Here's Wikipedia:
The claim that Frederic Remington, on assignment to Cuba in 1897, telegraphed William Randolph Hearst that "There will be no war. I wish to return" and that Hearst responded, "Please remain. You furnish the pictures, and I'll furnish the war" is unsubstantiated. This anecdote was originally included in a book by James Creelman, though there is no evidence that the telegraph exchange ever happened, and substantial evidence that it did not.
My apologies if I gave offense.
But I reiterate that our choices inform characterization. If this is a route you consciously choose to go, *le shrug* feel free to vote for it.
It just seems fair to point out that is an endpoint of that entire action-chain. Worse if we fail and get caught at it.
That's fine. I don't mind if you have a problem with a plan but I don't think haranguing each individual who votes for a plan you don't like is a good idea.
On the merits, I don't mind Mira developing some sharp elbows to throw around in domestic politics. We're not assassinating dissidents here. I think the plan is also fairly clear in that we're going for discrediting instead of straightforward dismantling via diplomacy largely on the basis of action efficiency. If Mira develops a personality that is willing to cut corners a bit rather than stand on ceremony during a crisis, I am also fine with that.
I like the idea of Plan Brogatar except for two things. I'd rather switch Pierce the Veil with the counter intel action that lets us passively monitor our economy for future crashes and gives our analysts experience by working on our current one. That's because for something like Pierce the Veil, even if it's only a bonus +8, I'd rather pick it at a time where we can dedicate a personal action to it. Secondly I'm leery and on the fence for the Release Assets action. Given I haven't kept up with the thread discussion I'm unsure how most people feel about it but reducing our income by 90% sort of sounds like it puts us in the major negatives when it comes to funding everything we have going on. I don't think Diamonds in the Rough winning helps us either; why are we going with the long term benefit option that has high short term costs instead of the short term benefit option again? My only though about how that won is that maybe there was an argument about it providing more jobs or something?
This is flat-out wrong. Not only is it flat-out wrong, I've made contrary statements -- to you personally -- within the last ten pages.
People bitched and bitched, in this quest and my other one, about thread discussion and player input affecting the PC's rationale, and I got tired of it. Now the thread gets no input on player mindset; I decide everything according to whatever rationale appeals to me at the moment. Unless a vote specifically calls out a mindset for Mira to take -- and even then, that's the kind of write-in I'd moderate heavily, if I allowed it at all -- it means nothing for Mira's thoughts. I decide everything.
@PoptartProdigy , a question I can't remember others asking. The quarians are likely stuck with us for a long time, possibly a generation or more. Are there any plans among the quarians to start families in their rachni-imposed exile?
Long-term, yes, Malan does have some plans to relax regulations. He is hoping that you manage to re-establish some kind of secure relay connection to the Republic first, though.
This is flat-out wrong. Not only is it flat-out wrong, I've made contrary statements -- to you personally -- within the last ten pages.
People bitched and bitched, in this quest and my other one, about thread discussion and player input affecting the PC's rationale, and I got tired of it. Now the thread gets no input on player mindset; I decide everything according to whatever rationale appeals to me at the moment. Unless a vote specifically calls out a mindset for Mira to take -- and even then, that's the kind of write-in I'd moderate heavily, if I allowed it at all -- it means nothing for Mira's thoughts. I decide everything.
I think what he means is that, as you explicitly told us, some decisions Mira makes indicate that Mira is making them for what are to you certain specific reasons.
For example, "if Mira voted against letting the FDO control a planetary mining colony, it must be because she doesn't trust the leader of the FDO, because otherwise surely she wouldn't have gone against all her economic advisers saying it was an efficient thing to do."
He's not saying that discussion influences the PC's reasons for making decisions, he's saying that the outcomes of votes, in effect, influence that reasoning.
If we repeatedly voted for actions that involved Mira imposing more and more of a dictatorship on Virmire, we can only imagine that you'd presumably portray Mira as becoming more and more of a dictator, justifying these measures to herself as necessary, getting a bit more paranoid about enemies of the state, being more ready to consider suppressing 'enemies' and so on. Because otherwise, there would be no rational in-character explanation for Mira's actions, and you've always written (the bulk of) your characters as rational beings driven by internally coherent motives.
[X]Plan Viking HO!
-[X]Martial 1: Army Reform:
-[X]Martial 2: Slash Naval Production:
-[X]Diplomacy 1: Regularize Special Addresses:
-[X]Diplomacy 2: Cut Them Off At The Knees:
-[X]Stewardship 1: Partial Nationalization:
-[X]Stewardship 2: Unemployment Benefits:
-[X]Intrigue 1: Spies, Analyze Thyself:
-[X]Learning 1: Line of Succession:
--[X]Double Down
-[X]Personal 1: Personal Attention Army Reform
-[X]Personal 2: Personal Attention Regularize Special Addresses
-[X]Personal 3: Personal Attention Cut Them Off At The Knees
Time to face facts.
We are not a first-rate power. If we ever become one it will be some time in the future.
We cannot afford to maintain a first-rate fleet. Our economy is buckling.
Time to accept that and stabilize at a smaller fleet.
The entire point of raiding doctrine is to shred Rachni logistics so that they cannot bring to bear on our -necessarily- smaller fleet.
We cannot raid while our fleet is tied down patrolling Rachni colonies.
We must train up our army and send it to make those patrols unnecessary.
Also - while this will not produce the massive casualties I advocated - it will bring in the loot of an industrialized civilization.
Time to face facts.
We are not a first-rate power. If we ever become one it will be some time in the future.
We cannot afford to maintain a first-rate fleet. Our economy is buckling.
Time to accept that and stabilize at a smaller fleet.
1) We're not maintaining a first-rate fleet. We're maintaining a second-rate fleet.
2) There are potentially other ways to stabilize the economy. I'm not saying that it isn't one method of doing so, but it's not the only method.
Fine. Time to face facts.
We have a second-rate fleet.
We are not a first-rate power. If we ever become one it will be some time in the future.
We cannot afford to build up to or maintain a first-rate fleet. Our economy is buckling.
Time to accept that and stabilize at a smaller fleet.
The entire point of raiding doctrine is to shred Rachni logistics so that they cannot bring to bear on our -necessarily- smaller fleet.
We cannot raid while our fleet is tied down patrolling Rachni colonies.
We must train up our army and send it to make those patrols unnecessary.
Stabilizing the economy is secondary, necessary but not sufficient.
Our objective is to not get eaten.
SAGrognard, while I'm not actually sure your plan is a bad plan, your argument is terrible.
The goal is to not get eaten. But that doesn't mean your ideas for not getting eaten are the best, or the only, ideas. If we don't stabilize the economy, no other strategy of ours can save us from getting eaten forever; we need Virmire's economy to remain stable or growing in order to defend ourselves against the (stable or growing) rachni economy. So upgrading the army is also not sufficient. Because we cannot guarantee that the fleet size we have will be adequate to secure us for long against rachni who are tired of being raided.
Though I suppose it depends in part on our capital ship count... I'm a bit hazy on how many battlecruisers and dreadnoughts we actually have.
SAGrognard, while I'm not actually sure your plan is a bad plan, your argument is terrible.
The goal is to not get eaten. But that doesn't mean your ideas for not getting eaten are the best, or the only, ideas. If we don't stabilize the economy, no other strategy of ours can save us from getting eaten forever; we need Virmire's economy to remain stable or growing in order to defend ourselves against the (stable or growing) rachni economy. So upgrading the army is also not sufficient. Because we cannot guarantee that the fleet size we have will be adequate to secure us for long against rachni who are tired of being raided.
Though I suppose it depends in part on our capital ship count... I'm a bit hazy on how many battlecruisers and dreadnoughts we actually have.
Too many ships of all classes.
I don't actually claim to be a skilled politician expert at swaying opinion with honeyed words, so terrible argument is par for the course.
The difference between us is you see the economy as the driver, fix that and ripple to being stronger eventually.
You may well be right.
I see the situation where if the Rachni decide to go minimum force on other fronts and commit decisive against us we cannot stop them.
We committed to a raiding strategy, intending to shred Rachni logistics so that they cannot bring to bear.
It is not 'tired of being raided', it is 'cannot mass to kill because of being raided'.
We are not currently raiding, because we are patrolling.
If they decide to kill us, we die.
We MUST deal with those colonies. Glass them, conquer them, irrelevant.
My concession to the economy focused types is to conquer and loot them.
As a general notice, folks, I've tweaked the income hit on, "Release Assets." It now multiplies income by 0.1 immediately, without imposing a constant, ongoing multiplier. Thus, the initial hit is the same, but later costs or improvements will work as normal. In addition, this hit will in and of itself improve somewhat over time.
Question: Is it applied after all the subtractions from the yearly income from other actions in this turn (or whatever turn we take it), or before?
Edit: Also, I presume it increases the income hit to a .05 multiplier if we Double Down on Release Assets?
As a general notice, folks, I've tweaked the income hit on, "Release Assets." It now multiplies income by 0.1 immediately, without imposing a constant, ongoing multiplier. Thus, the initial hit is the same, but later costs or improvements will work as normal. In addition, this hit will in and of itself improve somewhat over time.
Too many ships of all classes.
I don't actually claim to be a skilled politician expert at swaying opinion with honeyed words, so terrible argument is par for the course.
It's not about honeyed words, it's about logic. One raiding fleet, or even two or so, isn't going to be enough to stop the rachni permanently if they become determined to get rid of us. If we don't gain the ability to keep expanding the fleet, offensive operations will result in us taking painful losses and we won't be able to replace them, making our doctrine useless in the long run. In the short term we'll sting the rachni, and in the long term they'll gather up enough brute force to crush us with carefully guarded supply lines.
We need to be able to keep building ships. Raiding doctrine does not make us immune to that need.
Furthermore, we have no evidence that what's hurting us is the cost of maintaining the ships we have. We are being very clearly told that reducing the size of our shipbuilding industry is a viable way to break out of the recession. We don't need to downsize the fleet, we just can't keep expanding it this fast, without expanding the underlying civilian economy.
The difference between us is you see the economy as the driver, fix that and ripple to being stronger eventually.
You may well be right.
I see the situation where if the Rachni decide to go minimum force on other fronts and commit decisive against us we cannot stop them.
We committed to a raiding strategy, intending to shred Rachni logistics so that they cannot bring to bear.
It is not 'tired of being raided', it is 'cannot mass to kill because of being raided'.
Do you really think we have the military strength to make that happen reliably? If we do, it'll be because of a lot of shipbuilding.
See, you're reading "we have a doctrine that intends to do X" as "we can unfailingly do X, and doing X is our only chance of survival." The problem is, if we don't have the force to accomplish the objective X, it doesn't matter whether we have a doctrine or not. Raiding doctrine, like all other doctrines, relies on the enemy not being able to muster enough force to wear down your strength by attrition- because raiders are subject to attrition losses.
We are not currently raiding, because we are patrolling.
If they decide to kill us, we die.
We MUST deal with those colonies. Glass them, conquer them, irrelevant.
My concession to the economy focused types is to conquer and loot them.
Do you really expect the rachni- some of the most famously tenacious defensive fighters in Mass Effect history- to leave behind enough useful industrial equipment for "looting" them to be worthwhile?
Okay, I'm not deleting 'Send In the Marines' because as written it's a plan some people value for specific reasons. But now that I realize the income malus to "Release Assets" is flat rather than ongoing... I think I'll take it over sacrificing naval production.
[X] Send the Marines AND the Ships
-[X] Marine Expansion: ... Time: 2 years. Cost: 50,000 credits. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] War Games: Cost: 20,000 credits Time: 1 year Chance of Success: 75%
-[X] Destroy Racial Governments: ... Time: 1 year. Cost: 25,000 credits; +5,000 yearly income... Chance of Success: 80%.
-[X] Regularize Special Addresses: Time: 1 year. Cost: -20,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] Public Works Projects: ... Time: Continuous until canceled, locked for duration. Chance of Success: 70%, rolled every year. Cost: -40,000 yearly income for duration of option.
-[X] Release Assets: ... Time: Indeterminate. Chance of Success: (Cumulative roll). Cost: Multiply yearly income by a factor of 0.1 immediately.
-[X] Spies, Analyze Thyself: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: -25,000 yearly income.
-[X] Line of Succession: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: 5,000 10,000 credits.
--[X] Double Down
-[X] Personal Attention: Marine Expansion
-[x] Personal Attention: Public Works Projects
-[X] Personal Attention: Regularize Special Addresses
YES, I am sacrificing "unemployment benefits." This is because I fully expect releasing assets to further lower unemployment. And for public works to indirectly lower unemployment in the next few years even if the bulk of the grunt work is being done by, well, grunts.
In real life I am a major supporter of a liberal (pun intended) program of unemployment benefits, for both personal-historical and political reasons. But given the weirdness of our action economy, I think it takes second priority to focusing on rebuilding the overall economy. Note that this parallels, for instance, the US response to the Great Depression. FDR focused more on jobs programs and restarting the economy; it wasn't until the Johnson administration and the War on Poverty that widespread government benefits and welfare became the norm. Given that we started this recession with almost totally laissez-faire attitudes prevailing, modified only by the critical need to nationalize war industry to build military equipment, I feel like we're doing okay.
Question: Is it applied after all the subtractions from the yearly income from other actions in this turn (or whatever turn we take it), or before?
Edit: Also, I presume it increases the income hit to a .05 multiplier if we Double Down on Release Assets?
That's fine. I don't mind if you have a problem with a plan but I don't think haranguing each individual who votes for a plan you don't like is a good idea.
I'm really not.
Note that I've not actually said anything about Plan Brogatyr, even though the math is wrong.
Again, I apologize for any offence I may have caused.
On the merits, I don't mind Mira developing some sharp elbows to throw around in domestic politics. We're not assassinating dissidents here. I think the plan is also fairly clear in that we're going for discrediting instead of straightforward dismantling via diplomacy largely on the basis of action efficiency. If Mira develops a personality that is willing to cut corners a bit rather than stand on ceremony during a crisis, I am also fine with that.
Thing is, these aren't just sharp elbows, or playing hardball; we've done this before, when we flatout fired everyone and prosecuted almost everyone in a government ministry and began from scratch. That had long term consequences vis a vis the business community, which is still scared of us, but it was legal.
The specific option you call out is characterized as flat out illegal, and with Consequences on a regular failure.
[ ] Sabotage Racial Governments: The vestigial racial governments are making renewed plays for prominence. This is not the time. You do not have the luxury of people who will use this crisis to enrich themselves. Order Intelligence Division to get to work in ensuring that prominent figures' more legally-actionable indiscretions have a habit of coming to light, and otherwise ruining their careers. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 75%. Cost: 35,000 credits. Effect: Use your Ministry of Intelligence to sabotage your political opponents in the racial governments. Very illegal.Consequences on a regular failure or worse.
That's why I pointed it out in particular, so that it wouldn't be missed.
This is flat-out wrong. Not only is it flat-out wrong, I've made contrary statements -- to you personally -- within the last ten pages.
People bitched and bitched, in this quest and my other one, about thread discussion and player input affecting the PC's rationale, and I got tired of it. Now the thread gets no input on player mindset; I decide everything according to whatever rationale appeals to me at the moment. Unless a vote specifically calls out a mindset for Mira to take -- and even then, that's the kind of write-in I'd moderate heavily, if I allowed it at all -- it means nothing for Mira's thoughts. I decide everything.
...please don't call me, "Boss."
There is no existing agency to handle this. She already explicitly ruled so, just a year ago. Per the option for which you all voted, her stated reasoning was that she decided that it was a bad precedent to set, politically. There has been nothing to make her change her mind on that score.
My other quest has taught me how very volatile players get when they learn that their discussion or reasoning impacts the PC's reasoning. I have learned to set a consistent, internally-determined mindset for the PC. And Mira's internal mindset is, "putting this under the FDO along with everything else is a bad precedent to set." This is a decision she made in context of every financial expert in her government screaming at her to do something else. She already had access to all those financial arguments you've outlined above. She has not come across any new information. Her reasoning was political. She trusts Virani no more now than she did last year. This may change after a little while of running this separated office, but if it will, that hasn't yet happened. On a meta level, I don't like the whole, "Vote for a thing, now immediately vote against the thing for which we just voted," phenomenon. It is annoying from the QM's perspective.
You have. But that doesn't matter. People made it very clear to me how they felt about player discussion influencing PC mindset. Consequently, that doesn't happen anymore. The reasoning was in the option, and I was very clear that nobody in your government saw financial grounds to refuse Virani. I'm not going to walk this back for you all.
My apologies if I gave offense. But I reiterate that our choices inform characterization. If this is a route you consciously choose to go, *le shrug* feel free to vote for it.
It just seems fair to point out that is an endpoint of that entire action-chain. Worse if we fail and get caught at it.
Not player discussion; player choices.
I don't find it unreasonable to assert that a deliberate choice on Mira's part to do something you specifically call out as very illegal by going beyond even her own expansive War powers would be a significant characterization inflection point, even in the event of success.
Am I wrong? Have I mischaracterized you or your GM policy in any way?
If I have, I would appreciate correction.
============================================================================================================================
Hard data I recall was at the 1st Nebula Expanse battle, where our forces were compared thus to the 34% Quarian fleet:
You now control the AB-NE relay. The 3rd RWF is at LONG range to the Rachni's in-system fleet, and have not yet committed to a melee. They are reporting significant combat damage and crew exhaustion, but remain combat-capable and desperate. Counting you and the RWF, you outnumber the Rachni forces 4:3, with you and the RWF each roughly the same size. The RWF is down to two dreadnoughts. The Rachni have six dreadnoughts in-system. The 1st Battle Fleet has seven battlecruisers.
Where the size of a Battle Fleet is 2x. Size of a Raiding Fleet is ~x. 1st Battle Fleet is at 77% strength. 1st Raiding Fleet is at 70% strength.
0.77 1st Battle Fleet + 0.7 1st Raiding Fleet = 0.77*2x + 0.7*x = 2.24x
Approximately 110% the size of a Battle Fleet.
Therefore we're sending somewhere around the numerical strength of a full battle fleet into the Nubian Expanse.
At that time, the 70% 1st Raiding Fleet had 2 battlecruisers.
I assume a full-strength raiding fleet has ~3-4 BCs at full strength.
Given as the Quarian 3RWF has two dreadnoughts at a strength of 34%, and given the Rachni fleet we destroyed in Resurgent Grace, I've been assuming a standard galactic battle fleet runs somewhere around 5-6 dreadnoughts or so.
We use battlecruisers as well as dreads, so I'm not sure what the exact proportions are for a Virmirean battlefleet.
But we know the First Battle Fleet had seven battlecruisers at the Nebula Expanse engagement, and was only at 77% strength. It currently has at least one dreadnought, and is at 87% strength.
It's safe to assume we have at least ten battlecruisers and at least one dreadnought at the moment.
Eleven capitals. That's up from 3 capitals at Turn 10 IIRC.
Counting the battlecruiser we lost, we've been averaging at least one new capital a year since we kicked the Rachni out of Attican Beta.
In real life I am a major supporter of a liberal (pun intended) program of unemployment benefits, for both personal-historical and political reasons. But given the weirdness of our action economy, I think it takes second priority to focusing on rebuilding the overall economy. Note that this parallels, for instance, the US response to the Great Depression. FDR focused more on jobs programs and restarting the economy; it wasn't until the Johnson administration and the War on Poverty that widespread government benefits and welfare became the norm. Given that we started this recession with almost totally laissez-faire attitudes prevailing, modified only by the critical need to nationalize war industry to build military equipment, I feel like we're doing okay.
Yet, to my knowledge, FDR established Social Security in 1935.
Unemployment insurance, pensions for seniors, welfare benefits for handicapped and needy children.
Johnson expanded it, but FDR set them up.
Regarding the US response to the Great Depression and the Works Progress Administration:
The goal of the WPA was to employ most of the unemployed people on relief until the economy recovered. Harry Hopkins testified to Congress in January 1935 why he set the number at 3.5 million, using Federal Emergency Relief Administration data. Estimating costs at $1,200 per worker per year ($21.4 thousand in present-day terms[23]), he asked for and received $4 billion ($71.4 billion in present-day terms[23]). Many women were employed, but they were few compared to men.
In 1935 there were 20 million people on relief in the United States. Of these, 8.3 million were children under 16 years of age; 3.8 million were persons between the ages of 16 and 65 who were not working or seeking work. These included housewives, students in school, and incapacitated persons. Another 750,000 were person age 65 or over.[24]:562 Thus, of the total of 20 million persons then receiving relief, 13 million were not considered eligible for employment. This left a total of 7 million presumably employable persons between the ages of 16 and 65 inclusive. Of these, however, 1.65 million were said to be farm operators or persons who had some non-relief employment, while another 350,000 were, despite the fact that they were already employed or seeking work, considered incapacitated. Deducting this 2 million from the total of 7.15 million, there remained 5.15 million persons age 16 to 65, unemployed, looking for work, and able to work.[24]:562
The WPA allegedly employed 3.3 million at it's peak in 1938.
The 1938 US population then was ~130 million.
Note there were similar programs for writers, musicians, artiste, the works.
A significant aspect of the Works Progress Administration was the Federal Project Number One, which had five different parts: the Federal Art Project, the Federal Music Project, the Federal Theatre Project, the Federal Writers Project, and the Historical Records Survey. The government wanted to provide new federal cultural support instead of just providing direct grants to private institutions. After only one year, over 40,000 artists and other talented workers had been employed through this project in the United States.[31] Cedric Larson stated that "The impact made by the five major cultural projects of the WPA upon the national consciousness is probably greater in toto than anyone readily realizes. As channels of communication between the administration and the country at large, both directly and indirectly, the importance of these projects cannot be overestimated, for they all carry a tremendous appeal to the eye, the ear, or the intellect—or all three."[32]:491
Adhoc vote count started by uju32 on May 19, 2018 at 12:24 AM, finished with 99 posts and 40 votes.
[X]Plan Guns And Butter
-[X]Martial 1: Marine Expansion: 50,000 credits: 2 years: DC 31 - Minister 11 = DC20
-[X]Martial 2: War Games: 20,000 credits: 1 year: DC26 - Minister 11 = DC15
-[X]Diplomacy 1: Regularize Special Addresses: -20,000 yearly Income: 1 year: DC 31 - Minister 11 - PA16 = DC4
-[X]Diplomacy 2: Cut Them Off At The Knees: 25,000 credits: 1 year: DC46 - Minister 11 - PA16 = DC19
-[X]Stewardship 1: Public Works Projects: -40,000 yearly Income: Locked for duration: DC31 - Minister 12 - PA 18 = DC1
-[X]Stewardship 2: Unemployment Benefits: -15,000 yearly Income: 1 year: DC 26 - Minister 12 = DC14
-[X]Intrigue 1: Spies, Analyze Thyself: -25,000 yearly Income: 1 year: DC21 - Minister 12= DC9
-[X]Learning 1: Line of Succession: 5,000 *2: 1 year: DC21 - Minister 44 = DC-23(Autosuccess)
--[X]Double Down
-[X]Personal 1: Personal Attention Public Works Projects
-[X]Personal 2: Personal Attention Regularize Special Addresses
-[X]Personal 3: Personal Attention Cut Them Off At The Knees
[X] Plan Send In The Marines
-[X] Marine Expansion: ... Time: 2 years. Cost: 50,000 credits. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] Slash Naval Production: ... Time: 1 year. Cost: Naval production cut in half (this is how much you need to cut in order to have any actual effect; no lawyering). Chance of Success: 100%.
-[X] Destroy Racial Governments: ... Time: 1 year. Cost: 25,000 credits; +5,000 yearly income... Chance of Success: 80%.
-[X] Regularize Special Addresses: Time: 1 year. Cost: -20,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] Public Works Projects: ... Time: Continuous until canceled, locked for duration. Chance of Success: 70%, rolled every year. Cost: -40,000 yearly income for duration of option.
-[X] Unemployment Benefits: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 75%. Cost: -15,000 yearly income for duration of crisis. Nobody will starve in unemployment.
-[X] Spies, Analyze Thyself: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: -25,000 yearly income.
-[X] Line of Succession: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: 5,000 10,000 credits.
--[X]Double Down
-[X] Personal Attention: Marine Expansion
-[x] Personal Attention: Public Works Projects
-[X] Personal Attention: Regularize Special Addresses
[X] Plan Brogatar
-[X] War Games: The Navy has fully adopted Beshkarian doctrine, but yet lacks experience in the applications. Fortunately, you have another fleet hanging around with which you can practice. Ask Fleet Admiral Kassa'Malan if he will participate in a series of war games to test Beshkarian doctrine. Time: 1 year. Cost: 20,000 credits, can do nothing else with fleets this year. Chance of Success: 75%. Effect: Run a series of war games with the 3rd Rannoch War Fleet, with them as the defenders and your fleets as the attackers, and get some experience in the particulars of executing the particulars of Beshkarian Doctrine before having to apply them in combat. DC 25 - 22 (adv) = DC 3
-[X] Slash Naval Production: Virtually all of your orbital industry is naval at this point. You need that production...but so do your civilians. Time: 1 year. Cost: Naval production cut in half (this is how much you need to cut in order to have any actual effect; no lawyering). Chance of Success: 100%. Effect: Release active military industry to the civilian market at the cost of naval production. Improves civilian economy slower than the, "Release Assets," Stewardship option, but does not require a massive income hit and does reliably improve the civilian economy.
-[X] Regularize Special Addresses: DC 30 Your special addresses brought a sense of governmental transparency and stability that greatly bolstered the public's willingness to listen to you. This seems like a tradition worth establishing. Time: 1 year. Cost: -20,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 70%. Effect: Regularize special addresses on a less frequent schedule, improving the ability of the Prime Minister to interact with the Assembly and the populace at large. As a side effect, grants a rather significant and unmatchable incumbent's bonus during election years due to the exclusive platform. DC 30 - 21 (adv) -16 (pa) = DC -7 Auto Success
-[X] Hard Times, Hard Decisions: This is going to be a rough few years. You need to impress on the people that things will get worse before they get better, but that they will get better...if they're willing to endure the worse. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 55%. Cost: 20,000 credits. Effect: Bolster the public's willingness to endure harsh government measures towards fixing this crisis, lessening the impact of any unpopular decisions you make over the next few years .
-[X] Unemployment Benefits: The problem you face is a lack of consumer goods for the population you have. Providing benefits to the inevitable unemployed won't do anything about that, but it'll at least make sure that everybody can get their hands on food -- of which you do have enough. The Passage of the Army Expansion Act means that there are far fewer people going unfed, reducing the cost of this option, although your civilian industry shortfall remains as urgent a problem. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 75%. Cost: -15,000 yearly income for duration of crisis. Nobody will starve in unemployment. DC 25 - 23 (adv) = DC 2
-[X] Release Assets: Virmire actually has plenty of industrial assets going, "spare." The issue is that they're mobilized to your control rather than the civilian population's. Now that you've handled the initial response to the crash, releasing these assets is probably one of your better options to start turning things around, as you really don't have a faster way to get industry back under civilian control and producing goods for them. The issue is...doing this has a cost: those assets will not be available to you again until the situation stabilizes and the economy recovers. Time: Indeterminate. Chance of Success: Rolled every year until the cumulative result reaches , with natural 1's inflicting negative progress. Cost: Multiply yearly income by a factor of 0.1; the factor will rise as the option progresses until disappearing entirely at the option's completion. Effect: Release the various assets to which the government has an exclusive claim back to civilian control, giving the civilian economy the shot in the arm it needs to begin making up its crushing shortfalls in a normal manner. DC ??? 23 (adv) + 18 (pa) = ??? Personal attention each turn is a must
-[X] Piercing the Veil: The MoI, to be frank, is completely obscure to you. It came with the job, as a condition of the job, and you get the impression that Shurna was never much more open with Kerak than she is with you. That said, you think you've earned her respect, and a modicum of loyalty. Certainly, the two of you have a good working relationship. Maybe if you ask real nice, she'll open up to you about how her Ministry actually works. Honestly, she'd better, because you have no idea how you'd go about circumventing that were she disinclined to tell you. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success ? (Rolled with Mira's Intrigue score alone, no hero or minister bonuses applicable). Cost: Free. Effect: Ask Shurna to pretty please tell you how your intelligence ministry works. DC ??? +8 = ???
-[X] Line of Succession: Durrahe Korun will die at some point in the next ten years. After he is dead, you will need to fill his position. He has compiled a list of candidates, and is willing to mentor one in preparation for the transition. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: 5,000 credits. Effect: Go over the list of candidates for the position of Minister of the Sciences and select one to succeed Durrahe when he dies. Durrahe will mentor his replacement and begin easing them into a more active role in the Ministry in preparation for the transfer of power. Reduces or even eliminates shortfalls of a death succession, depending
-[X] Personal Attention: Hard Times Hard Decisions
-[X] Personal Attention: Release Assets
-[X] Personal Attention: Regularize Special Addresses
[X] Plan Preparing for Pelenor field
-[X] War Games. Time: 1 year. Cost: 20,000 credits, can do nothing else with fleets this year. Chance of Success: 75%
-[X] Army Reform. Time: 3 years. Cost: -35,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 60%
-[X] Regularize Special Addresses: Time: 1 year. Cost: -20,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] Cut Them Off At the Knees. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 55% (she might decide to refuse your invitation, after all). Cost: 25,000 credits
-[X] Unemployment Benefits. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 75%. Cost: -15,000 yearly income for duration of crisis
-[X] Release Assets. Time: Indeterminate. Chance of Success: Rolled every year until the cumulative result reaches , with natural 1's inflicting negative progress. Cost: Multiply yearly income by a factor of 0.1 immediately. Income will slowly recover over time. Personally, I don't think it will be that slow given the bonuses we got
-[X] Sabotage Racial Governments. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 75%. Cost: 35,000 credits
-[X] Line of Succession. Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: 5,000 credits
--[x] DD
-[X] Personal Attention: War Games
-[X] Personal Attention: Army Reform
-[X] Commit Hero Unit (Kurik, Sabotage Racial Governments)
[X]Plan Viking HO!
-[X]Martial 1: Army Reform:
-[X]Martial 2: Slash Naval Production:
-[X]Diplomacy 1: Regularize Special Addresses:
-[X]Diplomacy 2: Cut Them Off At The Knees:
-[X]Stewardship 1: Partial Nationalization:
-[X]Stewardship 2: Unemployment Benefits:
-[X]Intrigue 1: Spies, Analyze Thyself:
-[X]Learning 1: Line of Succession:
--[X]Double Down
-[X]Personal 1: Personal Attention Army Reform
-[X]Personal 2: Personal Attention Regularize Special Addresses
-[X]Personal 3: Personal Attention Cut Them Off At The Knees
[X] Send the Marines AND the Ships
-[X] Marine Expansion: ... Time: 2 years. Cost: 50,000 credits. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] War Games: Cost: 20,000 credits Time: 1 year Chance of Success: 75%
-[X] Destroy Racial Governments: ... Time: 1 year. Cost: 25,000 credits; +5,000 yearly income... Chance of Success: 80%.
-[X] Regularize Special Addresses: Time: 1 year. Cost: -20,000 yearly income. Chance of Success: 70%.
-[X] Public Works Projects: ... Time: Continuous until canceled, locked for duration. Chance of Success: 70%, rolled every year. Cost: -40,000 yearly income for duration of option.
-[X] Release Assets: ... Time: Indeterminate. Chance of Success: (Cumulative roll). Cost: Multiply yearly income by a factor of 0.1 immediately.
-[X] Spies, Analyze Thyself: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: -25,000 yearly income.
-[X] Line of Succession: ... Time: 1 year. Chance of Success: 80%. Cost: 5,000 10,000 credits.
--[X]Double Down
-[X] Personal Attention: Marine Expansion
-[x] Personal Attention: Public Works Projects
-[X] Personal Attention: Regularize Special Addresses
*blinks slowly*
This is what you told me:
In the light of those replies, this is what I said to @jacobk:
Not player discussion; player choices.
I don't find it unreasonable to assert that a deliberate choice on Mira's part to do something you specifically call out as very illegal by going beyond even her own expansive War powers would be a significant characterization inflection point, even in the event of success.
Am I wrong? Have I mischaracterized you or your GM policy in any way?
If I have, I would appreciate correction.
For one thing, I don't personally see Mira doing something very illegal to be remotely out of character at the moment, so if you did go for that, it would change her character not at all.
More than that, though, I have had it made very clear to me that players hate it when them doing something has second-or-above-order consequences on PC characterization. Thus, I determine what's going through Mira's head when she picks an option. Regardless of how any given option might logically impact her characterization, it would be a grave mistake to assume that the player base has any consistent indirect influence on her character. In short, I object -- strongly -- to your characterization of player choice having impacts on Mira as a paradigm. It does not.
You still feel the effects through Turn 21; thus, the income hit keeps coming through that year. As you said, eight years of effect. That effect will be removed for Turn 22.
[X] Send the Marines AND the Ships
Getting rid of the unemployment action is positive for me.
But I'll still hedge my bets.
[X] Plan Send In The Marines
For one thing, I don't personally see Mira doing something very illegal to be remotely out of character at the moment, so if you did go for that, it would change her character not at all.
You still feel the effects through Turn 21; thus, the income hit keeps coming through that year. As you said, eight years of effect. That effect will be removed for Turn 22.
To be absolutely clear about this:
Is it the Income at the beginning of Turn 22 that should have the Fun Coupons penalty removed?
Or is it the Income at the end of Turn 22 that should have the Fun Coupons penalty removed?
Sorry, but I want to have it absolutely clear in my head.
Okay then. Noted for future reference.
To be absolutely clear about this:
Is it the Income at the beginning of Turn 22 that should have the Fun Coupons penalty removed?
Or is it the Income at the end of Turn 22 that should have the Fun Coupons penalty removed?
Sorry, but I want to have it absolutely clear in my head.
Given the way I calculate income -- namely, that changes are effective as of the year they are applied, and apply in full to that year's income -- to remove the Fun Coupons in Year 21 would be to have only seven years of effect. This thus means that Fun Coupons runs for years 14-21 before concluding in year 22. This is also a particular case in that this is, to start with, an adjusted-duration option.
In any event, the plan has always been for it to conclude in Year 22, and it has been labeled as such in the Status Screen ever since I got around to adding the Learning section some in-game years ago.
To be fair, this IS the woman who originally took power in a military coup because her corrupt hack of a predecessor was going to get them all killed with his stupidity and incompetence. If she thinks she needs to break a law to Get Shit Done, she will break a(nother) law. If she acts with respect for laws when it's inconvenient, it's because she's sat down and made a considered decision that the long term consequences of lawbreaking will be worse. Which, to be fair, is easy to do when you're an asari who fully expects to live in the civilization 200 years from now that was created by the precedents you set today.
