[X] Offer Transit Rights
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Attempting to Fulfill the Plan: GDI Edition
- Pronouns
- He
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
Durabys
Miaow! Break the Chains!
- Location
- the land of the Boii
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Current tally:
28 people have voted
[ ] Both
8 people have voted
[ ] Offer Transit Rights
16 people have voted
[ ] Focus on New Start Ups
16 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Fair Allocation
9 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
1 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Old Business Restoration
28 people have voted
[ ] Both
8 people have voted
[ ] Offer Transit Rights
16 people have voted
[ ] Focus on New Start Ups
16 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Fair Allocation
9 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
1 people have voted
[ ] Focus on Old Business Restoration
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
Allowing more Competition. By allowing more people to Attempt.
[] Focus on Fair Allocation
Equal/fair distribution.
E: Since they're tied and the others are a bit behind I'll vote for the one I prefer. (Since The other two factions(co-op, Old buisness(enough to atleast found politicians)) are more likely to have money already so anything they get here would just be boosts)
Allowing more Competition. By allowing more people to Attempt.
[] Focus on Fair Allocation
Equal/fair distribution.
E: Since they're tied and the others are a bit behind I'll vote for the one I prefer. (Since The other two factions(co-op, Old buisness(enough to atleast found politicians)) are more likely to have money already so anything they get here would just be boosts)
Last edited:
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Realised i forgot to vote, every business that gets big enough becomes a cooperative anyway so fair allocation seems the most reasonable, also makes us look less authoritarian overall rather than outright weighing in to favor one group over others.
As you said this is the start of the crisis, meaning what we do initially sets the tone for everything else, and if the foundation of our crisis preparations are disrupted by having to deal with massive amounts of internal strife, political shenanigans and constantly changing governmental systems thats going to have a knock on effect on what we do and cost time, territory and most importantly lives in the ensuing Tiberium surge.
Some of the others definitely would have similar effects, but take longer to enact (which i'd say would work better for us really, as we should aim to shift opinions over time, not simply all at once/as fast as possible simply because it's easier).
Julian Bennet (who really did nothing wrong with the Mecca debacle, just unfortunately had to deal with the fallout of Hackett's idiocy tainting his plans) would lead to a far more diplomatic and empathic GDI over time, with his outreach to the fallen and sociological focus.
Tran Công Tăng Would help us slowly shift to a more compassionate military, with her focus on saving as many lives as possible, on top of limiting the worst of the Hawks extremism as most of them (except maybe the most extreme initiative firster's) would see her as 'one of theirs' and she'd likely be an example for future recruits as a representative of our military's best ideals.
Even Hackett (despite his colossal fuckup here) has a few good points, as he'd likely lead to us having an easier time eventually allying and integrating less extreme Nod cells into GDI as he's the one who helped get us in contact with the Qatari remnants (which has has paid off massively over time).
Litvinov meanwhile is more of a political firebrand than anything else and suffers from being nearly a pure politician, she has good ideas and wants reform but has very little of idea how to do the main thing she's focused on (Education reforms), let alone anything else we currently have as a main priority for dealing with the massive crisis.
Yes what she's campaigning for is important but she's also doing it at the expense of other important things and burning bridges that really did not need to be burned in order to force what she wants through as fast as possible, that kind of impulsiveness is not a good quality to have in a leader during a major crisis as it would likely lead to more kneejerk 'build/do/fix this now' mandates for the treasury despite the fact we might not have the required infrastructure in place or want to set up other things to support whatever it is first.
It doesn't help that i just don't see her as that great a candidate in the first place as views aside what she's actually campaigning for (education reform) has mostly been going through over time due to the massive focus we had on Education buildup early on, sure it started in blue zones but it's been slowly propagating out over time as we take more territory/get more refugees, we'll likely have another education project to do at some point once our Yellow/green zones are built up enough that will almost certainly help the reform she wants without needing her to be the Director.
As for the civil war, why on earth would you think thats guaranteed? We don't have to placate them we have to convince them, sure it'd be easier to set everything off and just kill/imprison everyone but purging the ranks of people who disagree with some of the things we're doing would be both tyrannical and counterproductive in the middle of a major crisis.
More to the point the splintering wouldn't just effect our internal civilians but also our military, with Nod likely taking advantage of the chaos to slip their own agents in and add to the massive amounts of discord and/or sabotage our infrastructure (potentially pushing back a lot of our progress).
Tearing apart the political establishment would do too much damage, every turn later in the game is one more turn we have to convince more and more of the current establishment that our methods work and that we're on the right path, sure there might still be a bit of a split later on but it'd be far smaller and do much less damage than setting it off now (when our civilian population are already beginning to panic thanks to the Tib mutation).
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Realised i forgot to vote, every business that gets big enough becomes a cooperative anyway so fair allocation seems the most reasonable, also makes us look less authoritarian overall rather than outright weighing in to favor one group over others.
No, she's the fast option, but not the only option for reform and the one that seems like it will cause the most amount of disruption.
As you said this is the start of the crisis, meaning what we do initially sets the tone for everything else, and if the foundation of our crisis preparations are disrupted by having to deal with massive amounts of internal strife, political shenanigans and constantly changing governmental systems thats going to have a knock on effect on what we do and cost time, territory and most importantly lives in the ensuing Tiberium surge.
Some of the others definitely would have similar effects, but take longer to enact (which i'd say would work better for us really, as we should aim to shift opinions over time, not simply all at once/as fast as possible simply because it's easier).
Julian Bennet (who really did nothing wrong with the Mecca debacle, just unfortunately had to deal with the fallout of Hackett's idiocy tainting his plans) would lead to a far more diplomatic and empathic GDI over time, with his outreach to the fallen and sociological focus.
Tran Công Tăng Would help us slowly shift to a more compassionate military, with her focus on saving as many lives as possible, on top of limiting the worst of the Hawks extremism as most of them (except maybe the most extreme initiative firster's) would see her as 'one of theirs' and she'd likely be an example for future recruits as a representative of our military's best ideals.
Even Hackett (despite his colossal fuckup here) has a few good points, as he'd likely lead to us having an easier time eventually allying and integrating less extreme Nod cells into GDI as he's the one who helped get us in contact with the Qatari remnants (which has has paid off massively over time).
Litvinov meanwhile is more of a political firebrand than anything else and suffers from being nearly a pure politician, she has good ideas and wants reform but has very little of idea how to do the main thing she's focused on (Education reforms), let alone anything else we currently have as a main priority for dealing with the massive crisis.
Yes what she's campaigning for is important but she's also doing it at the expense of other important things and burning bridges that really did not need to be burned in order to force what she wants through as fast as possible, that kind of impulsiveness is not a good quality to have in a leader during a major crisis as it would likely lead to more kneejerk 'build/do/fix this now' mandates for the treasury despite the fact we might not have the required infrastructure in place or want to set up other things to support whatever it is first.
It doesn't help that i just don't see her as that great a candidate in the first place as views aside what she's actually campaigning for (education reform) has mostly been going through over time due to the massive focus we had on Education buildup early on, sure it started in blue zones but it's been slowly propagating out over time as we take more territory/get more refugees, we'll likely have another education project to do at some point once our Yellow/green zones are built up enough that will almost certainly help the reform she wants without needing her to be the Director.
The problem is that it's pretty much 100% guaranteed that Nod will use the lack of Ion cannon strikes to pull something, the Caravanseri are but one Nod faction among many so even if we come to an agreement with them one of the other Warlords (or Kane if he thinks he can get an advantage from it) will send their forces to pull something, if only to force the Mecca warlords hands and get them to start fighting against us and/or give the more extreme hawks something else to point to in regards to yellow zoners/treacherous Noddies in the long run.
As for the civil war, why on earth would you think thats guaranteed? We don't have to placate them we have to convince them, sure it'd be easier to set everything off and just kill/imprison everyone but purging the ranks of people who disagree with some of the things we're doing would be both tyrannical and counterproductive in the middle of a major crisis.
More to the point the splintering wouldn't just effect our internal civilians but also our military, with Nod likely taking advantage of the chaos to slip their own agents in and add to the massive amounts of discord and/or sabotage our infrastructure (potentially pushing back a lot of our progress).
Tearing apart the political establishment would do too much damage, every turn later in the game is one more turn we have to convince more and more of the current establishment that our methods work and that we're on the right path, sure there might still be a bit of a split later on but it'd be far smaller and do much less damage than setting it off now (when our civilian population are already beginning to panic thanks to the Tib mutation).
Last edited:
[X] Offer Transit Rights
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Though as a counter argument for how neat it is to use infrastructure dice for abatement I feel like I should point out the following: we will need tons of power plants which will have been part of the infrastructure section, and resources have usually been our limitation not dice.
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Though as a counter argument for how neat it is to use infrastructure dice for abatement I feel like I should point out the following: we will need tons of power plants which will have been part of the infrastructure section, and resources have usually been our limitation not dice.
- Location
- The Underdark
Power plants are heavy industry not infrastructure. You have been feeding some of your power need with infra dice, but that is running out.
There are two things about the Ion Cannon strike demand:
First is that it's almost certainly a bargaining position that is intended as a start to have concessions attached - the diplomats will likely be able to attach caveats, conditions, and generally bargain down from this point.
The second, is that this is a demand that the Treasury is not involved with. It's irrelevant to our decisions.
First is that it's almost certainly a bargaining position that is intended as a start to have concessions attached - the diplomats will likely be able to attach caveats, conditions, and generally bargain down from this point.
The second, is that this is a demand that the Treasury is not involved with. It's irrelevant to our decisions.
- Location
- The Underdark
Nod, and the Caravanserai, even those bits that want to talk to you have problems with, well, most of the various bits of policy that the Initiative has conducted. Not just Treasury things, but military things, and social things, and nine other things. So they want concessions across a wide arc. Similarly, your negotiators want their own concessions. They want Noddies to lay down arms, they want to at least cut back on if not eliminate attacks on GDI shipping across the Islamic parts of the Brotherhood of Nod, so on and so forth. What your role in this particular negotiation is, at most, is to say "yes, we can do X and/or Y, on Z schedule" to give your negotiators more or less room to maneuver and increase the odds of successfully working out the kinks in all of this.
- Location
- Hyperborea
Good. From start to finish it was consistently detrimental to the quality of the thread.
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
Last edited:
- Location
- ROB's House
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
- Location
- United States
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
- Location
- USA
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
- Location
- Minnesota
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Focus on Fair Allocation
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Both
[X] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
[X] Focus on New Start Ups
[X] Focus on Existing Cooperatives
[X] Focus on New Start Ups