plus several (low probablility) chances that we'll GAIN stability instead of loosing itso like...
[] The whole lowlands are kind of a mess, you know? (-3 Stability, +6-8 Econ, other effects)
[] Share with even those who don't want to listen (-1 Diplomacy, +1 immediate Stability, chance for additional stability, other effects)
[] Megaproject Support
Next turn:
[] [Main] The Garden
[] [Secondary] The Garden
[] [Secondary] The Garden x2
[] [Kick] The Garden
+ 6-8 - 3 = 3-5 + 5 current Econ - Provincial actions
+1 - 3 +x? + 1 Stability = -1? + 1 again if The Garden finishes in one turn.
End result, Megaproject + 0 net stability + whatever the hell the provinces do + 3 Econ, probably.
I'm pretty sure the saltern is actually among the earliest of our megaprojects in terms of reality--i suppose it depends on exactly what type of salt production it is, because wikipedia's kind of vague on that when it talks about salt production being extant in semi-large amounts since ~4000 BCE...
Do we? I'd been under the impression that stopped... @Academia Nut confirm?
Because disease knows no borders? That's basically the entire logic behind modern medicine. Get as many people immune to a thing as possible, so that it can't spread and cause a crisis.If people want to take in everyone from the lowlands, we're gonna need the expansion policy to make room for those people.
Also, why should we give up the medical tech for defeating a disease that AN called "one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse"?
*Looks at the influx of votes to go to negative stability*
See, this is why I was really hoping for a buffer...
stability and better herd immunityIf people want to take in everyone from the lowlands, we're gonna need the expansion policy to make room for those people.
Also, why should we give up the medical tech for defeating a disease that AN called "one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse"?
I think that this is a mass diplo annex action so the villages and land comes with the refugeesIf people want to take in everyone from the lowlands, we're gonna need the expansion policy to make room for those people.
Also, why should we give up the medical tech for defeating a disease that AN called "one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse"?
It's only -2 thanks to the sharing action.*sees mass of -3 stability hits people are willing to take.*
...
Ugh...
tbf, most of those who are voting for 3 are also voting for the +1 immediate stability, with a chance for more, and 3 possible activations of GG.*Looks at the influx of votes to go to negative stability*
See, this is why I was really hoping for a buffer...
Because then instead of just being immune to the disease we can cure it and everyone knows it, we might be able to start forcing everyone around us to at least send tribute for keeping our 'magic' in place.If people want to take in everyone from the lowlands, we're gonna need the expansion policy to make room for those people.
Also, why should we give up the medical tech for defeating a disease that AN called "one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse"?
We're also implicitly telling them how to horribly fuck up other people with bioweapons, and under the circumstances our civ is likely to take that very poorly.
Do we? I'd been under the impression that stopped... @Academia Nut confirm?
Three reasons:If people want to take in everyone from the lowlands, we're gonna need the expansion policy to make room for those people.
Also, why should we give up the medical tech for defeating a disease that AN called "one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse"?
*remembers that synergy is a thing* oh don't worry we're not completely out there on going for the risk. There is a chance that basically going "all the cures!" And then saying "come to us to get all the cures!" Will have a good effect on each other.*Looks at the influx of votes to go to negative stability*
See, this is why I was really hoping for a buffer...