I agree in general but disagree as to the degree it can be mitigated. Let's see the options before arguing though.
Paths of Civilization
- Thread starter Academia Nut
- Start date
- Original
I agree in general but disagree as to the degree it can be mitigated. Let's see the options before arguing though.
- Location
- Provo Utah or Northwestern Idaho
[X] Random Admin tech upgrade
Choose the next heir
[X] Magwyna (-1 Stability, other effects, [Poor Martial, Heroic Admin and Diplo])
Choose a midturn project
[X] Grand Sacrifice (-3 Econ, +2 Stability)
Refugee policy
[X] Take in some (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
Grand Sacrifice offsets Magwyna as the heir, and she is probably the best leader available right now.
And while I would love for us to have a true city, right now as we are fighting a disease is not a good idea. Unless somehow cramming all these people together makes people's immune systems better able to resist this sickness? I don't think that will happen though since from the symptoms described I am pretty sure its Whooping Cough, which is the result of a bacterial infection and needs pretty hardcore antibiotics to treat. Which don't exist yet, as in we don't have the tools or the knowledge to get the tools and knowledge to get the tools and knowledge we need, repeated several more times.
Choose the next heir
[X] Magwyna (-1 Stability, other effects, [Poor Martial, Heroic Admin and Diplo])
Choose a midturn project
[X] Grand Sacrifice (-3 Econ, +2 Stability)
Refugee policy
[X] Take in some (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
Grand Sacrifice offsets Magwyna as the heir, and she is probably the best leader available right now.
And while I would love for us to have a true city, right now as we are fighting a disease is not a good idea. Unless somehow cramming all these people together makes people's immune systems better able to resist this sickness? I don't think that will happen though since from the symptoms described I am pretty sure its Whooping Cough, which is the result of a bacterial infection and needs pretty hardcore antibiotics to treat. Which don't exist yet, as in we don't have the tools or the knowledge to get the tools and knowledge to get the tools and knowledge we need, repeated several more times.
...you are aware that I was against the tax reform in the first place, right?
And your rhetoric had a lot to do with people being unwilling to raise stability even before the previous crisis and the nomad war happened.
Hell, even now, you are so convinced in your own infallability, that you are trying to convince everyone, yourself included, that high stability is a bad thing.
Are you truly this unable to admit a mistake?
And frankly, your attitude of being the only intelligent person being caught in a thread with a bunch of idiots is grating and tiring.
Last edited:
pblur
Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn
- Location
- Lawrence's Wagon
Agreed. The appearance of disenfranchisement is a serious problem. (Of course, it's partially ACTUAL disenfranchisement; some people in this thread of made it clear they would never support a Stallion king.)
Also, another point to all the 'civil war and stomp them into an example' crowd; we're electing a king with bad Martial. It's VERY not the time to go to war with our most heavily martial province.
...could you please point out a post where someone would suggest declaring a war on our own province.
Not that it even were possible, mechanically.
pblur
Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn
- Location
- Lawrence's Wagon
The problem I have with this vote is that Grand Sacrifice doesn't solve our biggest problem. We're shaping up to a crisis with the March within 3-4 turns. Snubbing yet another legit King candidate (admittedly in favor of a better one, but they don't know that) is just going to accelerate it.
I'd recommend Roads. The faster we start prepping for that crisis, the fewer turns we'll have to eat penalties from it.
High stabilty shows the general satisfaction of our people in the rule of the new queen, and will make it impossible to undermine her rule easily.
This said, I am all for building trails next turn.
Last edited:
Powerofmind
In Madness Fallen
- Location
- United States
So hang on. You bitch that it's my fault that the tax reform went so poorly, and then when I explain how it wasn't my damn fault, you turn around and say 'well I didn't want it in the first place'?
My rhetoric was nothing! Basically anyone who wanted to main restore harmony had to go through a wall of people arguing against it because there were other priorities for main actions! My argument was drowned in action economy arguments!
I am convinced that high stability is not all good - primarily because that's what AN actually said on the matter - and I work to remind people of that. I have never said it's a bad thing, I've only said that it's not purely good. I will not admit any mistake, because I'm not the one being misunderstood here. If you don't like my attitude, stop arguing with me from the position of misunderstanding my god damn points.
For the purposes of resolving this crisis narratively, it's not clear Grand Sacrifice does much that's useful. Meanwhile, actually making sure the March and our northern provinces benefit from the infrastructure we're building (through roads and aqueducts) and then Restoring Order to make the remaining hotheads sit down and shut up has obvious narrative utility. (Enforce Law might also work, if we bring our centralization down a bit first.)
Last edited:
If our diplo king can get the northern provinces on side we would still win by sheer dint of economic disparity. However under the circumstance I do not think it is worth it.
- Location
- Australia
@Powerofmind, @tenchifew, please stop the both of you.
- Location
- Germany
If i am honest. I want that crisis a bit, even if that means we lose the march.*
That doesn´t mean that i don´t plan to build the road next turn.
At this point i don´t really care if the roads or the Grand Sacrifice win.
Both have different out comes as we need to take different actions next turn.
I really plan to deal with the March now and if we have to exile /kill quite a few of them.
Edit* just so we can bring out the big guns and make sure that the provinces get the note that they can´t just go try to become independet and if they try that they get hammered don´t by the rest of the nation.
Last edited:
pblur
Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn
- Location
- Lawrence's Wagon
That's not what I said. I said they were in favor of a civil war, not that they specifically wanted to declare it.
Most recently:
pblur
Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn
- Location
- Lawrence's Wagon
This is pure speculation dependent on a specific view of what Stability measures. I don't see it.
...wow.
Now, either you were, and I quote you, "one of perhaps two people" seeing the possible bad sides of high stability... and thus convincing the voters to not raise stabilty for turn after turn after turn...
Which led to a situation where we entered a major crisis at negative stability in the end, or you were one of the "wall of people arguing against it because there were other priorities".
Take your pick.
As I read it, your rhetoric was key to our low stability at this time.
And you keep trying to argue it. In my eyes, it nears a delusion.
- Location
- Philippines
So you want civil war? Are you mad! Nothing good can come from such an action all it will do is breed resentment among the people and wast valuable resources better spent elsewhere
Umi-san
Procrastinating.
- Location
- ꙮ
*shrug* I was irritated and assumed that you had switched to new-but-related topics since you couldn't(?) argue directly against my replies.
Stick to one, please.
This has nothing to do with Study Health, though. Study Metal solves the bad logic problem. Study Health would help us fight this rib-cracking cough, whether by developing a vaccine (unlikely) or simply developing: a habit of washing hands; face masks; cough syrup; idk enough about whooping cough to continue.
As already stated, please consider as to what "immediate problems" might mean. Is a continuous, endemic disease really only an "immediate" problem?
#'Murica
It's already calculated in because the first option is only a chance yet provides Econ.
It's unknown whether they're actually of higher availability. Our boats and their boats just happened to meet, and it's quite possible that the pirates stole them in the strife, which would mean they have less boats at home.
Remember that each boat is likely owned by a family in their civilization, and "owned" by a family in ours.
Maybe. It certainly looks like New Trails will do something, but is it worth it to bring stability down to 0 over the course of our new Hero's election? What will that do to her "other effects"? I think it's quite clear that we can wait on Trails but can't wait on strengthening her position so that our civ doesn't go "wow, elect a woman and society crumbles."
Please make a convincing plan that raises stability w/o depending on a further fall to -1.
We have all of those except "basically slaves."
Worst case it doesn't enable Restore Order and leaves us at 0, still needing to burn Stability.
+, doing New Trails now means it will take significantly longer to do a Double Main New Trails, though I suppose that since our goal is connecting w/ the Stallion Tribes that doesn't matter.
Still means that we connect with these infamously patriarchal people during a time when our new King has brought our people down from their previously great height. Doing GS then Dam + New Trails or Province then Double New Trails just seems less risky, socially.
Strangely enough people were actually trying to do that... Dragon Paradox championed that for a few turns from what I recall. Plans kept being suggested to enrage them and then take them over with the military.
Those plans got shot down and got lots of confusion of why that was a grand idea in the first place.
Somewhat true,it also means the society is more standardized socially. However a lower stability means changes to society are a bit easier. At this point, there are feelings that women need to be crazy levels of competent over a male candidate to fill the same roll... this seems to be trickling down from a good old boys culture in the March. There leadership candidates all have some poison pill side effect culturally.
0 to +1 stability is actually better for excising some arrogance, compared to +2. Also the matched trails efforts with the Stallions means they look like the ones stirring the septic tank. Partly as they are way fonder of hero units that the rest of The People.
This brings to mind a question I've had for a while, though I don't believe it's likely to come up in practice.
Enforce Law gains ~.5 stability, where Enforce Authority costs us the same amount. Does Enforce Law have a chance of gaining stability, or chance of losing stability followed by a one-point gain?
For things that require us to maintain max stability, or that trigger off a stability drop, the difference could matter.
Last edited:
pblur
Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn
- Location
- Lawrence's Wagon
IIRC, we found out last time that the max value was the max it could be used at. It was usable the entire last time we were at 0 Stab, and turned unusable at 1.
Nah, I was restating the same points in different ways. I find that helps people understand things if you approach things from different perspectives until it clicks.
Also, I couldn't figure out what 'lel' meant. It could have been 'lol' put the keys are so far apart that it seemed intentional. I do understand arguing when tired causing issues.
That could be the case, if not for the descriptions.
Stability 2 being "optimistic" and stability 3 being "emboldened" shows me that our people in this case have enough trust in the government and in the next day to try out something more advenurous, actually leading to innovation and social reforms.
On the other side low stabilty has led multiple times to "my family/my village first" and reactionary dealings.
This is exactly what happened at the end of the tax crisis and what took the wind out of the sails of the Young Stallion faction.
I don't find these things mutually exclusive. Stability levels effect how change happens. For instance, if The People took the trait 'Order over All' things would only really change when stability was low.