Remove ads

Tales of History - A Civ-Builder Quest

Reader mode
Duesal said:
That doesn't address the problem that we're definitely becoming isolationist. We don't have positive interactions with anyone outside the mountains, we just raid them. This stifles trade and tech development, and it makes our cultural dominance which we were so excited about basically worthless in regards to converting anyone but the White Clans, etc.

We just got a QM warning about it, we probably shouldn't ignore it. Just raiding the goat people doesn't do anything to change our current path.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Problem is with our cultural ideals we pretty much need to come from a position of either power or legitimacy, until either of those is established we will inevitably lose the diplo/culture war. Thus the point about isolating until we have both land beyond the valley and a second village, perhaps at the Goat and Gentle river joining, near where Brushcrest's fort was, or perhaps further north where the nomad trade route crosses to act as a way/toll station of sorts. Now that our home situation is sort of stable we're proceeding to establish legitimacy via military action, followed up in the following turns via border Menhirs.

Edit- Also Satar's points.
 
Maybe we could send a delegation to Makar? Surely they won't care if we raid the Goat People?
 
What needs to be done is to pick an outside group to raid, an outside group to trade with, and do both. Raiding for its own sake is pointless since it is never going to actually succeed at suppressing the population down there, they just have too much food. Trading alone will cause problems because the need to maintain a military that is high quality and experienced is big, because you'll never have numbers up in the mountains.

Trading also happens to be a way to offload the wealth from your raids and turn whatever you could carry into what you actually need at any given time.
 
Last edited:
Were probably constantly missing their boom bust cycle since we only ever do anything when their booming is annoying us.
 
Maybe we could send a delegation to Makar, see what they're willing to trade, get more information about the geopolitical happenings of the lowlands, and if they're trading with the nomads or if Brushcrest is. See what they think of an anti-Brushcrest alliance.

And then maybe we could make the decision to call off the raid (or not) based on our findings. That's the most I can see happening.
 
Satar said:
Maybe we could send a delegation to Makar, see what they're willing to trade, get more information about the geopolitical happenings of the lowlands, and if they're trading with the nomads or if Brushcrest is. See what they think of an anti-Brushcrest alliance.

And then maybe we could make the decision to call off the raid (or not) based on our findings. That's the most I can see happening.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Near as we can tell Brushcrest threw in the towel after drawing or loosing most of its fights with the Makar, I don't think the Makar would appreciate us raiding and extinguishing their tribute state. This is seen through the seemingly one way trade the Makar receive from them.
 
Kirron 999 said:
Near as we can tell Brushcrest threw in the towel after drawing or loosing most of its fights with the Makar, I don't think the Makar would appreciate us raiding and extinguishing their tribute state.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Maybe, maybe not. You've got to remember that the coalition was stronger than the Makarites. Maybe Brushcrest is a tributary in name only. Maybe things are in a tense stalemate between the remnants of the coalition and Makar, which would explain why all the villages in the trading place have palisades. We don't know.

But suppose the Makar have taken over everything. Then it's not really a question of isolationism, is it? We may as well raid the Goat People because there is no way in hell we are ever culturally converting the Makar, and I would fear a hegemonic Makar might just invade us instead of trading for our Azurite and silver.
 
Last edited:
Azel said:
Brushcrest Forces:
2x Hunters (Veteran)
3x Hunters (Regular)
2x Hunters (Elite) - Allies
4 to 6 Hunters (Veteran) - Allies
2 to 5 Hunters (Regular) - Allies
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we manage to attack Brushcrest by itself we probably can win(I'm assuming they have 1 or 2 more hunter pops now), a few of allied towns got razed iirc. I'm just in doubt about how big of a retaliation force we'd face.
 
Profectus said:
If we manage to attack Brushcrest by itself we probably can win(I'm assuming they have 1 or 2 more hunter pops now), a few of allied towns got razed iirc. I'm just in doubt about how big of a retaliation force we'd face.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're not counting Mobs, palisades, possible Makarite garrison, etc. It's suicide, dude.
 
So, we're in a pretty precarious situation, externally speaking. Our food situation seems pretty stable right now, but we are being seriously hampered by our low production. We might have to stop our aid to the White Clans, which hopefully won't hurt relations that much, in order to hurry up and finish the silver mine. I'm rather torn on what to do in regards to our neighbors. On the one hand, we cannot afford to allow a lowlander-Goat People alliance, on the other hand, it seems the lowlanders are profiting quite a bit on their trade, and we will almost definitely see backlash from them if we attack their traders. We may get away with attacking their actual home, but that will likely be much harder. Brushcrest in particular will be likely react the strongest.
 
Tomcost said:
I have the suspicion that the Makar is no more, for some reason...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It would make sense, a raider civ like that can't survive for long, the people surrounding it would eventually become difficult to surprise with their river shenanigans since unlike horses, rivers are stationary locations.
 
Okay... we are alone...

We need friends who are definitely not savages like the white clans, or at least manage to steal and conquer enough shit as to get on Brushcrest's level.
 
Tomcost said:
Okay... we are alone...

We need friends who are definitely not savages like the white clans, or at least manage to steal and conquer enough shit as to get on Brushcrest's level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or we just keep watching and wait for their bust part of the cycle hits, and then put the finishing blows? Would require consistent scouting actions tho.
 
I'm still not sure about what we need to do but one thing that's clear is that when we pick a course of action we need to really commit to it even if it means eating short term penalties. It feels like the entire reason we're in this slump is due to us never really finishing the job in terms of foreign policy. Whether it via us leaving Brushcrest alone letting them build up or us later not following up on our teamup with Makar (there was the food issue but i'm honestly starting to think a short term famine might have been worth it). Whether we opt to raid or to trade we need to maintain that course and not change our minds 2-3 turns down the line. We also really need a more permanent presence in the lowlands. Throughout all these crisis a lack of information is always our greatest foe.
 
Problem there with committing to courses of actions is that there are 3 or 4 people who usually produce plans, and we're typically vying for our own plan to succeed, meanwhile the regular have a look and leave voters will typically switch plan maker every time we hit difficulties, such that we end up shoring up the short term at the cost to the long term. And even when us planners are cooperating about what to do, we typically have our own takes on things, see me and Satar's disagreements over the specifics of the raiding this turn for example, even if I did take on his econ advice, while Sunrise is pushing for trade and new settlements where most of us have discounted such until we hit pottery.
 
Last edited:
Kirron 999 said:
Problem there with committing to courses of actions is that there are 3 or 4 people who usually produce plans, and we're typically vying for our own plan to succeed, meanwhile the regular have a look and leave voters will typically switch plan maker every time we hit difficulties, such that we end up shoring up the short term at the cost to the long term. And even when us planners are cooperating about what to do, we typically have our own takes on things, see me and Star's disagreements over the specifics of the raiding this turn for example, even if I did take on his econ advice, while Sunrise is pushing for trade and new settlements where most of us have discounted such until we hit pottery.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah coordinating will be the hardest part of maintaining any plan. Not really sure what we can do to improve on that front right now though.
 
Ah the perils of democracy

I vote for war. Whatever has the most war has my vote. I mean think about it: we stay strong, If we win we take everything and if we lose we can just attack something else and take their things.

No downside!
 
[] Plan Enough Lollygagging
-[X] Reassign some of the workers to different tasks.
--[X] 1 Unassigned worker to cattle rancher
--[X] 1 Unassigned worker to clay mining
-[X] Send the hunters on a raid.
--[X] Ambush and destroy all Herdsman caravans, take the yaks for food and livestock, their goods for the ancestors, and their technology if applicable.
--[X] Send all the hunters, and some clansmen if they want to get some loot.
-[X] Increase resource gathering slots.
--[X] Build a silver mine (Cost: 3 Production, 1 Production already spent)
-[X] Council: Gain +1 Production to spend this turn, used to finish the silver mine.
 
Last edited:
What we need is to TAKE LAND FOR ONCE IN OUR LIVES AND STOP HIDING BEHIND 'but they might revolt without pottery'.
Raid scout raid scout focus on the high herdsmen until we at least have a 2-3 villages. then take our hopefully grown army and burn everything south of us to the ground until we hit the sea.
Instead of raid once then sit back and do jack shit for 3 turns then scout then raid do jack shit for 3 turns ect.
 
Last edited:
SpeckofStardust said:
What we need is to TAKE LAND FOR ONCE IN OUR LIVES AND STOP HIDING BEHIND 'but they might revolt without pottery'.
Raid scout raid scout focus on the high herdsmen until we at least have a 2-3 villages. then take our hopefully grown army and burn everything south of us to the ground until we hit the sea.
Instead of raid once then sit back and do jack shit for 3 turns then scout then raid do jack shit for 3 turns ect.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not revolt without pottery, it's starve without pottery. And that's what I intend to start on next turn, border menhirs to mark out our land, but for now we have neither the population nor spare production to settle a new village. Once we do, then we will but that has mechanical requirements that we have not reached yet.

Edit-


Ghostdevil said:
While mandate is default arrogant, being deliberately arrogant in the vote... ehh, strikes me as a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm fairly certain he put it there as a meme plan in response to our prior conversation, particularly around planers vying for different plans with different goals to win.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top