The Practice War [Complete]
- Thread starter Snowfire
- Start date
- Original Sci-Fi
- Location
- Somewhere out there
I don't think that's the piece of information we need to worry about. The fact that we've met with the G6 at all is enough to bring fire down on all of our heads, and disseminating information about War Fleet tactics and weaknesses would certainly seal the deal. OpSec is the name of the game right now: The information we're sharing here must not under any circumstances leak out, and EVERYONE knows that. That's why we're building Clarion.
Regarding Plan Sweettalker:
Incidentally I feel that we've knocked it out of the park enough with the Marionettes that they're likely to ally with us whichever plan we choose; I got the impression that Amanda's Reverie with Lorelli has bonded the two species in a rather transcendent way, and we're only beginning to see the repercussions. The Cich'swa are described as so divided I wouldn't be surprised to see @Snowfire just flip a coin to decide if they go along or not.
Regarding Plan All In:
I guess the decision ought to lie with whether we want to focus on motivating the groups who already want to go after the Shiplords, or if we want to focus on trying to reassure and court the groups who are reluctant to join our crusade. Do we Sweet Talk a subset of the groups, or to we go All In and try to get everyone on our side? I can't really say that with any certainty, because I just don't have the best sense for how much or how little each member of the G6 is tracking with what we're saying. @Snowfire, does Amanda and the rest of the diplomatic team have a feel for each of the delegations' dispositions that you could give us?
Yes, this is why I've been wavering over possibly supporting this plan over my own proposal: not because the plan tries to create a bond over some imagined shared military experience between the decidedly non-martial Amanda and these career diplomats, religious figures, and covert ops agents, but because it truly emphasizes the notion "Shiplords can be made to feel things, to do things", even at the expense of ignoring the actual question that is currently being asked of us. That's a really important point to make to the younger races like the Telas and the Nileans, who are still pugilistic enough to be eager to oppose the Shiplords and just need the excuse; I'm just not sure if it's so important that it risks alienating those like the Schorvan and the Sarthee, who are respectfully deeply skeptical of and deeply weary of an endless grind of death and stagnation.
Incidentally I feel that we've knocked it out of the park enough with the Marionettes that they're likely to ally with us whichever plan we choose; I got the impression that Amanda's Reverie with Lorelli has bonded the two species in a rather transcendent way, and we're only beginning to see the repercussions. The Cich'swa are described as so divided I wouldn't be surprised to see @Snowfire just flip a coin to decide if they go along or not.
Regarding Plan All In:
In contrast, my plan actually does directly answer the question the Sarthee asked: "If we rebel, they will mobilise in strength. We have seen that a handful of times since we won our home from them. I do not know if even all of our races together could stand against that." It leads with the kinds of reassurances that the Schorvan and the Sarthee would require to even contemplate getting involved.
I guess the decision ought to lie with whether we want to focus on motivating the groups who already want to go after the Shiplords, or if we want to focus on trying to reassure and court the groups who are reluctant to join our crusade. Do we Sweet Talk a subset of the groups, or to we go All In and try to get everyone on our side? I can't really say that with any certainty, because I just don't have the best sense for how much or how little each member of the G6 is tracking with what we're saying. @Snowfire, does Amanda and the rest of the diplomatic team have a feel for each of the delegations' dispositions that you could give us?
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
The thing is, we really do need all the races on our side to have a good chance of winning against the Shiplords.
And the one thing ALL the races are going to care about is the existential threat posed by War Fleets' ability to casually wipe out entire star systems even in the face of powerful, coordinated defenses. That's critical to them all.
And the one thing ALL the races are going to care about is the existential threat posed by War Fleets' ability to casually wipe out entire star systems even in the face of powerful, coordinated defenses. That's critical to them all.
Well, if that's the case then All In's the obvious choice, because we'd be required to get the Sarthee and Schorvan on-side, but is that the case?
This question gets down to a very important detail of the UPI report that we don't know, namely how much forecasting and predestination factor into Insight's predictions. The Unknown Potential report was written in mid-late 2109, nearly 15 years ago. Is the report using fleet sizes, technological development, populations, etc from 2109, or is it taking into account the development of every race into the future? Even if it's the later, is it taking an aggregate of all possible development paths, or is it making its prediction based on exact, predestined future knowledge? How much, if any, is humanity skewing that report due to adding things like the Clairon and (hopefully) the Orrery to the galactic stage, even humanity's discovery of the Fifth and Sixth Secrets and creation of the Ulfberht class of ships and the Calypso, none of which existed at the time of the UPI report?
Depending on the answer to these questions, we may or may not need literally every species in the galaxy (of which the G6 is a tiny part, no doubt) to rise up in rebellion alongside humanity. If we don't need everyone, then it could be an option to decide now that it's better not to tailor our arguments in order to chase the reluctant Sarthee and Schorvan people and instead "rally the base", as Plan Sweettalker does. In that case we could more quickly lock in support from the Telas and Nileans by emphasizing the possibility of success, rather than hedging against the risks of failure that we must do to coax the Sarthee and Schorvan from their skepticism.
I'm choosing to think of the Turn 5 UPI report as a snapshot in time, a prophecy made in the moment that it's possible for EarthGov to overcome or surpass, unless @Snowfire comes in and contradicts me with WoG. I'll admit it's entirely for morale purposes: I'd rather this not be a world where Amanda and the rest of Humanity 2.0 are unable to break free from a bittersweet prophecy taken from near the beginning of the Quest, and choose to act as if we can do better. That's why I consider Plan Sweettalker still an option, even if I'm starting to lean away from it: I'm optimistic enough to believe that the more moderate plan is still available.
As @Snowfire said:
There were nine total levels of success, and we reached level two, rolling above average with a Diplomacy score higher than an actual AI's ability to learn. Without some better measure of assessment from the GM, I am concerned that we may be intended to not secure everyone to our side, and if we chase the most reluctant species we may end up not convincing the least reluctant species either.
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
How would that happen? I mean, we address all the points, just starting with the 'fighting makes no sense, we'll just all die" - which must be a concern to all parties present.
Then come the finer tidbits, and the show of trust with 'and if you don't help us we are toast'.
Also, my read on the way Snowfire described the galactic situation, we and the G6 all together might be able to start a fight that causes others to join which might end up in the SL to lose. If the first step fails already, the quest ends in 'Sol goes nova'.
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
This is explicitly not what you quoted says. There were three levels of success. You hit the second one.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Uh, Snowfire said three, you say nine. I don't think Snowfire meant for you to triple the number they gave. Among other things because it would just be stupid to have nine levels of success in the DC when you need godlike Diplomacy to reach even the lowest levels, and because from a game design standpoint nine levels of success are a pain in the ass to figure out.
I think when Snowfire said three, they meant three. Maybe that meant "you convince two, four, or six out of the six delegates," for instance.
Basically, it sounds like we made progress, probably considerable progress, but to seal the deal we need to make our planned contributions specific and concrete. We need to give them hope beyond just the nihilistic "better to die fighting the Shiplords together than to die separately at their hands later or become Uninvolved."
The operant question is HOW to give hope. Do we start by pointing out that yes, we think we know how to stop a War Fleet, and are fully planning to use our own star system as a live-fire test of the system in a few decades? Do we start by pointing out that the Shiplords can be made angry in a recognizable way? I dunno.
- Location
- Ekaterinburg, Russia
This is not how that works.
THIS is how that works.
We hit the second degree of success, and convinced 2/3 of the delegation. Which is an excellent result that gives us a measure of hope for further success in Shiplord War.
More to the point, there's this thing called peer pressure and that thing called bandwagoning. Once four out of six G6 polities become committed to the Shiplord War, this puts a form of implied pressure on the other polities to start preparing. Also, once the Shiplord War actually begins - with 4/6 and Humanity, it's a probable result - the other polities will then be caught between doing nothing while everyone else is fighting Shiplords, and actually joining to help the war effort against the Shiplords. And they will understand that whether they win or lose, this will have been their truest chance of success against the Shiplords, bar none.
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
Alright, I'm going to put a deadline on this vote now. I'll close this around 11 am GMT tomorrow (Sunday). Vote tally follows below:
[4] Plan: ◈All In
[4] Plan Sweettalker
[1] Plan: ◈Twilight of the Gods
Total No. of Voters: 9
I'd love a bit more in the way of votes, but I understand that plan votes can be confusing. That said, I do kinda need this not to be a draw.
[4] Plan: ◈All In
[1] Plan: ◈Twilight of the Gods
Total No. of Voters: 9
I'd love a bit more in the way of votes, but I understand that plan votes can be confusing. That said, I do kinda need this not to be a draw.
- Location
- PA
[X] Plan Sweettalker
Sorry I do have half a notion of what's what with each plan but I think I like the realism Sweettalker seems to be about-don't need to get everyone, because the naked ambition of All in might carry across and reinforce that 'naive fae-child' impression I think the other diplomats kind of get from Humanity.
Sorry I do have half a notion of what's what with each plan but I think I like the realism Sweettalker seems to be about-don't need to get everyone, because the naked ambition of All in might carry across and reinforce that 'naive fae-child' impression I think the other diplomats kind of get from Humanity.
Last edited:
Snowfire
Polyglot of Chimera
- Location
- Wordcats
To be fair, that impression is somewhat backed up by an absurd amount of power and shown feats via a medium that none of the G6 can use. This is, though, a double-edged sword.
- Location
- PA
Precisely. We've shown we've got power in spades in a way no other polity has possessed until now. If we push TOO hard and fail, that places them in an uncomfortable position of asking themselves like 'what happens if I say no? Will she take it well or will she get angry?' Because the power to fry them all is something they'll know we have after either plan goes through. So what we need to to demonstrate a degree of maturity and being able to accept that things went wrong, instead of always having the mindset 'if I wish hard enough I can do ANYTHING!!!', and having to not only see what happens when that line of thought hits a rebuttal but literally being the thing doing the rebutting is not a fun role for anyone.
Ah, okay then. I was under the impression there was three separate groups (six delegations divided by two), and three levels of success for each, of which we achieved two.
That's much better than I was thinking. That means we only need to convince two more delegates, one of which is obviously the Schorvan delegation who is visibly skeptical and asked us a direct question about mitigating risk to his/her people. We'd better answer it.
[X] Plan All In
Last edited:
- Location
- Poland
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Plan Sweettalker
No need to go all out, since we are more than half-way there.
Alos, Zaealix was convicing in his argument.
No need to go all out, since we are more than half-way there.
Alos, Zaealix was convicing in his argument.
But, um, his argument is that he openly doesn't understand what he's voting for, and as a result is misrepresenting both options.
"All in" isn't the vote of naked ambition; if anything it's Sweettalker that does that, since that plan revolves around doubling down on the positives of the plan (We can make the gods bleed) first. All In is about answering the specific concern the skeptics have raised over risk, using that as a segue into the rest; it's called All In not because it's more or less ambitious, but because it attempts to bring in everyone, rather than rallying a "base" of support and using the momentum of their agreement to sway the holdouts through peer pressure.
- Location
- Poland
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Plan Undecided
Because that's valid reasoning, but frankly it's flippant to just switch teams so quickly.
So for now I'll admit I know Jack, and sit with him on the bleachers, waiting for the vote to be decided by people who know their stuff.
On the one hand, this is generally good policy and should be encouraged. On the other hand, voting is tied and voters are unlikely to change their minds for various reasons--your vote would be the tiebreaker.
One of the reasons I framed Sweettalker with Sins of Rage first is to ensure we're all on the same page.
It's unclear if they are fully aware of what we know about Shiplord capabilities and intentions, or if they have additional information they haven't shared. Putting Sins of Rage first allows us to expand on known SL capabilities, and everyone to air their concerns before we segue into Promise of Adamant.
It damages our argument to advance Promise of Adamant first in the knowledge that we THINK we know everything important there is to know about the imminent threat, only for the Sarthee or Schorvan to raise a new wrinkle we were unaware of. IMO.
Basically, frontload the bad news, then follow with good news/mitigation.
I actively want to avoid the Miracle of Sol in this discussion because we currently don't know what it was, how to explain it, or whether we can replicate the effect in time. When asking people to put species survival on the line on our say-so, uncertainty on what we're contributing does not improve our sales position.
And I THINK Sins of Rage covers the Beacon of Souls writein; if they think the use of Speaking is desecration, they're going to be pulling more aggro than pretty much any of them anyway, regardless of our position.
GM has spoken, so I shall simply restrict my quote to this:
Ships of Rage makes it clear that the SLs consider Practice, or at least Speaking, as desecration.
Which means when, not if but when, they find out we use it, we ARE going to bear the brunt of any Shiplord attack.
Incidentally, it also tells the G6 that they can divert effort from themselves if things go bad by selling us out.
I don't agree.
War Fleets are the SL trump card, and a fucking scary one, but nothing says they can't beat you to death with Regular Fleets.
Defense doesn't win wars.
None of these guys have faced a Shiplord boarding force to the best of my knowledge, or witnessed non-conventional SL tactics.
It's important to impress on them that the SLs won't simply stick to protocol if we're involved.
Last edited:
Tayta Malikai
200% Space Whale
- Location
- Australia
It's been a little tough keeping up with all the points being made, but after comparing them with my own initial feelings, I'm gonna weigh in for:
[X] Plan All In
Sins of Rage was always a priority for me, helping to cement what makes this attempt against the Shiplords so different. The main difference between the two plans for me here is whether it or Adamant comes first. Given that the War Fleets are basically the Shiplords' threat of ultimate force to enforce their rule, it seems prudent to emphasize how we intend to address them.
The other stuff, Beacon of Souls and Storm of Swords, are pretty much icing on the cake at this point.
[X] Plan All In
Sins of Rage was always a priority for me, helping to cement what makes this attempt against the Shiplords so different. The main difference between the two plans for me here is whether it or Adamant comes first. Given that the War Fleets are basically the Shiplords' threat of ultimate force to enforce their rule, it seems prudent to emphasize how we intend to address them.
The other stuff, Beacon of Souls and Storm of Swords, are pretty much icing on the cake at this point.
- Location
- Somewhere out there
It does, I think Beacon of Souls is actually an attempt to soften Sins of Rage instead of jumping all the way into it.