experience.

Quote:
I'm not sure I would want to play a game in which the most powerful player artificially prolongs the game by pulling his punches because he would otherwise be derided for winning "prematurely". Likewise, I would not want to play a game in which the superpower refuses to end it because he enjoys being more powerful than everyone else.

It's about neither, but rather to instead of ending the game by winning or being the uncontested superpower reset the game by re-establishing some sort of balance, if necessary (such as by releasing a new player spot from one's lands). However, I'm rather a proponent of house rules that makes it very difficult to achieve that kind of domination (as well as the killing of players as a multi-polar world makes the game exponentially more fun).

Yes, it's a game, it's about winning, but this ain't the Olympics. For me games begin and end with fun. Competition exists to make games fun, not for it's own sake. If this was a game of CK, EU3, Vicky, or HoI2 I'd agree completely with you, but it isn't; it's a mega-campaign, a special beast that requires special considerations. IMHO.

Quote:
There seems to be a logical disconnect between you both wanting a long game and not wanting nuclear weapons. It seems to me that nukes prolong the game by making players more afraid to attack each other and by generally hurting large powers harder than small ones (since dissent is a percentage). Nukes are the ultimate big stick that keeps players from annexing each other and large powers from overrunning the world.

I was being unclear. What I mean is that the position each player has isn't just a result of HoI, but hard work from CK/EU3 onwards. HoI is the final fight, the showdown to settle the mega-campaign. What nukes do is that they way way too easily negates all that hard work and instead puts a player's fate in the hands of chance. I mean look at a country like Japan: it did ok in EU3, decent in early Vicky, and then phenomenally in late Vicky and HoI. What could be more suitable and fair than for Japan to end it's campaign properly in the battlefield, rather than to be wrecked by nukes? Which scenario creates the most fun and challenging gameplay?

A long game for me means we run from CK to HoI with as many nations alive as possible at HoI start, but once in HoI it's a fight to the finish. The big nations in HoI have earned their shot at overrunning the world through hard work in more than one game.

Quote:
Frankly, no I will not. You see, I will not use nuclear weapons irrationally just to satisfy "nuclear holocaust fantasies" (as you so eloquently and even slightly condescendingly put it). I will use them if I can benefit from it, just like every other feature of the game. If it ends in apocalypse, then so be it.

If nuclear apocalypse ends up sucking balls, then I know which house rules I would want in the next game.

I apologize for the unnecessarily harsh choice of words, it was uncalled for. My impression was that you wanted to try out nuclear holocaust "just to see what it's like", and as I strongly believe it would be bad for this game to end in nuclear holocaust I would simply prefer to see that you satisfy your curiosity in a less "serious" environment, such as a normal HoI2 game.

King of Men wrote:
Still, some people are more vulnerable than others. Italy is of course the canonical example; but it's worth noting that Japan also has much industry and manpower concentrated in a relatively small set of islands. Likewise Shanxi has a lot of very high-value provinces.

Well, I knew what I was doing and what the risks were. Even if (when?) Italianopolis gets nuked, I believe it was the right choice as the alternative would've been to have played out Vicky as a minor power and to convert to HoI with an IC level on par with Prussia. C'est la guerre, and so on.
Foelsgaard
Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:06:22 AM
 Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/1/2009
Posts: 943
Varyar wrote:

It's about neither, but rather to instead of ending the game by winning or being the uncontested superpower reset the game by re-establishing some sort of balance, if necessary (such as by releasing a new player spot from one's lands). However, I'm rather a proponent of house rules that makes it very difficult to achieve that kind of domination (as well as the killing of players as a multi-polar world makes the game exponentially more fun).

Yes, it's a game, it's about winning, but this ain't the Olympics. For me games begin and end with fun. Competition exists to make games fun, not for it's own sake. If this was a game of CK, EU3, Vicky, or HoI2 I'd agree completely with you, but it isn't; it's a mega-campaign, a special beast that requires special considerations. IMHO.


I think we actually agree on the basics. Fun before Victory. I find it fun to compete for victory, but the most important thing is not that I win (The journey not the goal and that jazz). I will not mind (much) that someone wins before HoI.

I also very much agree that game mechanics (Or house rules to a degree) that makes it difficult to conquer the world are good ones.

What I do not want is that the game is regulated by some vague "gentlemens rules". I want a good set of clear rules, where victory within that set of rules is lauded and encouraged, not derided.

EDIT: We are also seriously off topic at this point? Perhaps we should take it to another thread?
Varyar
Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:30:03 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Foelsgaard wrote:
EDIT: We are also seriously off topic at this point? Perhaps we should take it to another thread?

Quite so. My response is posted in the main thread, here: http://forums.ederon.net/default.aspx?g=posts&m=52893#52893
King of Men
Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 7:29:38 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
The Alliance Against Asian Annoyances offers this peace, which all its members have agreed to:

  • Norway cedes England-south-of-Thames and the Norse Law to Japan. (As is, indeed, traditional when the Ynglings lose a war in this timeline. Big Grin )
  • Italy cedes St Helena to Japan.
  • France cedes Iberia to Quebec.
  • Germany cedes the Russian cores to Russia.
  • Norway pays Japan tribute, either 100 oil/day for two years, or weekly transfers of 5000 until a total of 70k has been reached, at Japan's choice.

    A big complicated peace like this might best be done by edit; on the other hand it may be easier to sep-peace eg Norway and Russia at the start of the session, and move troops to the agreed demarcation lines before peacing the rest.

    Read my blog.
    Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
  • Gollevainen
    Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 8:58:39 PM
     Legatus legionis

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalAuthor of 50,000th Forum Post

    Joined: 4/5/2008
    Posts: 4,235
    Location: "I need zoo love!"
    Sissies!! To the Death!!



    Irsh Faq wrote:
    I've noted with Golle a trend of stirring up as much drama publicly as he can whenever he's up to something shady in the background. Presumably its a smokescreen strategy.
    Ulmont
    Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:14:52 PM
     Major General

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 12/13/2007
    Posts: 1,577
    Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Gollevainen wrote:
    Sissies!! To the Death!!


    Thumbs Up
    The Professor
    Posted: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:59:03 PM
     General of the Army

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/17/2007
    Posts: 8,437
    Location: Time
    King of Men wrote:
    The Alliance Against Asian Annoyances offers this peace, which all its members have agreed to:

  • Norway cedes England-south-of-Thames and the Norse Law to Japan. (As is, indeed, traditional when the Ynglings lose a war in this timeline. Big Grin )
  • Italy cedes St Helena to Japan.
  • France cedes Iberia to Quebec.
  • Germany cedes the Russian cores to Russia.
  • Norway pays Japan tribute, either 100 oil/day for two years, or weekly transfers of 5000 until a total of 70k has been reached, at Japan's choice.

    A big complicated peace like this might best be done by edit; on the other hand it may be easier to sep-peace eg Norway and Russia at the start of the session, and move troops to the agreed demarcation lines before peacing the rest.


  • Has Jakalo gotten back to you yet that I will be insisting on the 1945 Soviet Union borders? Since I wasn't apparently clear enough on the usage of the word "prefer" as it stands just getting back my cores leaves 2 areas in which Germany on the Prussian lands could attack me from which makes it extremely hard to defend that border exponentially increasing the chance of encirclement attacks.

    The lands in question are NOT German cores so Germany doesn't lose much.

    Their game can only exist to be won.
    Then so be it who else can see it done.
    danomite
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 12:03:04 AM
     Tribunus laticlavius

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 9/17/2008
    Posts: 2,768
    Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    The Professor wrote:
    Russians demanding more...


    WAR WAR WAR!

    It is said that the future is always born in pain. The history of war is the history of pain.
    If we are wise, what is born of that pain matures into the promise of a better world,
    because we learn that we can no longer afford the mistakes of the past.
    The Professor
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 12:12:34 AM
     General of the Army

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/17/2007
    Posts: 8,437
    Location: Time
    This is what I was demanding from the beginning.

    Their game can only exist to be won.
    Then so be it who else can see it done.
    danomite
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 1:35:03 AM
     Tribunus laticlavius

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 9/17/2008
    Posts: 2,768
    Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    The Professor wrote:
    This is what I was demanding from the beginning.
    You've been demanding war? Tongue

    It is said that the future is always born in pain. The history of war is the history of pain.
    If we are wise, what is born of that pain matures into the promise of a better world,
    because we learn that we can no longer afford the mistakes of the past.
    King of Men
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 1:53:45 AM
     Legatus legionis

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/23/2007
    Posts: 8,493
    Location: Nowhere
    Quote:
    Since I wasn't apparently clear enough on the usage of the word "prefer" as it stands just getting back my cores leaves 2 areas in which Germany on the Prussian lands could attack me from which makes it extremely hard to defend that border exponentially increasing the chance of encirclement attacks.


    Well, if you wanted extra territory you should have fought harder. As it is, the nation that did the least in this war is gaining the most. Honestly, I'd rather give Quebec extra provinces than Russia; the Quebecians fought hard in a lot of places. The Russians could just about maintain a fighting line from the Baltic down to Kiev, and at that it collapsed pretty nicely when Germany came knocking; only Asian troops saved it.

    Read my blog.
    Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
    The Professor
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:24:49 AM
     General of the Army

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/17/2007
    Posts: 8,437
    Location: Time
    King of Men wrote:
    Well, if you wanted extra territory you should have fought harder. As it is, the nation that did the least in this war is gaining the most. Honestly, I'd rather give Quebec extra provinces than Russia; the Quebecians fought hard in a lot of places. The Russians could just about maintain a fighting line from the Baltic down to Kiev, and at that it collapsed pretty nicely when Germany came knocking; only Asian troops saved it.


    Then lets continue the fighting for an extra session then, as it stands the German front was in full retreat when the session ended AND I am responsible for the destruction of 60 Norwegian divisions.

    You want Germany to hold those lands then we will probably have to continue the war for another session, of which Japan will certainly retaliate with nuclear weapons.

    So is not giving me 6 or so additional non german cores worth nuclear annihilation?

    Are you feeling lucky?

    Their game can only exist to be won.
    Then so be it who else can see it done.
    King of Men
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:32:44 AM
     Legatus legionis

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/23/2007
    Posts: 8,493
    Location: Nowhere
    Quote:
    Then lets continue the fighting for an extra session then, as it stands the German front was in full retreat when the session ended AND I am responsible for the destruction of 60 Norwegian divisions.


    That would be Shanxi, actually; and I would love to see what happens to that Russian front without Japanese troops. Now, if Junger was making additional demands, I would not feel particularly intransigent about it. As for nuclear weaponry, I notice that you're very free with promising retaliation using Japanese warheads. Brinksmanship is easy enough when the literal fallout won't be on your own head. I think Tokyo may feel a bit differently about it.

    Read my blog.
    Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
    Ulmont
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:34:38 AM
     Major General

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 12/13/2007
    Posts: 1,577
    Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    King of Men wrote:
    That would be Shanxi, actually


    Speaking of which, the Shaanxi sub would be quite happy to continue the fighting for another session rather than taking another boring retrenching session...
    The Professor
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:40:22 AM
     General of the Army

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/17/2007
    Posts: 8,437
    Location: Time
    King of Men wrote:
    That would be Shanxi, actually; and I would love to see what happens to that Russian front without Japanese troops. Now, if Junger was making additional demands, I would not feel particularly intransigent about it. As for nuclear weaponry, I notice that you're very free with promising retaliation using Japanese warheads. Brinksmanship is easy enough when the literal fallout won't be on your own head. I think Tokyo may feel a bit differently about it.


    We the alliance is fairly solid in our combined commitment in what our demands are, this isn't just me!russia demands but us!alliance demands, I am under the impression that Jakalo hasn't informed you of the adjusted clarified demands yet.

    Their game can only exist to be won.
    Then so be it who else can see it done.
    Varyar
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 10:43:22 AM
     Centurion

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 7/4/2008
    Posts: 868
    The Professor wrote:
    Has Jakalo gotten back to you yet that I will be insisting on the 1945 Soviet Union borders? Since I wasn't apparently clear enough on the usage of the word "prefer" as it stands just getting back my cores leaves 2 areas in which Germany on the Prussian lands could attack me from which makes it extremely hard to defend that border exponentially increasing the chance of encirclement attacks.

    The lands in question are NOT German cores so Germany doesn't lose much.

    If the EastAsian alliance truly care so much about giving the nation who has done the least and already getting most even more, then we are of course happy to renegotiate. Perhaps less oil, or less of the Norselaw to Japan?

    I will take your demands seriously when presented by Jakalo.
    Jakalo
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 11:36:20 AM
     Hauptmann

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 8/12/2009
    Posts: 369
    Location: Ogre, Latvia
    The Professor wrote:
    Then lets continue the fighting for an extra session then, as it stands the German front was in full retreat when the session ended AND I am responsible for the destruction of 60 Norwegian divisions.

    You want Germany to hold those lands then we will probably have to continue the war for another session, of which Japan will certainly retaliate with nuclear weapons.

    So is not giving me 6 or so additional non german cores worth nuclear annihilation?

    Are you feeling lucky?


    Blayne I would like you didnt point Japanese nuclear warheads at every single conversation. Especially so against Malaysia.

    Regarding this situation I suggest you graciously let Germans keep these provinces as although this is no popularity contest as you have observed accepting lenient peace terms can make you future ally while occupying more of his land will surely escalate in conflict when you are most vulnerable.

    Especially so because this kind of look like naked attempt at opportunism.

    If you can`t do something smart, do something right.

    Frosty wrote:
    Great Strategic Master Jakalo.

    We should all heed to deep wisdom revealed by ancient one.
    King of Men
    Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010 9:10:23 PM
     Legatus legionis

    One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

    Joined: 11/23/2007
    Posts: 8,493
    Location: Nowhere
    Ok, Russian cores (including the French ones) + Iasi + Beltsy.

    Hurrah! Hurrah! For peace and home, hurrah!
    Hurrah for The Bonnie White Flag that ends this cruel war.

    Read my blog.
    Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
    Users browsing this topic
    Guest


    Forum Jump
    You cannot post new topics in this forum.
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
    You cannot create polls in this forum.
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

    Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.0 (NET v2.0) - 10/10/2006
    Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
    Copyright © 2005-2007 Daniel "Lord Ederon" Scibrany. All rights reserved.