Remove ads

Tales of History - A Civ-Builder Quest

Reader mode
Satar said:
In all honesty, accepting outside contact but rejecting outside imports would really be the worst of all worlds. Imports/Exports or trade in general is the biggest sticking point between the Fishes and the Artisans. We should want the Fishes to be more amenable to trade, not less.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Protectionism is all about taking care of your existing industries. Why would we ever need to buy food or production?

And who is going to complain about buying dyes and luxury items?
 
Tomcost said:
Protectionism is all about taking care of your existing industries. Why would we ever need to buy food or production?
And who is going to complain about buying dyes and luxury items?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I do hope you're not serious. Being able to buy Production or Food (with Pottery) would drastically expand our production capacity or maybe allow us to dose ourselves with a little bit of that boom juice the lowlanders are riding high on. That's not an ancillary benefit; that's a strategic, game-changing advantage. If nothing else, buying food would allow us to hedge against famine. That's huge.

And Production! Imagine being able to complete more mega-projects (e.g., be able to spur on our own technological development) while also having access to tech through trade. Or being able to expand mines and so be able to trade for more dyes and luxury goods, producing more culture, producing more social advances.

Frankly, introducing "Protectionism" in the Stone Age is bizarre and anachronistic. It sort of strategically shoots us in the foot. I don't think it's a good idea.
 
Satar said:
In all honesty, accepting outside contact but rejecting outside imports would really be the worst of all worlds. Imports/Exports or trade in general is the biggest sticking point between the Fishes and the Artisans. We should want the Fishes to be more amenable to trade, not less.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Its a step up from isolation. We can always gently nudge it towards neutrality later.
 
Satar said:
I do hope you're not serious. Being able to buy Production or Food (with Pottery) would drastically expand our production capacity or maybe allow us to dose ourselves with a little bit of that boom juice the lowlanders are riding high on. That's not an ancillary benefit; that's a strategic, game-changing advantage. If nothing else, buying food would allow us to hedge against famine. That's huge.

And Production! Imagine being able to complete more mega-projects (e.g., be able to spur on our own technological development) while also having access to tech through trade. Or being able to expand mines and so be able to trade for more dyes and luxury goods, producing more culture, producing more social advances.

Frankly, introducing "Protectionism" in the Stone Age is bizarre and anachronistic. It sort of strategically shoots us in the foot. I don't think it's a good idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So, you want to aim for a full removal from the faction goals by spending two culture on it?
 
Tomcost said:
So, you want to aim for a full removal from the faction goals by spending two culture on it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, I'm just trying to change their opinion on people from Greenvalley trading outside the valley. From Peace, Stability, Isolationism -> Peace, Stability, Isolationism (except for foreign trade conducted in foreign places)

Also, is this an implicit admission on your part that not being able to trade Food or Production is strategically limiting? Because you sidestepped the point.
 
Last edited:
Satar said:
No, I'm just trying to change their opinion on people from Greenvalley trading outside the valley. From Peace, Stability, Isolationism -> Peace, Stability, Isolationism (except for foreign trade conducted in foreign places)

Also, is this an implicit admission on your part that not being able to trade Food or Production is strategically limiting? Because you sidestepped the point.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It is limiting, but not right now that we don't have access to pottery and we don't have anything to trade for production.

My goal is to gradually change it

Edit: added this to the vote

"If the rolls allow for it, attempt to remove the motivation instead of changing it"
 
Last edited:
Tomcost said:
It is limiting, but not right now that we don't have access to pottery and we don't have anything to trade for production.

My goal is to gradually change it
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But tolerating foreigners in the valley is a bigger concession imo. Traders from Greenvalley selling at Great Hearth? Out of sight, out of mind. If you look at historical isolationists (Japan, etc), they tend to externalize trade to a few ports which are then sort of quarantined from the rest of the country. Why would you want foreigners in Greenvalley but not want imports? Fundamentally I don't get it.
 
Satar said:
But tolerating foreigners in the valley is a bigger concession imo. Traders from Greenvalley selling at Great Hearth? Out of sight, out of mind. If you look at historical isolationists (Japan, etc), they tend to externalize trade to a few ports which are then sort of quarantined from the rest of the country. Why would you want foreigners in Greenvalley but not want imports? Fundamentally I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we get food from the outside, why would we keep food from the inside?
Why not force the fishermen to drop their nets so that can do more useful things like cut trees or dig ground?
 
Satar said:
But tolerating foreigners in the valley is a bigger concession imo. Traders from Greenvalley selling at Great Hearth? Out of sight, out of mind. If you look at historical isolationists (Japan, etc), they tend to externalize trade to a few ports which are then sort of quarantined from the rest of the country. Why would you want foreigners in Greenvalley but not want imports? Fundamentally I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

See my edit above.

Anyway, you argue that ir is easier to tolerate trade if it is done away from the settlement, but I don't know if it will be handled that way.

Our plans are mostly the same, with mostly wording as a difference. We both want the fishes to open more, but the argument is different. How about we use both? I mean, I'm afraid about not succeeding enough and thus putting a less ambitious condition, hence protectionism as a middle goal
 
SpeckofStardust said:
If we get food from the outside, why would we keep food from the inside?
Why not force the fishermen to drop their nets so that can do more useful things like cut trees or dig ground?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think this is a misreading of what the Fishes' concerns are. They aren't like 20th century workers, worried about being undercut, but like early Americans, afraid tha their country will be dashed to pieces if it gets too badly entangled in European (lowlander) affairs.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
If we get food from the outside, why would we keep food from the inside?
Why not force the fishermen to drop their nets so that can do more useful things like cut trees or dig ground?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
1 that would piss of the fishers.
2 it would likely be less productive overall as we would have to trade said logs and minerals for food at likely higher rates.
3 that would be strategically crippling if we depended on outside food for it means if anything happens to cut off food supply outside the valley or cut of trade we would be left starving. And considering a turns length even 1 or two turns depending on food imports means we likely lose institutional knowledge of how to fish. Oh and you know, it means the lowlanders could hold our food supply over our heads if hostilities break out or they wish to "renegotiate".
 
[X] Plan Bishoprics & Coalitions Of The Willing
SpeckofStardust said:
Scouting more turns before attacking.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or generally, being less randomly aggressive.
Probably should plan our raiding better in general, but the previous state of overpowerful Hunters would have led to either Empire or something similar eventually, since the Hunters will want to stay politically important and that means finding things to fight.

So structurally, we want more production/gathering pops per fighting pop. Can't help it till we actually start transitioning to hunting as supplemental rather than primary production.
 
veekie said:
So structurally, we want more production/gathering pops per fighting pop. Can't help it till we actually start transitioning to hunting as supplemental rather than primary production.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly, real life having a military more the 5% of the population is never a good idea.
So unless people have really good agruments otherwise (myself included) we should train no more military pops. And for good arguments I mean plans involving their
A. immediate use
B. how to demilitarize back to a 5% or less pops in a military once use has ended.
 
Hm...

Not many votes and a tie to boot.
Adhoc vote count started by Azel on Apr 12, 2020 at 1:57 AM, finished with 75 posts and 10 votes.
  • [X] [Training] Begin recruiting orphans from among the clans and have them brought to the White Halls for training.
    [X] [Authority] The issue of distance needs to be resolved. Let the White Halls congregation name a representative who will hold sway over the Bone Tenders in the mountains.
    [X] Plan unity
    -[X] Try to influence a faction.
    --[X] Fishes
    --[X] Try to change isolationism for Protectionism and Unity, citing that the outside can very well hold dangers and the only way to be prepared is not to isolate, but be open and have agreements with others, just like the Valley People should be united in a common cause. The conflict which wrought this state was because of a group deciding things on their own and leaving Greenvalley to fend for itself. If the rolls allow for it, attempt to remove the motivation instead of changing it
    ---[X] The internal motivation is that the Faith can only grow by further contact with other villages, and isolationism puts it at a disadvantage.
    --[X] Spend 3 culture
    -[X] Gain +1 Culture to spend this turn.
    -[X] (Optional) Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
    --[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley)
    [X] Try to influence a faction.
    --[X] Fishes
    --[X] Try to change isolationism for Protectionism and Unity, citing that the outside can very well hold dangers and the only way to be prepared is not to isolate, but be open and have agreements with others, just like the Valley People should be united in a common cause. The conflict which wrought this state was because of a group deciding things on their own and leaving Greenvalley to fend for itself.
    --[X] Spend 3 culture
    -[X] Gain +1 Culture to spend this turn.
    -[X] (Optional) Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
    --[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvall
    [X] Plan unity with a twist
    -[X] Try to influence a faction.
    --[X] Fishes
    --[X] Try to change isolationism for Protectionism and Unity, citing that the outside can very well hold dangers and the only way to be prepared is not to isolate, but be open and have agreements with others, just like the Valley People should be united in a common cause. The conflict which wrought this state was because of a group deciding things on their own and leaving Greenvalley to fend for itself.
    --[X] Spend 2 culture
    -[X] Send a diplomat to someone.
    --[X] White clans
    --[X] Consult the local chieftains and bone tenders about the clanmen's ancestors, it is proper that if families are to join their lineages and histories should be recorded and venerated properly.
    -[X] (Optional) Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
    --[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley)
    [X] Plan Bishoprics & Coalitions Of The Willing
    -[X] [Training] Begin recruiting orphans from among the clans and have them brought to the White Halls for training.
    -[X] [Authority] The issue of distance needs to be resolved. Let the White Halls congregation name a representative who will hold sway over the Bone Tenders in the mountains.
    -[X] Try to influence a faction.
    --[X] Fishes
    --[X] Remind the Fishes that while it is all well and good for heathen lowlanders to be barred from the Valley, it is also normal for the Valley People to venture forth, for it is the whole world that is given to the People of the Valley by the Ancestors. It is only when the Valley People become too entangled in the affairs of the lowlanders that disaster strikes. But to trade away one's excess, or to empower some few traders to venture forth and make money/spread the faith, is nothing to be feared. (Summary: heathens shouldn't be allowed into the Valley and the Valley should avoid becoming too enmeshed in the political affairs of the lowlands; but having our traders in the lowlands is fine and even desirable, because it might help spread the faith as well as warn the People of future lowlander perfidy).
    --[X] Spend 2 culture
    -[X] Gain +1 Culture to spend this turn.
    -[X] (Optional) Change the focus of the Pilgrim Village.
    --[X] Encourage own culture. (+1 Valley People Culture in Greenvalley)
Click to expand...
 
Wait wheres my vote?
I am pretty sure i voted? :O
Well if not...
[X] Plan Bishoprics & Coalitions Of The Willing
 
SpeckofStardust said:
Honestly, real life having a military more the 5% of the population is never a good idea.
So unless people have really good agruments otherwise (myself included) we should train no more military pops. And for good arguments I mean plans involving their
A. immediate use
B. how to demilitarize back to a 5% or less pops in a military once use has ended.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Depends on the civilization level. Currently we need more food producers than anything else, and we need food production efficiency so we don't need to occupy a lot of territory to make the same amount of food.

I'd say count military pops by location. You need a certain number of military pops to actually hold a location against wild animals or raiders, and you need a buffer past that so you can afford some losses so elephants don't end your civ if they show up twice in a row.

So what makes a good garrison force? 1 pop of full time military specialized units with 2 pops of part time military hunters makes decent garrison(if you crash convert your civilians into random mobs as desperation) for a single settlement?
 
Satar said:
Rationale: Effectively we've got +4 Culture (3 from White Halls, 1 from Pilgrim Village. I want to save at least 2 so our Cultural Ideals/Identities don't disappear overnight.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
@Satar I think that your plan looks fine, though I wonder why you say we effectively only got 4 culture, when we got 5, 3 from temple, 1 from pligrim and 1 from either diplo or culture choice. I do not know if you already though about and simply decided that a surplus of 3 was better than a surplus of 2, but still.
Satar said:
--[X] Remind the Fishes that while it is all well and good for heathen lowlanders to be barred from the Valley, it is also normal for the Valley People to venture forth, for it is the whole world that is given to the People of the Valley by the Ancestors. It is only when the Valley People become too entangled in the affairs of the lowlanders that disaster strikes. But to trade away one's excess, or to empower some few traders to venture forth and make money/spread the faith, is nothing to be feared. (Summary: heathens shouldn't be allowed into the Valley and the Valley should avoid becoming too enmeshed in the political affairs of the lowlands; but having our traders in the lowlands is fine and even desirable, because it might help spread the faith as well as warn the People of future lowlander perfidy).
--[X] Spend 2 culture
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I like your argumentation, and the only improvement that I can think of, is using the White Clans as an example of outsiders that we have actually relationships with, which includes trading. They are of course mostly non-heathen, but I still think that they show that trading is nothing to be afraid of and that outsiders can change to be decent people.
Chances are though, that @Azel would do that anyway, but I feel like mentioning it anyway.
 
Ooooor we could just train everyone for military service and only call up the most willing/what we need at the given moment? That way we wont have unarmed mobs if we get attacked. Like a second amendment with extra steps.
 
looseanon said:
Ooooor we could just train everyone for military service and only call up the most willing/what we need at the given moment? That way we wont have unarmed mobs if we get attacked. Like a second amendment with extra steps.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Imagine how bloody this whole ordeal would have been if everybody had been armed and trained when the council broke.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top