Attempting to Fulfill the Plan: GDI Edition
I dont usually vote. Still, what the hell
VOTE
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Big Enough Supermajority
I am opposed to promising to spend half of our Infastructure dice for the next four years on BZ Arcologies, which is what Happy Arcologies promises. Thats a red line for me.
I think its both mechanically unwise and thematically inappropriate
Thematically inappropriate because at a time when we are building towards a possible major conflagration on the horizon, prioritizing a mass rollout of BZ Arcologies comes off as a little profligate, regardless of how popular it might be. Especially since, for building a buffer against refugee surges, eyeballing the math suggests YZ Arcologies gives you 150% the Housing for 80% of the cost.
The excess can then go into Fortress Towns to push the front forward and farther away from our territory.
Mechanically unwise since, while it may be a goal to work towards, this sort of commitment sacrifices a significant chunk of the flexibility that has allowed the players to pivot rapidly to opportunities without fear of blowback. Being able to surge Stabilizers, for example, relied on our not having promised to, say, spend most of our Tiberium or Fusion dice on something else.
May not change any minds. But thats my thinking.
Mind, I'm not entirely comfortable with the Supermajority plans either.
Specifically their going 800RpT as a goal.
But thats easier to defend than BZ Arcologies, in my mind.
VOTE
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Big Enough Supermajority
I am opposed to promising to spend half of our Infastructure dice for the next four years on BZ Arcologies, which is what Happy Arcologies promises. Thats a red line for me.
I think its both mechanically unwise and thematically inappropriate
Thematically inappropriate because at a time when we are building towards a possible major conflagration on the horizon, prioritizing a mass rollout of BZ Arcologies comes off as a little profligate, regardless of how popular it might be. Especially since, for building a buffer against refugee surges, eyeballing the math suggests YZ Arcologies gives you 150% the Housing for 80% of the cost.
The excess can then go into Fortress Towns to push the front forward and farther away from our territory.
Mechanically unwise since, while it may be a goal to work towards, this sort of commitment sacrifices a significant chunk of the flexibility that has allowed the players to pivot rapidly to opportunities without fear of blowback. Being able to surge Stabilizers, for example, relied on our not having promised to, say, spend most of our Tiberium or Fusion dice on something else.
May not change any minds. But thats my thinking.
Mind, I'm not entirely comfortable with the Supermajority plans either.
Specifically their going 800RpT as a goal.
But thats easier to defend than BZ Arcologies, in my mind.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
These two arguments are to some extent acting at cross purposes to each other. When Nod eventually attacks, it is very likely that we will lose ground, or at a bare minimum that Nod will launch infiltrations and long range attacks armed with weapons of terror, tiberium weapons, and so on. Our "Green Zone" buffer territories will not be fully and truly safe; it is in the nature of a buffer to absorb attacks that would otherwise hit whatever is behind it.
If anything, we are likely to see an increase in internal migration of refugees from the Green Zones to the Blue Zones.
If Nod experiences any meaningful success on the battlefield, civilian Green Zone populations will tend to be (PARTLY) pushed back into the Blue Zones, where we will have to find places to house them in a hurry during a shooting war. If we're relying heavily on Yellow Zone arcologies to house refugees, many of those refugees will wind up back on the road again in short order.
So you can advocate relying heavily on Yellow Zone arcologies to house the current refugee waves. Or you can expect Nod to hit us hard and push against our territory hard enough to be a serious problem. Advocating the one while expecting the other leads to a contradiction that can only be resolved by trying to keep most of the civilians in the Blue Zones, away from Nod.
Fortress Towns are miserable housing and only get filled after all other housing has been, so getting refugees to settle there requires us to maintain deliberate housing scarcity in the Blue Zones (which angers Blue Zone residents), or to discriminate by refusing to settle Yellow Zone refugees in the existing Blue Zone housing (which involves giving Hideo Ozawa and Initiative First something other than a good swift kick in the pants). Neither is a good option in the long run.
Furthermore, Fortress Towns are not efficient for housing. Two phases of Blue Zone arcologies cost 1200 Progress at 15 R/die; the next four phases of Fortress Towns will cost a total of 1150 Progress at 20 R/die. And this despite the arcologies being much nicer to live in, more secure, and a source of valuable Consumer Goods.
The fortress towns are desirable to have, but it is not desirable that they be heavily populated with refugees.
The arcology commitment only requires us to spend roughly half the Plan's Infrastructure dice. Now, that's a lot, don't get me wrong- but it still leaves quite a bit of wiggle room, even enough for a megaproject in Infrastructure IF we're prepared to commit to making adjustments elsewhere in the Plan to reduce strain on Infrastructure dice.
...
Bear in mind that when we were discussing this before the Reallocation post was put out, nearly everyone was discussing this in terms of building 4-6 phases of arcologies. Because we legitimately need that much housing, and there has been no clear sign that we'll get that much housing of acceptable quality without building that many phases.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
-[X] Totals 10+286+203+73+85+570 = 1227 votes (68.2%)
-[X] No changes in PS
-[X] Budget 30% (410 Resources per turn)
-[X] Capital Goods 50 points
-[X] Consumer Goods 120 points
-[X] Food 20 points in reserve
-[X] 700 points
-[X] Stations- 4000 points
-[X] Abatement- 40 Points
-[X] Free Market Party (0/3/5/8) (three promises already made elsewhere, 10 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 points (FMP)
--[X] Take 120 points of Consumer Goods (FMP)
-[X] Market Socialists (3/5/7/9) (five promises, 286 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 points (MS)
--[X] Take 120 points of Consumer Goods (MS)
--[X] Take 40 points of Abatement (MS)
--[X] Complete at least three phases of Blue Zone Arcologies (MS)
-[X] Militarists (2/5/6/8) (five promises, 203 votes)
--[X] Take six of the following projects: (Mil)
---[X] Prototype Plasma Weapons Development (Mil)
---[X] Shimmer Shield Development (Mil)
---[X] Orbital Defense Laser Development (Mil)
---[X] Tube Artillery Development (Mil)
---[X] Railgun Munitions Development (Mil)
---[X] Tactical Plasma Weapons Development (Mil)
--[X] Take five of the following projects (Mil)
---[X] Complete the Hydrofoil Project (Mil)
---[X] Complete the Point Defense Refits (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least three more phases of Shell Plants (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least two more phase of Ablative Armor (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least two more phases of URLS production (Mil)
--[X] Spend at least three dice or 45 resources (whichever is less) on military projects every quarter (Mil)
-[X] United Yellow List (2/4) (five promises, 73 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI processing limit by at least 1200 (UYL)
--[X] Complete three phases of Blue Zone Arcologies (UYL)
--[X] Complete three phases of shell factories. (UYL)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 (UYL)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (UYL)
-[X] Starbound (3/5) (three promises, 85 votes)
--[X] Complete GDSS Philadelphia (SPAAACE!)
--[X] Complete GDSS Enterprise (SPAAACE!)
--[X] Complete at least six phases of Lunar Mines (SPAAACE!)
-[X] Socialist (2/4) (1 promise, 0 votes)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (Commie)
-[X] Developmentalists (4/8/12) (eight promises, 570 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI processing limit by at least 1200 (Dev)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 (Dev)
--[X] Complete GDSS Philadelphia (Dev)
--[X] Complete GDSS Enterprise (Dev)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (Dev)
--[X] Complete Perennials Phase 3 (Dev)
--[X] Take six of the following projects (Dev)
---[X] Prototype Plasma Weapons Development (Dev)
---[X] Shimmer Shield Development (Dev)
---[X] Orbital Defense Laser Development (Dev)
---[X] Tube Artillery Development (Dev)
---[X] Railgun Munitions Development (Dev)
---[X] Tactical Plasma Weapons Development (Dev)
-[X] Initiative First (5/9)
--[X] Hideo Ozawa can go play hopscotch in a Yellow Zone minefield (IF)
This is a modification to @Simon_Jester's plan to trim some of the fat. It still gets us an overwhelming supermajority, it still has us make get buy-in from the Starbound party, etc. etc. Things this plan trims out:
Perhaps it's far too late for this plan to be more than an academic exercise, and to anyone who likes this plan I'm sorry I wasn't really around yesterday to make it. But this is, essentially, my response to all the discussion that's happened since the vote opened.
-[X] Totals 10+286+203+73+85+570 = 1227 votes (68.2%)
-[X] No changes in PS
-[X] Budget 30% (410 Resources per turn)
-[X] Capital Goods 50 points
-[X] Consumer Goods 120 points
-[X] Food 20 points in reserve
-[X] 700 points
-[X] Stations- 4000 points
-[X] Abatement- 40 Points
-[X] Free Market Party (0/3/5/8) (three promises already made elsewhere, 10 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 points (FMP)
--[X] Take 120 points of Consumer Goods (FMP)
-[X] Market Socialists (3/5/7/9) (five promises, 286 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 points (MS)
--[X] Take 120 points of Consumer Goods (MS)
--[X] Take 40 points of Abatement (MS)
--[X] Complete at least three phases of Blue Zone Arcologies (MS)
-[X] Militarists (2/5/6/8) (five promises, 203 votes)
--[X] Take six of the following projects: (Mil)
---[X] Prototype Plasma Weapons Development (Mil)
---[X] Shimmer Shield Development (Mil)
---[X] Orbital Defense Laser Development (Mil)
---[X] Tube Artillery Development (Mil)
---[X] Railgun Munitions Development (Mil)
---[X] Tactical Plasma Weapons Development (Mil)
--[X] Take five of the following projects (Mil)
---[X] Complete the Hydrofoil Project (Mil)
---[X] Complete the Point Defense Refits (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least three more phases of Shell Plants (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least two more phase of Ablative Armor (Mil)
---[X] Complete at least two more phases of URLS production (Mil)
--[X] Spend at least three dice or 45 resources (whichever is less) on military projects every quarter (Mil)
-[X] United Yellow List (2/4) (five promises, 73 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI processing limit by at least 1200 (UYL)
--[X] Complete three phases of Blue Zone Arcologies (UYL)
--[X] Complete three phases of shell factories. (UYL)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 (UYL)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (UYL)
-[X] Starbound (3/5) (three promises, 85 votes)
--[X] Complete GDSS Philadelphia (SPAAACE!)
--[X] Complete GDSS Enterprise (SPAAACE!)
--[X] Complete at least six phases of Lunar Mines (SPAAACE!)
-[X] Socialist (2/4) (1 promise, 0 votes)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (Commie)
-[X] Developmentalists (4/8/12) (eight promises, 570 votes)
--[X] Increase GDI processing limit by at least 1200 (Dev)
--[X] Increase GDI income by at least 700 (Dev)
--[X] Complete GDSS Philadelphia (Dev)
--[X] Complete GDSS Enterprise (Dev)
--[X] Research and Deploy Wadamalaw Kudzu (at least two phases of construction) (Dev)
--[X] Complete Perennials Phase 3 (Dev)
--[X] Take six of the following projects (Dev)
---[X] Prototype Plasma Weapons Development (Dev)
---[X] Shimmer Shield Development (Dev)
---[X] Orbital Defense Laser Development (Dev)
---[X] Tube Artillery Development (Dev)
---[X] Railgun Munitions Development (Dev)
---[X] Tactical Plasma Weapons Development (Dev)
-[X] Initiative First (5/9)
--[X] Hideo Ozawa can go play hopscotch in a Yellow Zone minefield (IF)
This is a modification to @Simon_Jester's plan to trim some of the fat. It still gets us an overwhelming supermajority, it still has us make get buy-in from the Starbound party, etc. etc. Things this plan trims out:
- Reduces Arcologies from 5 to 3. 1,200 progress in Infrastructure we can spend elsewhere if we need to; if things go well this Plan we'll most likely push to do as many Arcologies as we can manage anyways.
- Reduces Capital Goods from 70 to 50. This promise wasn't necessary to gain major buy-in from the Market Socialists or the FMP. We don't need those 30 extra votes so much to promise such a massive investment of our always-stretched-thin Heavy Industry sector.
- Reduces Abatement from 60 to 40. Again, a promise that only pleases 30 seats in the Market Socialists. Abatement is, as always, heavily important for everything we do. But we must still guard against the unforseen, such as last Plan's double nat 1 that stopped us from doing more glacier mining for years. I'm sure everyone will expect us to go past 40 Abatement, but as always we must leave some flexibility to deal with the unexpected.
- Removed 100 RpT from offworld mining. This plan still promises to do a very large six phases of lunar mines, but 100 RpT would likely require far beyond that.
- Removed funding for SCED probe missions. We already built them a massively expensive G-Drive space ship in the GDIS Pathfinder. On their own SCED will complete the probe missions without our help. Again, this doesn't stop us from funding one or two probe missions if everything goes well in the Orbital sector.
Perhaps it's far too late for this plan to be more than an academic exercise, and to anyone who likes this plan I'm sorry I wasn't really around yesterday to make it. But this is, essentially, my response to all the discussion that's happened since the vote opened.
Last edited:
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
I like this a lot better, the less we promise the more flexibility we have. I don't think there is a compelling reason to push for even more of a majority at the cost of our ability to adapt to changes or setbacks during the plan.
I like this a lot better, the less we promise the more flexibility we have. I don't think there is a compelling reason to push for even more of a majority at the cost of our ability to adapt to changes or setbacks during the plan.
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
Going for this plan. Like Oblivion said the flexibility we get by saving points can be useful to respond to events that may occur in the plan.
Going for this plan. Like Oblivion said the flexibility we get by saving points can be useful to respond to events that may occur in the plan.
- Location
- New York
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
- Location
- USA
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
Reasonable goals that allow us to flex beyond them as the situation merits (as of note I expect to hit 4 arcolgoies in the plan barring a war breakout but this lets us space them out and do other housing and infra as needed). More flex in HI- even though we are likely to hit a higher cap good goal we can do so for the sake of diversification and using it to fill cap good needs of desired projects instead of a plan goal.
Reasonable goals that allow us to flex beyond them as the situation merits (as of note I expect to hit 4 arcolgoies in the plan barring a war breakout but this lets us space them out and do other housing and infra as needed). More flex in HI- even though we are likely to hit a higher cap good goal we can do so for the sake of diversification and using it to fill cap good needs of desired projects instead of a plan goal.
Last edited:
BoSPaladin
The Paladin
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
This is very nice. Technically we only need 901 votes. And this is still way above that, but is vastly easier to achieve. IIRC in discord too, Ithillid mentioned that part of the reason IF are being so... them. Is OOC: we need an opposition to prevent us from having stupid levels of 80% of the vote constantly and turning parliament into a rubber stamp.
So I'm fine with sacrificing some votes in parliament, we don't need our constant supermajority's. And ironically, getting less votes in this plan actually gives us more freedom.
This is very nice. Technically we only need 901 votes. And this is still way above that, but is vastly easier to achieve. IIRC in discord too, Ithillid mentioned that part of the reason IF are being so... them. Is OOC: we need an opposition to prevent us from having stupid levels of 80% of the vote constantly and turning parliament into a rubber stamp.
So I'm fine with sacrificing some votes in parliament, we don't need our constant supermajority's. And ironically, getting less votes in this plan actually gives us more freedom.
Last edited:
- Location
- Earth
[X] Plan Big Enough Supermajority
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
Changed my vote to this.
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
Changed my vote to this.
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
I'll throw approval to the new plan, Since I'm for any plan that does the minimum of space investment that I want (your plan does the minimum I want)
(big enough only does 2 promises, and the min I want is the three space options trimmed does)
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
I'll throw approval to the new plan, Since I'm for any plan that does the minimum of space investment that I want (your plan does the minimum I want)
(big enough only does 2 promises, and the min I want is the three space options trimmed does)
- Location
- Most likely California
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
Everyone kept discussing whether to cut some of the more extraneous promises, like the +100 offworld RpT or the probe missions, to get more freedom and leeway for our projects, and now we have a plan that does so.
Everyone kept discussing whether to cut some of the more extraneous promises, like the +100 offworld RpT or the probe missions, to get more freedom and leeway for our projects, and now we have a plan that does so.
- Pronouns
- He/his/him
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
- Location
- Minnesota
[X] Plan Trimmed Arcologies
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
[X] Plan Another Supermajority
