Voting is open
When you have the threat of Victorian intervention in turns 1-4, and you're not Established, things can get really dicey, since again, you'd only be in control of the city of Chicago, with everyone else in the region being part of a different faction.

@Derpmind Want to go for Growing Pains? It has Rail Companies.
By that same argument, even if you are in control of the entire region, you don't have the ability to actually tell people that an army needs to be raised, or do any government actions. Better to have full control over a smaller portion than to start with almost none over a larger one.
 
By that same argument, even if you are in control of the entire region, you don't have the ability to actually tell people that an army needs to be raised, or do any government actions. Better to have full control over a smaller portion than to start with almost none over a larger one.
There is the issue of food though; with established, we have control over some farmland in Illinois. Without it, we only have Chicago.
 
I mean the argument of Established or Efficient Bureaucracy really comes down to what else the plan entails. If there are immediate crisis, let's put vicky attention on the side for a moment as all plan had it, that requires action than having EB makes sense because you know exactly what you have on hand and the ability to apply it to a solution.
 
By that same argument, even if you are in control of the entire region, you don't have the ability to actually tell people that an army needs to be raised, or do any government actions. Better to have full control over a smaller portion than to start with almost none over a larger one.

Let's compare, shall we?

Efficient Bureaucracy (-3 CP): Cursed by many as they were, the old bureaucratic institutions of the United States were what allowed it to function as it did, and bureaucracy, in general, is essential to the functioning of a modern state. You have ensured that yours is capable of handling the challenges demanded of it by this latest expansion. Begin play with a proper census, established taxation structures, and all of the manifold other things that go on in the boring background of governance.

Established (-2 CP): You have broad recognition as the legitimate government of your region. Your neighbors and a few more distant powers recognize your legitimacy, as do your own citizens. If you do not take this, then at game start the Chicago Congress is ongoing and the Accords have yet to be signed; you control Chicago proper and nothing else, and will need to invest actions into completing the Congress. Failure to do so has dire consequences, both for trying and failing to found a nation in the international spotlight and for making me go through government creation pointlessly.

I don't know about you, but when the QM specifically says that if you do not take a certain action, and fail to complete the Accords - a possibility if you have an assassin running around - there will be dire consequences, I'm inclined to take them seriously. That, coupled with how the farmland wouldn't actually be ours, and how we wouldn't be seen as a legitimate government even by our potential citizens, could really hurt for any plans taking Population Boom.
 
I don't know about you, but when the QM specifically says that if you do not take a certain action, and fail to complete the Accords - a possibility if you have an assassin running around - there will be dire consequences, I'm inclined to take them seriously. That, coupled with how the farmland wouldn't actually be ours, and how we wouldn't be seen as a legitimate government even by our potential citizens, could really hurt for any plans taking Population Boom.

But the same goes for established only plans as efforts are also needed to actually setup a government. The accord is happening right now but there is no federal government if we didn't pick efficient bureaucracy. I mean finishing the accord means people expect promises to be acted upon, which could not happen if we have no bureaucracy to act with.
 
It is implied by the language of EB that you would have some manner of bureaucracy - simply not one that is quite up to handling the challenges demanded of it by this expansion quite yet. Among things that would need to be better worked out are the census, taxation structures, and such - it doesn't mean you have no bureaucracy to speak of.
 
It is implied by the language of EB that you would have some manner of bureaucracy - simply not one that is quite up to handling the challenges demanded of it by this expansion quite yet. Among things that would need to be better worked out are the census, taxation structures, and such - it doesn't mean you have no bureaucracy to speak of.

I see it as the City of Chicago bureaucracy being told you are now a Federal level bureaucracy and we want results pronto. The expansion, clicking with lower government, and responsibility is simply crushing.
 
I'd rather all the economy win than All-Round Start, so just to keep sure of that
[X] Securing a better Tommorow V3
[X] Securing a better Universe
[X] Plan Entrepot
[X] Plan Security, Established, and Economy
[X] Grand Theft BOOM

[X] Plan All the Economy
 
There is the issue of food though; with established, we have control over some farmland in Illinois. Without it, we only have Chicago.
I think it's been implied that if we don't take Population Boom, food security won't be such a pressing problem either way... but if we take Population Boom without Established, we can expect it to be a much bigger issue than it would otherwise be.

But, established is literally weaker than taking Bureaucracy? Like, it saves us fewer actions than having the bureaucracy already established.
It's also cheaper, and it serves a somewhat different purpose. We can't analyze this entirely in terms of action economy. There's a big difference between being an established nation at game start but one that's still struggling to put together its institutions, and being a city-state with institutions that's still struggling to define itself as a nation.

By that same argument, even if you are in control of the entire region, you don't have the ability to actually tell people that an army needs to be raised, or do any government actions. Better to have full control over a smaller portion than to start with almost none over a larger one.
I'm not sure I agree. Firstly, we shouldn't assume that we have "almost no" ability to accomplish things without Efficient Bureaucracy. Poptart can be sneaky, but they're usually pretty explicit when something is very important or the consequences of skipping it very bad. Clearly, having the bonus is a lot better than not, but I don't think we should act as if we're powerless without it.

Secondly, being the acknowledged authority in a territory is a huge military advantage. It means you can move troops and (importantly) supplies through it without obstruction. It means the locals will, by default, view your troops as probably being there to protect them, and not just as a second set of warlords rolling in to fight the first set. It means that people are likely to at least radio for help when foreign troops cross the border, instead of being easily talked or intimidated into being silent while an enemy army sneaks up on you.

With Established, we have defensive depth. Without it, we're going to have less of it.

At this point, I have to admit to myself that I'm only voting for Plan All the Economy because it has the rail companies. I didn't think I was a single-issue voter, but here I am prioritizing railways over sensible things like Established and not-having-an-assassin.

I like trains, ok?

Buuuut I probably shouldn't. The next-leading plan, All-Round Start, is better rounded and less risky. I've edited Plan All The Economy out of my vote.
You know who else likes trains a lot? Rumford.

Sorry. I am kinda joking on the level of 'You know who else liked chocolate? Hitler.' Because seriously, trains are cool, it's just that having a rail network that opens up in 12-18 months at the price of, say, having an ongoing food security crisis due to population explosion NOW may be a bit shaky

As long as that includes pissing on Rumford's grave, I am all for it.
Given how the Russians took care of him, I don't think they ever found the body.

I mean, the whole point of already having a bureaucracy is that we can replace loses to an assassin, and have the much harder thing to set up already set up, unlike established where we would have to dedicate a large number of actions to actually set up all the infrastructure that makes a nation-state.
Well yeah- though on the other hand, you really need Efficient Bureaucracy AND Established to really reduce the single-point-of-failure aspect created by The Greatest Sin. Even then it's still there, and the bonuses are only going to mitigate the effect of the maluses- and the maluses will probably also be reducing the effect of the bonuses, too, by making it harder for the new government to work together while eyeing each other and trying to figure out who's the traitor.

I honestly don't think the assassin is that bad in the long term. Assuming we find them somewhat quickly.
That's a pretty hefty assumption.

Also, how bad the assassin is depends in part on context. We're already relying pretty heavily on a single military commander's reputation and an elite unit personally loyal to him, at least for now. If we have a well-established constitutional government and a bureaucracy capable of promoting new leaders from the ranks, the disruption caused by the assassin will still be substantial- remember that the malus also comes with "and you know there is a traitor in the upper ranks of your government". But it's less likely to be crippling.

On the other hand, if we're still operating on more informal lines of authority, with no constitution as of game start, little or no bureaucracy, and the state held together by chewing gum, baling wire, and the personal appeal and authority of a handful of individuals to such an extent that we haven't even got everyone agreeing to use the same coins... Well, then we're in rather more danger, for the same reason that a monarchy is more likely to be destabilized by having the head of state assassinated than a democracy is. When the king dies, there's no clear line of succession and/or the successor may be someone people don't trust to do a good job (e.g. a small child). When the president dies, there's someone to step into their shoes and the nation will be functional immediately, albeit perhaps demoralized.

Any particular reason to vote to buy the nuke outright ? Imo the value of 5 CP of int options + chance at getting nuke > 5cp on nuke, particularly since even if we don't get it good intel makes us better protected against it being used on us and in a better military position. I definitely don't think it's worthwhile to buy the nuke.
Part of me, a part, would like to take that nuclear option off the table and/or put it into our hands, because I suspect something very plot-nasty is 'fated' to happen with it. Maybe to us, maybe to someone else.

So I'm approval-voting for, among many other plans, a few nuke plans. If one wins, I won't be sad.

Hard to believe that Hellfire Burns Vs. The World is only eight votes behind first place.

Come on guys, we can still win! Where's everyone whose first choice has less than ten votes- if you're not going to win then at least register your disapproval by voting Burns!



How can you disagree with the Captain?
Because you're trying to shift the direction of the quest away from the direction I want it to go, with this ironic not-ironic post-ironic 'meme vote' thing.

I don't like it, because it makes me feel like messing up my fun is a big joke to you.
 
Running a quick tally.
Adhoc vote count started by Simon_Jester on Mar 26, 2019 at 7:53 PM, finished with 204 posts and 73 votes.
 
Because you're trying to shift the direction of the quest away from the direction I want it to go, with this ironic not-ironic post-ironic 'meme vote' thing.

I don't like it, because it makes me feel like messing up my fun is a big joke to you.

Sorry, not my intention. Honestly I wasn't treating it as meme, I was treating it as a genuine if radical proposal. I joke a lot because I joke a lot.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, not my intention. Honestly I wasn't treating it as meme, I was treating it as a genuine if radical proposal. I joke a lot because I joke a lot.
I understand.

The trouble is, a radical proposal that's presented as a joke, if successful, gives everyone who disagrees with the proposal the sense of being trodden on and marched over by a group that is (and this is important) laughing as they do it.
 
I understand.

The trouble is, a radical proposal that's presented as a joke, if successful, gives everyone who disagrees with the proposal the sense of being trodden on and marched over by a group that is (and this is important) laughing as they do it.

It honestly didn't occur to me that it could be taken that way. Sorry about that.
 
Last edited:
All the Economy has a good chance of ending us early game. We have a high possibility of facing invasion, famine, and economic crisis all at once. And that's how most nations die.

Far too late-game, and a pathetic early-game when Victoria is attacking.
 
Last edited:
All the Economy has a good chance of ending us early game. We have a high possibility of facing invasion, famine, and economic crisis all at once. And that's how most nations die.

Far too late-game, and a early-game when Victoria is attacking.
But, All-around we could be ended by disease, insufficient government action due to lack of Bureaucracy, and a lack of later economy, allowing the Vics to bury us in guns and bodies later on when they take full action.
 
[X] Securing a better Tommorow V3

[X] Plan Security, Established, and Economy

[x] Plan All the Economy

Adding an approval vote for Security/Established/Economy, as it also hits my important criteria here - honestly I'd rather prefer it to All the Economy, but my highest priority right now is that All-Around Start not win, so I'll take what I can get.
 
Voting is open
Back
Top