Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
[X][Sacrifice] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X][Harmony] Yes, the people need to be further calmed (-1 to +2 Stability)
[X][Ward] Everyone, even the Dead Priests! (Shares far and wide for -1 Diplomacy, +1 Stability, ???)
[X][King] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
[X][Refugee] All who need aid must receive it (-5 Stability, +11-15 Econ, overcrowding issues, ???)

reasoning regarding giving it to everyone including the DP:
- if you guys read the 1632 series (time travelling americans during the 30 Years war), sharing their medical knowledge was one of the key issues between the supremacist americans (they believe they can use it as a weapon against those stupid germans) and the protagonists, the protaganists believe that the greater enemy are the downtime diseases and sickness. but in our case, fighting disease is the same as fighting evil spirits and Demons, and I'd rather fight those than mortals who can be later be our friends in the far future!:p
- also, if we are giving it to everyone, the DP would later find out the secret, so better take credit for it (Civilization games 101)

editing vote
 
Last edited:
butchock said:
[X] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X] Yes, the people need to be further calmed (-1 to +2 Stability)
[X] Everyone, even the Dead Priests! (Shares far and wide for -1 Diplomacy, +1 Stability, ???)
[X] Speak with spirits (Twythulmyn dies, +1 immediate stability, +1 Legitimacy, ???)
[X] All who need aid must receive it (-5 Stability, +11-15 Econ, overcrowding issues, ???)

reasoning regarding giving it to everyone including the DP:
- if you guys read the 1632 series (time travelling americans during the 30 Years war), sharing their medical knowledge was one of the key issues between the supremacist americans (they believe they can use it as a weapon against those stupid germans) and the protagonists, the protaganists believe that the greater enemy are the downtime diseases and sickness. but in our case, fighting disease is the same as fighting evil spirits and Demons, and I'd rather fight those than mortals who can be later be our friends in the far future!:p
- also, if we are giving it to everyone, the DP would later find out the secret, so better take credit for it (Civilization games 101)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or we could just give it to no1.

bluefur87 said:
I am voting for that. I have stated the dangers.

If people want to play chicken with our civilization shattering then I don't see how you expect me to stop them beyond pointing out they're giving a vote for shattering the civilization. If you want to get people to move towards sacrifice everything, you're barking up the wrong tree. I'm already there.

Literally, all people have to do to make that work is switch the current leading vote to sacrificing everything. We'll end up at 4-5 econ next turn, depending on how well the dice roll, and not risk the shattering of our entire civilization.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
you make good points sir. I'd rather not die and we end up w/ the same-ish econ anyways.

[X] [Sacrifice] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
 
It's not like the quest will end when our central authority breaks.

Looks like people are betting on good rolls to get by the stability problems.

Who knows? Might even work better than expected.:rolleyes:
 
Umi-san said:
What do you define our current plan as? I define it as increasing our martial and technology level with a goal of an eventual expanse into the lowlands in order to end the DP.

I feel, to some degree, that this plan doesn't follow my ideals as described, but does follow yours in the sense that we will be working to annihilate a polity that opposes our morals. I say this because the DP already seem like they're becoming a softer nation, and in that sense are gradually reforming.

I want to reduce their power and increase ours, which involves war to strip land from them, but I don't want them completely dead. They can be made to be better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I meant in the sense of the current vote.

[] [Sacrifice] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)

Not sure about it. It seems to follow our ideals in some ways. I've finished collating my thoughts on my Ideal.

As to the DP and not the Ideal specifically? And longer term thinking? We can destroy them utterly and tear down their works. The DP as a people made several egregious crimes against us. So in order to restore the line, all we need to do is destroy them as a people. Though now that I really start thinking about it have they crossed the line? I think they have, but I'm not sure.
If we do destroy them as a people that means we can absorb some of their number. Kids and other innocents. I wouldn't condone a morality that aims for genocide except in the final case of them reducing us to absolutely nothing except a tiny handful of people. And we would never consider it a just action and it would haunt us forever. My thinking is if they genocide us and ravage those we care for they give up their right to exist, because when are they going to stop? It hurts me to even contemplate this but letting something like an omnicidal culture, the only reason I could think of to be this extreme, go unchallenged is a threat to everyone.

pbluekan said:
There isn't a perfect option in this vote, and like I said earlier, sometimes we have to compromise. I think, in this vote, that compromise is not sharing the warding secrets. Yes, we are happy to open our arms, it's why people continue to flock to us, but there's a limit. The DP are enough of an issue for us to have hit hat limit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah not sharing hurts our kindness and generosity. And there are rarely perfect options. And that is okay.

More in depth thoughts on the Ideal incoming.
Adhoc vote count started by BungieONI on Apr 15, 2017 at 1:46 AM, finished with 314 posts and 57 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Umi-san said:
Or we could just give it to no1.


you make good points sir. I'd rather not die and we end up w/ the same-ish econ anyways.

[X] [Sacrifice] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Stability calcs:

-1(start)+1 immediate+(Sacrifice)+(King)-(Ward)-2
With the assumption that small chance being a 1/5 on a roll of 1d100, and regular chance being a coinflip(1/2 ona roll of 1d100), that means there's two coinflips for at least +1 stab, and a 20% chance of -1 stab. I'm not a probability major, so I can't give hard answers to this, but from my very rough eyeball:

We immediately gain 1 stab from sac, so even if both negative stab hits happen, we only hit -2 max. If we assume best case outcome, we actually come out at stability 0(-1+1 immediate stability+1 from sac+1from king-0from ward-2)

[X] [Sacrifice] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
[X] [Harmony] No, they could cause further panic
[X] [Ward] No, it is sacred magic (Small chance of stability loss)
[X] [King] Remain home (Chance of stability gain)
[X] [Refugee] Some from friendly groups can come in (-2 Stability, +4-5 Econ)

since this is econ neutral-to-positive, and can get us to zero stability, with absolute worst case being -3 stab, but at a low probability
 
Last edited:
BungieONI said:
As to the DP and not the Ideal specifically? And longer term thinking? We can destroy them utterly and tear down their works. The DP as a people made several egregious crimes against us. So in order to restore the line, all we need to do is destroy them as a people. Though now that I really start thinking about it have they crossed the line? I think they have, but I'm not sure.
If we do destroy them as a people that means we can absorb some of their number. Kids and other innocents. I wouldn't condone a morality that aims for genocide except in the final case of them reducing us to absolutely nothing except a tiny handful of people. And we would never consider it a just action and it would haunt us forever. My thinking is if they genocide us and ravage those we care for they give up their right to exist, because when are they going to stop? It hurts me to even contemplate this but letting something like an omnicidal culture, the only reason I could think of to be this extreme, go unchallenged is a threat to everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What crime against us "The People"? For all intent and purpose, we are the ones messing with them. Their vision wasn't even near us when we fired the first shot.

OUR actions are all due to fear of competition, let's not dress up our intervention as some humanitarian mission for goodness.

We are lucky to have acquired advanced farming and peaceful annexation. The DP/ST/WC/Nomads were the product of their unfortunate environment, not direct malice. Were they brutal in their methods, yes. Did it help them survive, yes.

We can't condone them for trying to survive at all cost, just as they shouldn't decide to eat everyone because it is convenient.
 
Ok everyone, I made a quick Python 2 monte-carlo simulation so that we can see the probabilities of the various failure states. Most of the probabilities are self-explanatory except for the admin roll. This simulation assumes that if the admin roll passes all +stability actions are done first, and if it fails then the order is completely random (and thus still has a chance of coming out perfectly).
edit: updated version here
Code: 
import random
def roll(c): return random.random()<c

smallChance = 0.25
chance = 0.5
significantChance = 0.75
adminFail = 0.5

actionOrderBase = ['SacrificeLarge', 'KingStay', 'HarmonyNo', 'WardKeep', 'RefugeeFriendly']
#note that this is the order it will be done if admin roll passes
#if admin roll fails, will be performed randomly

Actions = {
'SacrificeEverything' : lambda x: x+1 if(roll(chance)) else x,
'SacrificeLarge' : lambda x: x+1,
'SacrificeMedium' : lambda x: x,
'SacrificeSmall' : lambda x: x-1 if(roll(chance)) else x,

'HarmonyNo' : lambda x: x,
'HarmonyYes' : lambda x: -4 if(x==-3) else x+random.randint(-1,2),

'WardKeep' : lambda x: x-1 if(roll(smallChance)) else x,
'WardFriendly' : lambda x: x,
'WardNeutral' : lambda x: x+1 if(roll(chance)) else x,
'WardEvil' : lambda x: x+1,

'KingStay' : lambda x: x+1 if(roll(chance)) else x,
'KingDies' : lambda x: x,
'KingHorse' : lambda x: x,

'RefugeeClose' : lambda x: x-2 if(roll(chance)) else x-1,
'RefugeeSome' : lambda x: x-1 if(roll(significantChance)) else x,
'RefugeeTies' : lambda x: x-2 if(roll(smallChance)) else x-1,
'RefugeeFriendly' : lambda x: x-2,
'RefugeeMany' : lambda x: x-3,
'RefugeeAid' : lambda x: x-4,
'RefugeeAll' : lambda x: x-5,
}


startingStability = -1
if 'SacrificeEverything' in actionOrderBase: startingStability += 1
if 'KingDies' in actionOrderBase: startingStability += 1

n = 200000

deaths = 0
stabilitySum = 0
for i in range(n):
  stability = startingStability
  actionOrder = list(actionOrderBase)
  dead = False
  if (roll(adminFail)): random.shuffle(actionOrder)
  for fn in actionOrder:
    stability = Actions[fn](stability)
    if (stability < -3):
      dead = True
      break
  if (dead):
    deaths += 1
    continue
  stabilitySum += stability
print str(deaths*100./n)+"% chance of death"
print str(stabilitySum/float(n-deaths))+" average stability at end (excluding deaths)"

Under these assumptions, there is a ~3% chance of death. I consider that acceptable, though not ideal. Average stability at end is -1.7

From a purely mathematic approach, it might make sense to kill our king and take a Restoration of Harmony. This drops our death% down to 1.55% and raises average stability to -0.7. From a trait perspective, I'm not so sure...

edit: See here for instructions on use.
 
Last edited:
VoidZero said:
What crime against us "The People"? For all intent and purpose, we are the ones messing with them. Their vision wasn't even near us when we fired the first shot.

OUR actions are all due to fear of competition, let's not dress up our intervention as some humanitarian mission for goodness.

We are lucky to have acquired advanced farming and peaceful annexation. The DP/ST/WC/Nomads were the product of their unfortunate environment, not direct malice. Were they brutal in their methods, yes. Did it help them survive, yes.

We can't condone them for trying to survive at all cost, just as they shouldn't decide to eat everyone because it is convenient.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is why I said I'm not sure they've crossed the line. If they haven't I'm much more willing to leave them intact. It's obvious they are Not Omnicidal so that most extreme response wouldn't happen.

Plus since we fired the first shot we are in the wrong according to this morality. We need to finish this in such a way that they stop bothering us and we no longer feel threatened by them.

I have a headache so my responses are gonna slow.
 
tryrar said:
Stability calcs:

-1(start)+1 immediate+(Sacrifice)+(King)-(Ward)-2
With the assumption that small chance being a 1/5 on a roll of 1d100, and regular chance being a coinflip(1/2 ona roll of 1d100), that means there's two coinflips for at least +1 stab, and a 20% chance of -1 stab. I'm not a probability major, so I can't give hard answers to this, but from my very rough eyeball:

We immediately gain 1 stab from sac, so even if both negative stab hits happen, we only hit -3 max. If we assume best case outcome, we actually come out at stability 0(-1+1 immediate stability+1 from sac+1from king-0from ward-2)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You don't immediately gain stability from sacrifice unless it's sacrifice everything.
Academia Nut said:
Size of Sacrifice to Spirits (Task [Sacrifice])
[] Small (-1 Econ, chance of stability loss, ???)
[] Medium (-2 Econ, ???)
[] Large (-3 Econ, +1 Stability, ???)
[] Everything! (-4 Econ, +1 immediate stability, chance of extra stability, ???)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
While the odds are small, you are playing chicken to gain a single point of econ.

I gave you the answer, it's up to you if you want to play that game or not.
 
Anyway here are my thoughts on my Ideal @Umi-san .

Absolutely Kind and Absolutely Ruthless
We are a humble, generous and compassionate people. We believe in the best in people. We open our arms to anyone. However, we have an absolute line in the sand, and if anyone abuses our kindness to harm those we care for and protect. We will destroy them utterly and tear down all they have worked for.

Let's break this down.

We are a humble, generous and compassionate people. -> What this means is that we don't grandstand, we give to others, and we will most importantly listen to the plight of other peoples and at least consider their words.

We believe in the best in people. -> We believe that people are good at heart and it takes evidence for us to think otherwise. Often we think, that cultures can ruin a person and make them take actions that are destructive and barbarous and even evil and think they are right and just.

We open our arms to anyone. -> We believe in giving people a sanctuary if they are suffering. The fire is indeed warm. We believe in giving people the chance to show what they are on a very deep social and moral level. We almost test them. "Will you spit on the hand trying to help you?"

However, we have an absolute line in the sand, -> We have only one line. We will warn you once if you seem to be on a path to crossing it. If you ignore it what comes next comes next.

and if anyone abuses our kindness to harm those we care for and protect.-> We don't particularly care if you are the horde of Nomads, the Dead Priests, or members of our own or even the gods when we are extremely pushed. The only difference this makes is how long we take to enact our response and how much force we bring to bear.

We will destroy them utterly and tear down all they have worked for. -> You have shirked our freely given kindness? You have spat on the hand that has an honest desire to try to help and shown you want to be destructive and hostile? You have destroyed and savaged what we protect? Did not listen to our warning, freely given? As you wish. We will Destroy you. And all of your works will be torn apart as a lesson to others so that they do not make such a foolish decision. If these others disagree with usyour example may convince them to be kinder, or they will leave us and ours alone.

This is almost a Fey way of thought. Very much taking our knowledge and trying to cultivate wisdom in ourselves and others as well as make friends.
 
tryrar said:
Yeah, I'd have voted for your previous vote if preexisting ties had a chance for econ 3 rather than a flat 2. I'm ok with trading a bit of stability for coming out ahead on econ in this crisis, which I'm pretty sure is FAR better than what our neighbors are doing :p
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Getting fucked real good? I mean, WE are taking a modest hit to Stability from the comet and need to burn some Economy and two turns of recovery to break even.

The Nomads took a Comet stability hit and then a plague(which is defended by Centralization and mitigated by population density). They'll be back, unfortunately, within 2 turns because bloody nomads, but are probably going to take another turn after that to recover to raiding hard targets.
The lowlanders are eating a MAJOR plague, and then eating a Comet stability hit. They're going to eat an Econ hit from the plague, and with luck this would trigger governmental crisis....unfortunately remember, the past generation of Dead Priests have been working on moderation and being less murderous assholes, so the combo is going to be "the gods are angry that we have gone soft!"

With luck we might see some of their tributaries break away out of necessity, as paying the slave tribute is going to be much harsher, though I would not be surprised if people tried to tribute the infected.
Powerofmind said:
Eh, I don't particularly care for morality. I just didn't want to make sacrifice a thing because it promotes values I don't want for mechanical reasons (that way lies having to work around a sacrifice value of dubious use). Just like I'm being freakishly amoral in my deliberate holding of the medicine secrets, simply because it means every disease fail from now on doesn't hurt us at all and brutalizes others with -2 or 3 econ, stability hits, etc. (so long as it doesn't come attached to a damn mysticism comet crit). Generally, I haven't focused so much on my personal morality (which is highly egalitarian and libertarian, thank you very much).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm mostly working on the logical level of avoiding Stability hits by disordering the government and destroying resources being counterproductive.

It's a trend that makes Stability hits harder to cope with in the future, and only feasible at present because we're doing great economically and aren't actually being hit by the plague. If we were? Sacrificing the king to avert plague means poorly organized quarantine procedures. Sacrificing food and goods means less resources to put towards feeding the quarantined and making up for the loss of their productivity.
Powerofmind said:
Opacity is just AN's thing, though. I don't think I've ever seen him present a single vote that did anything other than create half-blind supposition-based speculation. Where other QM's provide DC's or qualify in a stratified way, AN deliberately obfuscates to maintain the realism of the setting.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yep. Its one of the charms of it really
BungieONI said:
Lovely.

I appreciate the honesty and what little irked-ness I had with you is forgiven.


It's depressing. I don't seem to be feeling the salty or outright puerile fury like some of the people who voted. I'm just depressed because people are knee-jerk enough to not try to think in a holistic fashion. I realize it now after an hour but I was doing the same so I can't throw anymore stones than just bringing it up.

We were only thinking in pieces. About Stability. Or the morality of sacrificing/not sacrificing our King. The traits we could get out of sacrificing him or not. The possible Econ boosts. The narrative we wanted to tell didn't really get brought up except once or twice.


So to re-state a query/curiosity/request for clarity or confirmation which I hope might make some people contemplate.

So I'm wondering. The thread seems to want our people to develop a morality along these lines:

We are humble, generous and compassionate people. We believe in the best in people. We open our arms to anyone. However, we have an absolute line in the sand, and if anyone abuses our kindness to harm those we care for and protect. We will destroy them utterly and tear down all they have worked for.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's been considered, just not really practical/too risky.
If we had the raw Stability/didn't have DPs as neighbors, we could double down on the previous tactic: Sacrifice nothing, open doors to some refugees. We maintain the old customs, simply work harder, and give freely to weather the crisis.

But mostly, this was a consequence of a series of compromises, so we wound up in a situation where nobody's really happy with any particular thing, but we're not totally screwed on anything either.
pbluekan said:
Just curious @Powerofmind how are you getting those probabilities? I only roughly approximated the chances of each result when I did some of the stability math.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We know Low Chance is something close to 25%, Chance is usually something around the 50% mark, and high chance is usually something around the 70% mark...but that's just pattern recognition from what AN usually does, and ignores the fickle dice gods.
 
veekie said:
Getting fucked real good? I mean, WE are taking a modest hit to Stability from the comet and need to burn some Economy and two turns of recovery to break even.

The Nomads took a Comet stability hit and then a plague(which is defended by Centralization and mitigated by population density). They'll be back, unfortunately, within 2 turns because bloody nomads, but are probably going to take another turn after that to recover to raiding hard targets.
The lowlanders are eating a MAJOR plague, and then eating a Comet stability hit. They're going to eat an Econ hit from the plague, and with luck this would trigger governmental crisis....unfortunately remember, the past generation of Dead Priests have been working on moderation and being less murderous assholes, so the combo is going to be "the gods are angry that we have gone soft!"

With luck we might see some of their tributaries break away out of necessity, as paying the slave tribute is going to be much harsher, though I would not be surprised if people tried to tribute the infected.

I'm mostly working on the logical level of avoiding Stability hits by disordering the government and destroying resources being counterproductive.

It's a trend that makes Stability hits harder to cope with in the future, and only feasible at present because we're doing great economically and aren't actually being hit by the plague. If we were? Sacrificing the king to avert plague means poorly organized quarantine procedures. Sacrificing food and goods means less resources to put towards feeding the quarantined and making up for the loss of their productivity.

Yep. Its one of the charms of it really

It's been considered, just not really practical/too risky.
If we had the raw Stability/didn't have DPs as neighbors, we could double down on the previous tactic: Sacrifice nothing, open doors to some refugees. We maintain the old customs, simply work harder, and give freely to weather the crisis.

But mostly, this was a consequence of a series of compromises, so we wound up in a situation where nobody's really happy with any particular thing, but we're not totally screwed on anything either.

We know Low Chance is something close to 25%, Chance is usually something around the 50% mark, and high chance is usually something around the 70% mark...but that's just pattern recognition from what AN usually does, and ignores the fickle dice gods.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
what do you think on the current vote right now?
 
VoidZero said:
I don't understand math and programming but great job!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's pretty simple to use if you want to try it out. You copy and paste all of the code into the python interpreter of your choice (an easy one online is this one.) You can adjust the probabilities assigned to the chances there at the top, and you define which actions you want to take by changing the values next to actionOrderBase.
For example, my proposed harmony+king death plan is
actionOrderBase = ['SacrificeLarge', 'KingDies', 'HarmonyYes', 'WardKeep', 'RefugeeFriendly']

The names are in that big list right below, and are arranged in the same order as the vote's. After you set your parameters you just go ahead and run it and see what numbers it prints out.
 
veekie said:
The lowlanders are eating a MAJOR plague, and then eating a Comet stability hit. They're going to eat an Econ hit from the plague, and with luck this would trigger governmental crisis....unfortunately remember, the past generation of Dead Priests have been working on moderation and being less murderous assholes, so the combo is going to be "the gods are angry that we have gone soft!"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You have to remember that, while everyone claims us to be spiritual experts, we really aren't. Meanwhile the Dead Priests are a theocracy.
 
BungieONI said:
Anyway here are my thoughts on my Ideal @Umi-san .

Absolutely Kind and Absolutely Ruthless
We are a humble, generous and compassionate people. We believe in the best in people. We open our arms to anyone. However, we have an absolute line in the sand, and if anyone abuses our kindness to harm those we care for and protect. We will destroy them utterly and tear down all they have worked for.

Let's break this down.

We are a humble, generous and compassionate people. -> What this means is that we don't grandstand, we give to others, and we will most importantly listen to the plight of other peoples and at least consider their words.

We believe in the best in people. -> We believe that people are good at heart and it takes evidence for us to think otherwise. Often we think, that cultures can ruin a person and make them take actions that are destructive and barbarous and even evil and think they are right and just.

We open our arms to anyone. -> We believe in giving people a sanctuary if they are suffering. The fire is indeed warm. We believe in giving people the chance to show what they are on a very deep social and moral level. We almost test them. "Will you spit on the hand trying to help you?"

However, we have an absolute line in the sand, -> We have only one line. We will warn you once if you seem to be on a path to crossing it. If you ignore it what comes next comes next.

and if anyone abuses our kindness to harm those we care for and protect.-> We don't particularly care if you are the horde of Nomads, the Dead Priests, or members of our own or even the gods when we are extremely pushed. The only difference this makes is how long we take to enact our response and how much force we bring to bear.

We will destroy them utterly and tear down all they have worked for. -> You have shirked our freely given kindness? You have spat on the hand that has an honest desire to try to help and shown you want to be destructive and hostile? You have destroyed and savaged what we protect? Did not listen to our warning, freely given? As you wish. We will Destroy you. And all of your works will be torn apart as a lesson to others so that they do not make such a foolish decision. If these others disagree with usyour example may convince them to be kinder, or they will leave us and ours alone.

This is almost a Fey way of thought. Very much taking our knowledge and trying to cultivate wisdom in ourselves and others as well as make friends.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel like this is a somewhat nice Ideal, but not one that I can agree with and, if it was intended to be such, not one that reflects the actions our society has historically taken.

I'm inarguably fine with being kind and compassionate. I'm questionable in regards to generosity toward external parties - it helps our appearance, which is good, but giving away ourselves cannot be done recklessly.
I'm fine with believing in the best of everyone and welcoming everyone with open arms, but only if, as you've done, it's conditional on evidential support.
I'm fine with drawing a line in the sand, but having it be one that demands destruction once crossed is foolish. Pursuing absolute destruction provides no chance for reformation, no preservation of the resources the relevant entity constitutes, and depending on that party's strength would entail a reckless waste of our own resources. Multiple lines successively demanding harsher retribution is a better choice.
Absolutes are nice when Ideals but bad when reified.
 
notgreat said:
It's pretty simple to use if you want to try it out. You copy and paste all of the code into the python interpreter of your choice (an easy one online is this one.) You can adjust the probabilities assigned to the chances there at the top, and you define which actions you want to take by changing the values next to actionOrderBase.
For example, my proposed harmony+king death plan is
actionOrderBase = ['SacrificeLarge', 'KingDies', 'HarmonyYes', 'WardKeep', 'RefugeeFriendly']

The names are in that big list right below, and are arranged in the same order as the vote's. After you set your parameters you just go ahead and run it and see what numbers it prints out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ok, using your script(thanks for that by the way!) if we go extreme on all options, we have a 33% chance of coming apart at the seams. Holy fuck.
 
tryrar said:
what do you think on the current vote right now?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I still believe we're better off reducing the number of people we take in(even to the point of not getting any Econ!) over sacrificing more stuff, so no go there. It's a counterproductive approach to problem solving to burn up resources to placate the public in a crisis, and setting a trend is a problem.

Just not as opposed to it as king sacrifice, mainly because it's functionally not all that different from a particularly wasteful Festival that we're going to take anyway.
 
You know, the people who are going to get hit the heaviest by this are the WC. It's going to proc at least two instances, quite possibly more, of Pioneering Spirit, while make them very much not wanting to submit to the Dead Priests who just took them over and then suddenly comet and disease.

I wonder if the dead priest's vassals socially collapsing would cause them to experience Stability drops actually...
 
Last edited:
tryrar said:
If you can come up with a vote that a)gets us the same or more econ as we started B)doesn't drop us more than one stability, or actually gains stability, then I'd say you have a point.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sac the King or teach Warding?

Or, burn all the food. Eh, it worked at the beginning of time, when everyone was starving to death. Should work just fine now!

VoidZero said:
Who knows? Might even work better than expected.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I would love to see how Civilization Implosion mechanics work! ... Wait, why is everyone looking at me like that?

veekie said:
But mostly, this was a consequence of a series of compromises, so we wound up in a situation where nobody's really happy with any particular thing, but we're not totally screwed on anything either.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm certainly not happy with it! I'm actually getting flashbacks to that one time I tried to get people to get Sacred Cart Warriors way back when. Boy, those would have been useful about a week ago, eh? Anyway, enough of that salt, time for different salt: while the plan doesn't totally screw us in any way, it isn't really gaining us much either. Sure, the King lives, but that's only going to be true for another turn or so. Yeah, we avoid a human sacrifice trait, but we also forfeit a chance to evolve whichever traits enabled this decision in the first place. And hogging Sacred Warding is, from what I can suss out from the mechanics, straight up against our values!

I am very annoyed with all of you. I have so much salt, you have no idea. I'm unsubbing, be back in a few days! Try not to let your rampant fear of Undesirable Evolution get you devoured by a Civ without any such qualms!

2988 Damn you Academia Nut, why must your quests be so good!
 
bluefur87 said:
You know, the people who are going to get hit the heaviest by this are the WC. It's going to proc at least two instances, quite possibly more, of Pioneering Spirit, while make them very much not wanting to submit to the Dead Priests who just took them over and then suddenly 'comet'.

I wonder if the dead priest's vassals socially collapsing would cause them to experience Stability drops actually...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Umm, you forget the WC is defunct, and it's just the HK and the DPs now. I'm pretty sure neither have PS
 
bluefur87 said:
You have to remember that, while everyone claims us to be spiritual experts, we really aren't. Meanwhile the Dead Priests are a theocracy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I want to point out that the whole moderation, less sacrifices, and better treatment of tributaries are likely to be Noble ideas rather than Priest ideas, since half of these reduce the power of the priests.

Perfect time for them to declare that the gods are displeased and obviously they should be more in charge, that sacrifices should happen more often.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top