Voting is open
[X] This Or No Deal: You offered the peace you are willing to accept. If Victoria is unwilling to take that peace, then they will not have peace
 
[X] Commonwealth Hardball: You expected to compromise, but you are the victors, here, and Victoria will not be permitted to dictate terms in any sense. Reroll for, "Commonwealth Hardball," at DC 50.

[X] This Or No Deal: You offered the peace you are willing to accept. If Victoria is unwilling to take that peace, then they will not have peace
 
[X] Commonwealth Hardball: You expected to compromise, but you are the victors, here, and Victoria will not be permitted to dictate terms in any sense.

[X] This Or No Deal: You offered the peace you are willing to accept. If Victoria is unwilling to take that peace, then they will not have peace

I was only going to vote for the first, but Strypgia has convinced me to approval vote the other one as well.
 
[X] Budget Cuts 2: Budget Cut Harder

May approval vote later. Frankly, I have no interest in dragging this war on. Both for in-universe and out-of-universe reasons, I'd prefer to get back to rebuilding.
 
Allow me to explain then - "target" and "plan" are not the same word. Therefore, when "plan" DCs and "target" DCs are identified (as different values, no less) separately, they are not referring to the same thing.

I have now shown you citations for where this issue came from as well as multiple people seeking and receiving clarification to prove my point, and I'm getting sick of you continually restating your position with no evidence so I'm stopping here.

Okay, see, the problem - which I already articulated way back in this discussion - is that your evidence and my evidence are the same evidence. What we're arguing over is interpretation.

But fine, fair enough, that's clearly going nowhere so let's get some new evidence into the mix. @PoptartProdigy could you please review the current incarnation of Victorian Response (with the Foreign Aid clause removed) and confirm what its DC is? This seems like the easiest way to remove any possible ambiguity regarding the underlying math.
 
Hardball is a worse peace than most of the DC 30 plans, as its the peace that will last the least time, and gives them their strongest asset to win the civil war back immediately and with much less loss. Which is going to end up with us cut of from international trade and free industrial goods much more rapidly than otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Am back~
By delaying POW return, we do not give blackwell a core of experienced troops to use, or accelerate militia training. We get value out of those points technically not used by prolonging the civil war.
Blackwell controls the Atlantic ports and the Victorian foreign exchange reserves.
Nothing stops him importing mercenaries. Or "volunteers" from somewhere like Romania, for example, the same way the Cubans used to send troops abroad to colonial and Soviet bloc flashpoints. Both as trainers and as active combat troops.

In the meantime, Total Industry is leaving Annulment on the table.
Which means our path down the Mississipi is locked down by forty years of Victorian security agreements. Agreements that we now have to negotiate our way through without help.

For the love of God, if your aim is to boost Commonwealth economic development without giving the Vics and Russians any reasonable excuse to interfere, ignoring such an obvious policy chokepoint is mind-boggling.
The sooner he gets his Troops back, the sooner he feels confident in his position (both from the added numbers and from winning the war) and thus the sooner he is likely to break the treaty. Immediate prisoner of war exchange is not a free gimme.
You have no way of controlling that, actually.

If Alexander changes his mind and chooses to extend emergency bridging loans and equipment to Blackwell tomorrow, or a bunch of little green men show up as private trainers in Boston due to promises to a Russian oligarch PMC owner, or the Romanians send along a couple brigades of combat troops from their Black Sea port through the straits of the Bosporus to Boston. All of a sudden the timeline shortens despite anyything we can do.

I mean, we're declaring Hostile Neutrality to the CMC in every plan. That lack of support will shorten the war faster than anything here.

Again, Annulment accelerates our progress in getting independent access to the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississipi.
It ranks only behind Straits Access and War Reparations, and is about equal in importance with Johnson Declaration.
If we don't take it, we will bitterly regret it's absence in the years ahead.

It is WAY more important to our foreign policy and economic situation than desultory attempts to prolong their civil war using half-measures.
 
Inserted tally
Adhoc vote count started by uju32 on Nov 8, 2019 at 8:25 PM, finished with 62 posts and 43 votes.
 
In the meantime, Total Industry is leaving Annulment on the table.
Which means our path down the Mississipi is locked down by forty years of Victorian security agreements. Agreements that we now have to negotiate our way through without help.

For the love of God, if your aim is to boost Commonwealth economic development without giving the Vics and Russians any reasonable excuse to interfere, ignoring such an obvious policy chokepoint is mind-boggling.
Do you expect the truce to last long enough for us to start poking our way down the Mississippi? Because I have almost no hope of it lasting long enough for us to go down the Mississippi. And if its post truce break, annulment just means they have to spend a bit of diplomatic effort. Compared to refugees which directly boosts our population at the cost of their own. To add to this, since their industry is slave driven, this means a lot of the most productive people are going to flee to us, further undercutting their economy.
 
If you are interested in the Annulment Clause, I highly urge you to approval vote for

[ ] General All the Way (DC 30)

[ ] Peace is the Lifeblood (DC 30)

[ ] Freedom is the Right...!! (DC 30)

The foundation of these plans is that they are low-cost (autopass) and include both Annulment + Free Migration + Access to the Seaway + some sort of policy regarding the Lakes, which I consider non-negotiable. Where they differ is that General All the Way (DC 30) includes Seaway Clause, General, while Peace is the Lifeblood (DC 30) has the Johnson Doctrine and the Non-Intervention clause, and Freedom is the Right...!! (DC 30) includes the War Brides Clause, Exchange.
 
Do you expect the truce to last long enough for us to start poking our way down the Mississippi? Because I have almost no hope of it lasting long enough for us to go down the Mississippi.
Yes.

That's the whole point of this truce. Mississipi Access is a Diplomacy project first and foremost, and only secondarily an Infrastructure project.
It's going to take at least three years post-war for the Vics to get back in enough shape to eat the economic consequences of breaking some of the treaty's provisions.

That's enough time.
IF we don't give the Vics, and through them the Russians, excuses to interfere.
And if its post truce break, annulment just means they have to spend a bit of diplomatic effort.
No. You are dead wrong.

It took them forty years of effort to build their current security arrangements. Up and down several thousand miles of the Mississipi, and across the Eastern Seaboard. And that was when they were at their most successful. Those treaties are products of a Victoria that was much more powerful relative to everyone else than it currently is.

In game terms, it was a low DC, low AP effort with free AP from Russian backing. Then. Not now, after a major defeat and a civil war.
The idea that all they, or any faction, needs is a little bit of diplomatic effort to rebuild a network of treaties after breaking it, and being thoroughly beaten up at war is flat out untrue.

Even factions that like them would demand much more favorable, and more expensive, conditions.

Look at the real world.
Do you see Russia being able to rebuild the Warsaw Pact after it was dissolved in 1991? And it's not because Mr Putin wouldn't want to.
Or you can look at the Kurdish situation. Trump cannot simply unbetray the Kurds.

In this game, the Commonwealth cannot simply rebuild NATO with a little bit of diplomacy, even if it gets Legitimacy 25.
The Non-Proliferation Treaty is not going to come back with a little bit of diplomacy. The Missile Technology Control Regime isn't going to come back with a little bit of diplomacy. Five Eyes cannot be resuscitated with a little diplomacy. The complex web of a century of US treaties are gone.

The Commonwealth would have to start from scratch.

And that's the whole point of forcing the Vics to drop their own security treaties.
Treaties that were in part framed specifically to choke any possible rivals along the riverine superhighway that is the Mississipi. We need them gone, or we will be dealing with the consequences for the next half a decade.
Compared to refugees which directly boosts our population at the cost of their own.
To add to this, since their industry is slave driven, this means a lot of the most productive people are going to flee to us, further undercutting their economy.
These are both digressions. Everyone is taking these.

The problem with Total Industry in particular is that it is doing PoW Return,Delayed instead of PoW Return, Immediate, leaving 10 points of advantage on the table in return for the dubious possibility of extending the civil war, at the same time it is explicitly signing Hostile Neutrality and undercutting the CMC, thus shortening the civil war.
 
Last edited:
We do not have the resources or the manpower to be a serious threat to Victoria as is. We can defend, certainly, but any actual attack is not going to go well for us. That's why peace here is important - if the Victorians realise that we aren't an existential threat to them as is, the best we can hope for is a white peace, or at the most a treaty with a base DC of 0. If we take peace here, we can get concessions from Victoria. Up to 70 DC worth absolutely free, in fact. If we walk away now we have exactly one more chance to get anything from them, after that we're out of luck.
 
Simplifying things down Victoria's treaties can be divided into ones limiting anti-Victoria states, and ones boosting pro-Victoria states. The ones with pro-Victoria states are the ones you are concerned about, and as they are a benefit to the states they will want to remake them, this is why it will only take a bit of effort to get these treaties back, both parties want them. If anything they might be better for the pro-vic states as they can demand more from Victoria this time, and that means it will actually make it harder for us. The ones with liming treaties want to get out of them, but fear of Victoria kept them in line. Now that we have decisively defeated Victoria that fear has been called into question. This means bolder states or states with particularly egregious treaties will start ignoring them, and after Victoria doesn't retaliate others will start ignoring them as well. There will still be many that still keep to the treaties but I don't think anyone expected to reincorporate the entire rest of the usa in the next 5 years, and the states closest to the commonwealth are the most likely to start ignoring treaties anyway. Annulment of treaties can wait till after Victoria round 2 basically.
 
Last edited:
Ugh. If only the roll wasn't so abysmal. Annulment is a very important clause. Dropping the Seaway from General to Commonwealth would be worth it if we could get Annulment in exchange.
 
[X] General All the Way (DC 30)
[X] Peace is the Lifeblood (DC 30)
[X] Freedom is the Right...!! (DC 30)
[X] Plan: Do the Right thing
[X] Total Industry MK7 DC 30
[X] Budget Cuts 2: Budget Cut Harder
[X] And STAY OUT! DC 25+5= 30
[X] Take The Money And Run DC30
[X] Protector's Sandwich Mk. II DC 30
[X] Plan Copyleft
[X] Victorian response

Gonna just approval vote for peace, for now at least
 
Okay, see, the problem - which I already articulated way back in this discussion - is that your evidence and my evidence are the same evidence. What we're arguing over is interpretation.

But fine, fair enough, that's clearly going nowhere so let's get some new evidence into the mix. @PoptartProdigy could you please review the current incarnation of Victorian Response (with the Foreign Aid clause removed) and confirm what its DC is? This seems like the easiest way to remove any possible ambiguity regarding the underlying math.
As mentioned at several points over the past couple of votes, rolling and failing imposes an automatic +5 DC to subsequent negotiation rounds. As you rolled and failed, that means that your effective starting DC is now -35 instead of -40. Adding that to Victorian Response's total, we have a DC of 30.
 
[x] Total Industry MK7 DC 30
[X] Budget Cuts 2: Budget Cut Harder
[X] Protector's Sandwich Mk. II DC 30

These plans manage to get all three clauses I consider mandatory, while maintaining a DC of 30.
 
[x] Plan Copyleft
-[x] War Reparations Clause, Acquisitive: s. +5 DC.
-[x] Penal Labor Clause: . +20 DC.
-[x] War Guilt Clause: . +5 DC.
-[x] Geneva Conventions Clause:. +20 DC.
-[x] Militia Clause: . -5 DC.
-[x] War Brides Clause, General: " +30 DC.
-[x] Prisoners of War Clause, Immediate: T -20 DC.
-[x] Hostile Neutrality Clause:-15 DC.
-[x] Seaway Clause, General: . +50 DC.
-[x] Lakes Access Clause: -20 DC.
 
We do not have the resources or the manpower to be a serious threat to Victoria as is. We can defend, certainly, but any actual attack is not going to go well for us. That's why peace here is important - if the Victorians realise that we aren't an existential threat to them as is, the best we can hope for is a white peace, or at the most a treaty with a base DC of 0. If we take peace here, we can get concessions from Victoria. Up to 70 DC worth absolutely free, in fact. If we walk away now we have exactly one more chance to get anything from them, after that we're out of luck.
Peace at any cost is a worse pill than even a token war. If Hitler had lived to begin peace talks with the Allies in 1945, the entire world would have called the Allies idiots for meekly taking the Nazi's counterproposal after they shut down the Allies first demands. And Victoria's lost worse than Germany ever did. There were at least still Wermacht troops in the field when VE day came.

Victoria has no real idea of our available strength, and the last thing they did know for sure was we utterly crushed their field army. We don't even have to do anything. A bluff that we might attack, or even just aid the Crusaders in some way, is enough to put pressure on them. The Victorian's can't meaningfully prosecute the war with us right now, and giving them breathing room to settle their civil war and rearm to fight us is just foolish.

If we walk away here we lose nothing, and Victoria is the one that will be afraid of what we will do next. And they'll be worrying while the Crusaders are shooting at them. Even if all we do is bluff and scare them, that is a good effect.
 
If we walk away here we lose nothing, and Victoria is the one that will be afraid of what we will do next. And they'll be worrying while the Crusaders are shooting at them. Even if all we do is bluff and scare them, that is a good effect.
I wouldn't exactly say that we lose nothing, as we lose the AP we spend, and the gains to our economy that we can get right now. Assuming the length of the civil war stays the same, this is giving us an extra turn of bulking up with international trade and Victorian assets. At the same time, we can grab most of the treaty options anyway in this phase, as stuff like promising no military intervention to help the CMC is something that we almost certainly are going to do, while giving them lake access is something that encourages them to keep up the treaty and to further fund our development for even longer before they break the treaty.
 
Peace at any cost is a worse pill than even a token war. If Hitler had lived to begin peace talks with the Allies in 1945, the entire world would have called the Allies idiots for meekly taking the Nazi's counterproposal after they shut down the Allies first demands. And Victoria's lost worse than Germany ever did. There were at least still Wermacht troops in the field when VE day came.

Victoria has no real idea of our available strength, and the last thing they did know for sure was we utterly crushed their field army. We don't even have to do anything. A bluff that we might attack, or even just aid the Crusaders in some way, is enough to put pressure on them. The Victorian's can't meaningfully prosecute the war with us right now, and giving them breathing room to settle their civil war and rearm to fight us is just foolish.

If we walk away here we lose nothing, and Victoria is the one that will be afraid of what we will do next. And they'll be worrying while the Crusaders are shooting at them. Even if all we do is bluff and scare them, that is a good effect.
The thing is, we do lose something. The 1 AP we invested for the peace talk and any other subsequent AP costs involved to the war or keeping our military mobilised.

Not to mention spare AP from reparations and etc. Which translates to opportunity costs , both in upgrading our military and in economy. Yes. It's a pity that Victoria wasn't sold to the cleaners. But we still punished Victoria quite punitively depending on the plan we choose.

I know the peace talks story isn't out yet but we might as well view it as Russia pushing back against our initial demands, forcing us to accept a much more lenient treaty.


Adhoc vote count started by Blackstar on Nov 9, 2019 at 6:19 PM, finished with 74 posts and 47 votes.
 
Last edited:
Peace at any cost is a worse pill than even a token war. If Hitler had lived to begin peace talks with the Allies in 1945, the entire world would have called the Allies idiots for meekly taking the Nazi's counterproposal after they shut down the Allies first demands. And Victoria's lost worse than Germany ever did. There were at least still Wermacht troops in the field when VE day came.

Victoria has no real idea of our available strength, and the last thing they did know for sure was we utterly crushed their field army. We don't even have to do anything. A bluff that we might attack, or even just aid the Crusaders in some way, is enough to put pressure on them. The Victorian's can't meaningfully prosecute the war with us right now, and giving them breathing room to settle their civil war and rearm to fight us is just foolish.

If we walk away here we lose nothing, and Victoria is the one that will be afraid of what we will do next. And they'll be worrying while the Crusaders are shooting at them. Even if all we do is bluff and scare them, that is a good effect.
In 1945, the Allies were at the gates of Berlin. Right now, the Commonwealth hasn't put a single soldier on Victorian soil.

I mean, it's true that Victoria can't prosectue a war with us. But on the flip side, we also can't prosecute a war with them. Our economy just isn't strong enough and the army isn't prepared for it. Realistically speaking, there is going to be a brief peace, because neither of us can actually afford to keep fighting. If negotiations drag on too long, Victoria might realize that. And then our negotiating position falls apart. If Victoria realizes that we weren't going to intervene on the Crusader's behalf, what's the point of, say, the Hostile Neutrality clause? If the Victorians know we won't be attacking them much anyway, then our offer of a formal ceasefire suddenly becomes a lot less valuable.

This treaty is essentially bluffing Victoria into paying for something they'd probably be getting for free anyway. We don't want to risk them calling that bluff.
 
In 1945, the Allies were at the gates of Berlin. Right now, the Commonwealth hasn't put a single soldier on Victorian soil.

I mean, it's true that Victoria can't prosectue a war with us. But on the flip side, we also can't prosecute a war with them. Our economy just isn't strong enough and the army isn't prepared for it. Realistically speaking, there is going to be a brief peace, because neither of us can actually afford to keep fighting. If negotiations drag on too long, Victoria might realize that. And then our negotiating position falls apart. If Victoria realizes that we weren't going to intervene on the Crusader's behalf, what's the point of, say, the Hostile Neutrality clause? If the Victorians know we won't be attacking them much anyway, then our offer of a formal ceasefire suddenly becomes a lot less valuable.

This treaty is essentially bluffing Victoria into paying for something they'd probably be getting for free anyway. We don't want to risk them calling that bluff.

To add to this.

I don't think we should think about the treaty as "peace at any cost".

We start with 65 DC worth of demands. For free. Sure most of the plans offer concessions for more stuff, but you could literally write a plan that offers nothin, demands reparations, opens the Seaway(to everyone), makes Victoria accept war-guilt, and takes the liberty bell and get it to accept it. There are no options for concessions that hurt us or even require us to lift a finger aside from transporting some troops.
 
Last edited:
Voting is open
Back
Top