What is the plan for when we hit -3 Wealth from this?
Paths of Civilization
- Thread starter Academia Nut
- Start date
- Original
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
1. The Genius saw that Ironworks was coming and would want a ton of forests; we're taking that into account now. I offered above plausible reasons why the Hero here and PrimalShadow can both be right: our results from crisis response actions couldn't be firmly predicted, and our needs have shifted a great deal going from the main turn to the mid turn.
2. Could you offer a specific action plan for our coming main turn that only addresses fires with all of its actions and therefore has no room for forests or a policy switch? Otherwise, I find this too general a point and not credible in our situation where we reasonably expect Invested Actions to be introduced in the short to mid term. Turn to turn we have some leeway with forests if we maintain 3-4 open slots - if everything is on fire next turn we won't switch and if everything is on fire after we switch then we'll build extra kilns the next turn.
3. I'm quite familiar with that post, yes; just as I'm quite familiar with the mechanical details of our forest production and consumption. I would love some speculation on the specific narrative consequences of going over our limit for various periods of time, since we're balancing that risk against the known narrative problems of being short on Wealth or Econ for various periods of time.
4. I'm not really opposed to urbanization, so that's not a terribly strong argument for me. I find its action costs worth it (at the 2 Infrastructure Policy pace) and am happy to pay with Expand Forest, Aqueducts, various stability/intrigue actions, and kilns. Further, this is going to happen anyway from Balanced Policy and our Free City policies, just at a higher cost that leaves us responding less efficiently to other things.
Quests and Forests are both never ending concerns with upsides and downsides that we will always have to continually manage. They seem to fall into the same category for me. Setting a Policy for a particular quest would be short term, but that's not what's being discussed here.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I find situations that are helped by trading a couple points of stability for a couple points of martial very, very rare. I certainly would not have done it on the preceding turns.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Do you think it would build a level 3 City before we get the government upgrade?
E: Personally, I think Baths in Stallion Pen, Baths in Valleyguard, a level 2 Market in Redshore, a second Level 2 City* , and potentially a Governor's Palace and/or an additional ironworks or ironworks upgrade all come before that.
*I believe Valleyhome, Redhills, Valleyguard, and Lower Valleyhome all have good enough water access due to taking 3 progress to build an aqueduct for the latter four and Valleyhome being on the same river as Lower Valleyhome as far as I know
Last edited:
- Location
- United Kingdom
[X] [Enclave] Attempt to reconcile issues (-1 Stability, -4 Mysticism, -6 Culture, ???)
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore)
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore) x2
[X] [React] Restore confidence after the plague (Sec Restore Order + Sec Proclaim Glory)
[X] [PSN] Main Expand Forests (-2 Cent + Costs)
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore)
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore) x2
[X] [React] Restore confidence after the plague (Sec Restore Order + Sec Proclaim Glory)
[X] [PSN] Main Expand Forests (-2 Cent + Costs)
[X] [Enclave] Attempt to reconcile issues (-1 Stability, -4 Mysticism, -6 Culture, ???)
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore)
[X] [React] Greet new nomad chief (Main Targeted Salt Gift)
[X] [React] Restore confidence after the plague (Sec Restore Order + Sec Proclaim Glory)
[X] [PSN] Main Plant Poppies (-2 Cent + Costs)
Please don't throw us into negative wealth.
[X] [React] Attempt to get the western colonies in line (Main Influence Subordinate - Starts with Western Wall, x2 also goes to Greenshore, x3 goes to Tinshore)
[X] [React] Greet new nomad chief (Main Targeted Salt Gift)
[X] [React] Restore confidence after the plague (Sec Restore Order + Sec Proclaim Glory)
[X] [PSN] Main Plant Poppies (-2 Cent + Costs)
Please don't throw us into negative wealth.
Shard
One and Many
- Location
- Malaysia
I'm less concerned about that than the ~7 cities we had right before the megaplague. It pushed our Cent cap down to the point where we ate an instant -[Main] action.
In any event, I don't like spending actions changing how our actions are arranged - If we're going to take Infra policies, I very much prefer if it's because we have more True Cities, not because we spent a [Sec] on changing our policies. Plus you know, the Infra policies are gonna build ironworks at some point, and we want our forests for all the wood they're gonna get eaten up by.
(Also, yes, I don't like Active Policy changes either.)
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
Hrm. Sorry.
Hm.
[X] [PSN] Main Plant Cotton (-2 Cent + Costs)
?
Any idea how threatening the new Nomads would be as a settled civilization?
The Cavalry is, of course, scary but it's also a hardpoint against other hordes in a few turns. And in the meantime, they have absolutely zero experience with anything regarding being a settled people given that everyone in the area they settled down in got brutally murdered, so it's not even a case of the usual nomads taking over a settled civ.
So there is a good chance of getting them into our cultural orbit if they buy everything except the Salt from us. And hey, we'd be happy to pay them money to go and keep other nomads away. They can even keep the loot and we'd help if they want.
So theoretically, we could do as we did with the Heavens Hawk and try and hire them as Mercenaries and eventually turn them into a March to secure that flank against the Steppes.
The Cavalry is, of course, scary but it's also a hardpoint against other hordes in a few turns. And in the meantime, they have absolutely zero experience with anything regarding being a settled people given that everyone in the area they settled down in got brutally murdered, so it's not even a case of the usual nomads taking over a settled civ.
So there is a good chance of getting them into our cultural orbit if they buy everything except the Salt from us. And hey, we'd be happy to pay them money to go and keep other nomads away. They can even keep the loot and we'd help if they want.
So theoretically, we could do as we did with the Heavens Hawk and try and hire them as Mercenaries and eventually turn them into a March to secure that flank against the Steppes.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I mean, I understand how it seems inefficient, but we're going to build the Marketplace Level 2 manually if we don't, and that's worse.
Our LTE is huge right now; we aren't likely to run into that problem again soon, and it's a fairly predictable problem usually. I don't think it's worth constraining our actions over.
No one is proposing to cut back on forest production, just to change how we do it.
Might work. We're awaiting info from AN on whether our Heroic Admin can do order of operations on mid turn react options as well, and I suppose more specifically on whether he can further do them with PSN actions.
Last edited:
Shard
One and Many
- Location
- Malaysia
Quite frankly, what are the odds of us not having things we want to spend our actions on, or otherwise would want to not spend a [Main] Expand Forest literally every turn?
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
It's not literally every turn. It's these exact two to three turns before we build the Grand Hall annexes and get Invested Actions. I also think it's not the end of the world if we have to skip a turn and build extra Kilns to compensate. Keep in mind that Forestry policy doesn't give innovation rolls, so it's really just about the slots used and that we are occasionally expanding the area of the forest.
Also, if our actions are that constrained, then I'd like to have Infrastructure, since it can build things more relevant to crises. Why you'd rather have a forest than walls or baths or ironworks during a serious crisis, I'm not sure.
E: What are people's opinions on Defence vs Forestry vs Infrastructure?
Last edited:
Okay, I'm looking through the action list and something doesn't make sense to me one way or another.
Influence Subordinate is said to be something meant to put a targets culture closer to our own on the action list, understandable.
Support Subordinate is said to be getting a target back up to speed and gaining loyalty, also understandable.
Why in the world are our reaction choices influence subordinate then? These places are fundamentally our culture last I checked, and their theoretical reasoning for breaking off should be on how much help we are to them. But influence subordinate would just be teaching them to do stuff, since their culture is already mostly aligned with ours.
Support even gets them more econ, which is the stat they should be afraid of losing the most after the plague!
Support seems to be both superior mechanically and narratively, so either the action is actually incredibly weak despite the rewards saying otherwise, or our reaction actions considering our subordinates are just horrible options.
Influence Subordinate is said to be something meant to put a targets culture closer to our own on the action list, understandable.
Support Subordinate is said to be getting a target back up to speed and gaining loyalty, also understandable.
Why in the world are our reaction choices influence subordinate then? These places are fundamentally our culture last I checked, and their theoretical reasoning for breaking off should be on how much help we are to them. But influence subordinate would just be teaching them to do stuff, since their culture is already mostly aligned with ours.
Support even gets them more econ, which is the stat they should be afraid of losing the most after the plague!
Support seems to be both superior mechanically and narratively, so either the action is actually incredibly weak despite the rewards saying otherwise, or our reaction actions considering our subordinates are just horrible options.
Last edited:
I've thought about this some more, and I realize that I have a more fundamental disagreement with this.
So let me ask: whey you say that voters are going to go for a shiny instead of forestry, what are you thinking they will go for? I would expect that you are imagining something valuable; completing a quest with nice rewards, taking an opportunity to restore trade with our neighbors, perhaps putting work towards some new urgent problem that just surfaced...
So. Useful stuff. Presumably, the voters are choosing it for a reason, and think think it is MORE VALUABLE then the extra forests would be. We aren't going to give up a useful action in return for nothing; whatever "shiny" we are getting is going to be superior to forests as far as the majority of the thread is concerned.
Now, despite highly valuing forests, you might be among that majority. I assume that if the opportunity is sufficiently valuable or the threat sufficiently dire, you would (grudgingly) be willing to cut into our Forest reserves to make time for dealing with it. In such a case, you should be happy that we switched policies like I suggested, since that is what allows us to do this in the first place.
Alternatively, you might be among the minority. You could argue that most of the poeple in the thread are wrong, and that forests are important enough that we can't compromise them for a moment; and that however valuable or important the alternative we are considering is, it simply isn't worth reducing our forest reserves this way. In this case, you might regret having switched off Forestry policy, since it gives voters the choice to make what you think is the wrong decision.
So. The way I see it, you are currently predicting the second case, and are accordingly somewhat pessimistic about turning off Forestry Policy. "Think about it," you reason; "if we switch policies now, that gives the thread a chance to vote for the wrong thing." Except, if that is the argument you are making and I'm not misinterpreting you, this isn't a policy argument; it is a POLITICS argument. Effectively, you are saying that you are willing to pay resources to make sure that we stay locked in on important priority, instead of freeing it up for a vote.
I don't especially care for this argument.
VoidZero
Passing Flan 布丁魔王
- Location
- Anywhere but RL
Fairly threatening, less than a raging or unified clan but more than a mid-size settled civilization like HK or Dead Priest. The danger came from transition between powerful but unstable clan military to stable but more spread out Kingdom. That means the advantages of both are more prominent but associated drawbacks have not developed.
As for trying to get some say in the new Khan's empire building, worth a try; but sheer distance makes it costy. We don't know if they will start up war with the swamp people, or vice versa.
Because we're replacing their independence-minded elite with our loyal core elite.
DocMatoi
Theoretical Lover of Girls
- Location
- within 2 hours of the White House
- Pronouns
- They/Them
To avoid mass-urbanization, all we need to do is avoid getting our LTE too low. Infrastructure has little to do with it.
Furthermore, 2 Infrastructure policies isn't even enough to keep up with our QUESTS. It is way too little to be worried about runaway industrialization.
Last edited:
- Location
- Austria
Passives are not for rapid switching, they are for long-term effects.
And why we won't switch ut back? Because of 'oh one more turn wont hurt' effect - which is a bad idea if you are talking about passives, which are long-term.
Influence is naratively sending them specialists+replacing their elites with loyal to us. Former they need to fight plague, latter comes as a rider with former.
Supprt sends people who are no good at fighting plague or subverting loyalties.
@George ,I will reply to you from home, phone is not enough for this.
Okay, that's what it does thematically, but if it's regularly replacing their elite with our own, shouldn't the loyalty gained from influence subordinate be a lot higher than support subordinate?
One is replacing their entire elite with loyalists to the nation. The other is just giving them stuff so they'll like us more. The second offers a chance of loyalty at a secondary and definite loyalty at a main, while the former only offers definite loyalty at a main.
The given rewards for these do not match that narrative at all. Like, even in a normal situation they don't match the narrative, not just in this one instance. I'd expect replacing the elite with loyalists to always gain us more loyalty than just giving them some econ.
Abby Normal
High Clerk of the Ymaryn
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Civ Sheet has been updated! ( @PrimalShadow @veekie )
Diff Checker
Diff Checker
Highlights:
Diff Checker
Diff Checker
Highlights:
New stats, which includes confirmation that the admin penalty from provinces rounds up (since 9 cent is yellow), and that gold, salt, grand docks, and markets are all working, including the market in Valleyhome.
We have contact with our colonies in the west...and shit its a bad situation D=
Thunder horse is safe on dependency, and actually over cap on loyalty
Still no word from Amber Road
Mercs starting to recover effectiveness, but not loyalty
New glass tech
Butted -> Riveted, from refugees and/or general innovation rolls
New horse tech
DocMatoi
Theoretical Lover of Girls
- Location
- within 2 hours of the White House
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Thunderfriends!
- Location
- Austria
It replaces some elites - and thus pisses of others.
We have two options right now:
- Stay on Forest Policy.
- Switch to Infrastructure Policy. Now we have the choice between
- 2a. Switching back to Forestry Policy, having come out positive in the process despite the switching coss.
- 2b. Don't switch back.
You are saying that you are willing to sacrifice the shortfall between (1) to (2a), as long as the thread is denied the chance to choose between (2a) and (2b).
I urge people to push back against this reasoning. We should decide our actions via discussion, and if your actions can't win via reasoned debate then you absolutely shouldn't give up extra resources to make sure that things never come to a vote at all.