No matter what we do choose to do I believe we can all agree this mess shows us we need to do more to keep tabs on the Lapgives. The question is how?

Sending representatives like we ad the option to do earlier would have been a good option but now its too late for that.
 
My thinking is that they are heavy spearmen but their equipment is probably distinctly italian. Like, you wouldn't look at Messapii hoplites and confuse them for Greek hoplites.

Their shields probably have more in common with the Scutum than with the Hoplon as an example, and their helmets are open faced with crests.



They delivered the ones they caught, and there is no guarantee that others wont rise up with dreams of salt fairies dancing in their heads.

Its like living next to a field of gold and forbidding anyone from going out and scooping up nuggets. Its not going to happen and the people who live there are going to resent you from restraining them so. Even if you kill the ring leaders, its not just the nobility who would benefit from the salterns. The common folk would have lots of money to make from building the salterns, harvesting and transporting the salt, selling it to their neighbors, and they know it too.

That is why he is bringing us an offer of peace so that he can open up the salterns again and remove the reason for the nobility to rebel. They are probably a constant distraction, and he doesn't have the ability to simply impose his will or raze or relocate the cities away from the marsh. For one, we are right next door and he knows we would jump at a chance to seize the salterns. So he needs Salapia and Herdonia on board if he is going to mount any kind of effective resistance.

The primary reason we were even interested in Salapia and Herdonia as vassals was to get at the salt marshes in the first place.

And I am not saying that the Dauni would go for total war scorch the earth. I am saying that the King can make a war more of a headache then it already is, and that IF we wish to go to war, we should not do so right now. We have an opportunity to remove a distraction and focus on the adriatic, the Messapii, and Athens. We should take it and wait for things to settle before bullying the Dauni around and taking those two cities.
You seem to be ignoring the fact he's gave those truly loyal to him their lands, I agree with you he didn't kill the entire opposition, but he's now using the shock of their death to stop us from coming to their aid.

This is what the peace treaty is about, forcing us to back off so he can consolidate his control, clean house then come back for a chunk of our Empire the minute our back is turned.

His men are likely loyal, likely value the land and their position in his court over Rebellion for coin, especially as they literally just saw, and likely will participate in, the butchery of those who wanted to use the salt trade.

Yeah, it's valuable, but the Kingdom has been able to restrict people from trading it or even building infrastructure for decades, hell they destroyed the infrastructure themselves, and after what happened, if they get breathing room, they will purge what's left of the Pro-Salt Trade Faction rather easily once they have our word that we won't interfere, which raises the question why anyone would rise up for the sake of two middling cities? Especially when salt could turn them into true rivals.

You say he's doing this because he suddenly wants to open trade. But that just shows you haven't looked at what the Pro-Salt Trade faction wanted or did. They were willing to welcome back to his control and make peace themselves, leaving behind the idea of Eretria annexation in return for the salt trade being reopened.

That's what the Peace was, and why they were at that feast.

Killing them for wanting trade, because he wants to open trade? That one doesn't make sense to me, could you expand on what exactly you mean with that? Because wither you've missed the pint entirely or I have.

Finally, the idea of other concerns making war an issue. Yeah not at this point.

Athens won't immediately jump us, more likely just turn to alternatives for grain. The Illyrians are beaten for now. Taras doesn't hate us and the current vote to deny Athens will definitely improve relations. Colonisation is largely passive unless we decide to start a new colony.

Overall we have no enemies outside our borders and no pressing issues. This is likely one of the last times we'll get to pursue a war like this for decades.

The only enemy at the moment is the Dauni, and they are showing us the heads of those who helped us in the Salentine war and telling us to let their treacherous King do what he likes until he's ready to plunge a dagger in our back.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Hyria] Grant Hyria autonomy and Artahias allyship [+5,500 freemen providing tributes and levies including heavier infantry, Artahias becomes a loyal Eretrian ally rather than vassal].

[X] [Dauni] The Path of Peace [Eretria and the Dauni will cease hostility, open trade to one another, and stop plotting against one another].
 
Yeah, it's valuable, but a the Kingdom has been able to restrict people from trading it or even building infrastructure for decades, and after what happened, if they get breathing room, they will purge what's left of the Pro-Salt Trade Faction

The box of heads is surely not the full extent of the purge Ausculos conducted.
 
The box of heads is surely not the full extent of the purge Ausculos conducted.
Hmmm

This is a good point. If he purged the city, then if we marched to their rescue and only them...

You know, we dont have to suppress the entirety of the Dauni, we only have to take what we want. Salapia for sure, Herdonia if we are feeling bold.

At the very worst we can found colonies on their ruins if he razed the cities.

I am now being tempted.
 
I said he redistributed their land to the common people. Why would the cities be burned if that was the case?
 
Rejecting them leads them to getting their grain elsewhere, and signals that we value Sparta-supporting Taras over Athens. When the grain trade evaporates and the generous friendship of Athens is rejected, so goes the goodwill. All of a sudden, Eretria becomes an unknown; whose side will they come down on, should it come to it? You suggest maybe piling onto Athens with Sparta to preserve balance of power, and that's precisely what they could not tolerate. This makes them far more likely to take hostile action down the road against us, if their citizens are not as fond of us, they are relying more so on the Hellespontine grain, see us cozying up to the Spartan side of the spectrum and aren't sure where we'll fall. Athens will take action to secure its needs; I'd rather be paid for it than have them decide to risk taking it, especially when their payment can be used to make us a tougher nut to crack. Also, should they shift their vital trade away (again, a third of our routes) that cuts down on what we can build and maintain in defense.

A deal with Korinthos seems foolish. They have their inclinations towards reclaiming our new league members and seizing Adriatic trade, and would have no reason not to turn on us even in the unlikely event that Athens is overcome because they vastly outpower us, we have bad history and they want what we have. Only Athen's efforts have shielded us from them; what do you think would protect us if Athens falls? If it's friendship from a common victory, I don't see why you would trust that of Korinthos any more than Athens considering our histories.

We're not on Athens tier. It's OK to suck up to a big power, so long as you stay mindful and find a way to benefit. We can use that stacks of silver from enhanced trade to make ourselves more powerful; we could more easily backstab them later should we feel it warranted to do so because our league will be more developed, populated and prosperous (time is our ally as a settler state), our ships are raising in number and I find it likely that an arrogant Athens would bite of more than it could chew in struggle against Persia or something. Plus they run risk of more revolts, as they grow larger there are more opportunities to get bogged down in various cities deciding they've had enough and revolting while our lighter touch is not as prone to suffer like that in our own league.

I think that rejecting Athens for the principle of it to "not be a puppet" will lessen our capabilities and dampen our long-term growth. The trade wealth (again, Athens is a third of our trade and half the luxury items) can easily shift away as threatened in the update and leave us able to buy less and afford to maintain less of a navy. Please let's not shoot ourselves in the foot to make a statement that we can't yet back up.

I can't continue to back up my argument because I've got to work all day starting in a few hours but this vote really gets at the heart of my desires in this quest. I encourage anyone reading this to please consider voting for the Athenian friendship; we have laid so much groundwork for a fine Adriatic empire, and to go against Athens risks it mightily and harms our coffers.

Why are you whipping yourself to such a panic? The only true thing you've said is that this will likely lead to a decline in the grain trade. But given the issues with enserfment we are having, I am not at all sure that's a bad thing in the medium to long term. Further, the grain trade expanding would be rather bad, since it would push deforestation higher and lead to Eretria struggling to maintain her fleet in a crisis (which is exactly when it is most important to be able to maintain the fleet).

We have absolutely no indication that Athens would seek war to Eretria if we remain neutral. To hear you speak, to remain neutral is tantamount to declaring ourselves the allies of Sparta and Athens our eternal enemy! Which is patently false.

fasquardon
 
I said he redistributed their land to the common people. Why would the cities be burned if that was the case?

I thought he redistributed it to his supporters. Although I suppose the two are not mutually exclusive, I was thinking he gave it to nobles friendly to him. Well, I can see that its turning into a real thorn in his side if he is going through these measures.

We have been agitating for war for some time, so why is he picking now to try to get us to make peace I wonder?
 
I thought he redistributed it to his supporters. Although I suppose the two are not mutually exclusive, I was thinking he gave it to nobles friendly to him. Well, I can see that its turning into a real thorn in his side if he is going through these measures.

We have been agitating for war for some time, so why is he picking now to try to get us to make peace I wonder?

Certainly something to speculate on as I will not inform you of his internal thought process :p
 
Certainly something to speculate on as I will not inform you of his internal thought process :p

Normally we take peace when offered.

I wonder what will happen to his Kingdom if we make war and just take Salapia and Herdonia...

DAMMIT Cetashwayo, why must you tempt me so?

In Eretrian lore there is an old wives tale about a devil who tempts small children to their doom with pretty lights and tasty treats to eat. Its name is Cetashwayo. He is also known for spiriting away naughty children in the dead of night, so eat your anchovies lest he come creeping into the farmhouse at night.
 
Last edited:
This is what the peace treaty is about, forcing us to back off so he can consolidate his control, clean house then come back for a chunk of our Empire the minute our back is turned.

And we want the treaty so we can get our finances in order, expand our force an deal with our subjects and allies so we are preprared for the moment the Dauni show weakness due to a succession criris or an especially bloody raid by the Samnites etc. And unlike the Dauni who are hemmed in by semi-hostile forces on all sides we have the majority of the adriatic to expand into, direct connection to the largest trade-network in the world and a near endless stream of new men coming from Greece itself to strengthen our army. Therefore I would argue that we are far more likely to benefit from this peace than the Dauni are.

And it seems pretty clear that the men he killed were those willing to collaborate with us during the last crisis and that his motivation to do so was their clear disloyalty and I don't really get how you and other make a connection from that to his general stance on the salt trade and espeiucally how this is all just a big trap.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Hyria] Grant Artahias Brention as a bribe to allow Hyria autonomy under Eretria [+12,100 freemen including heavier nfantry, Hyria and Artahias become full vassals, the Kretans are outraged and may cause trouble].
[X] [Dauni] The Path of Pain [Eretria will continue to recieve options relating to war against the Dauni, there will be no easing of hostilities].
[X] [Athenai] Accept the Athenian treaty [Athenai will be grateful, Taras will be disturbed, Eretrian grain trade will grow faster in the future].

I'm finally free of work and have some time to actually contribute to this discussion!

I think people are looking at this is the wrong way. Especially the matter of the Samnites.

Yes, by choosing to make peace here rather than maintaining the status quo (because that's what Path of Pain is, not an immediate declaration of war) we gain a peaceful border in the short run, and we would ensure that we don't end up bordering the Samnites. However that's only in the short run.

The next time the Samnites choose to go to war they can go west again and attack the Ausconi or the Volsci or they can go East and attack the Dauni. Obviously, our preference is for them to continue to look to the west, so how do we encourage that?

If we maintain the status quo and at some point in the future we subjugate the Dauni we - in my view - greatly decrease the odds of the Samnites looking east. Because in that scenario if they choose to make war with the Dauni (our vassals) they would also be going to war with the Peuketii, the Messapii and Eretria; much better for them to continue to focus on the west. By conquering the Dauni we form a regional block that can act as a deterrent against anyone choosing to attack any of our vassals or us, thereby increasing the securing of Eretria and the Epulian League in Italia.

But if the Dauni remain independent then the Samnites -or anyone else - can freely make war on them and we can end up - once again - with an enemy at our borders.

Furthermore, by eventually conquering the Dauni we actively gain a vassal with who boarders the Samnites, and in this scenario, I view that as a positive. The Samnites are the faction in Italia we least want to fight, so by gaining a vassal who boarders them we can proactively approach them and open diplomatic channels while still having a vassal as a buffer. Additionally, as I said above, because attacking that vassal would result in the Samnites simultaneously ending up at war with four different factions it incentivises them to have diplomatic relations with us rather than going to war.

Now, this isn't just important in the short term to avoid a war with the Samnites it's also important as a longer-term strategic move to prevent anyone else from consolidating too much of central and western Italia. Especially Rome.

While Rome doesn't look particularly threatening right now historically over the next 40 years they conquer or diplomatically vassalise a great deal of the southern Etruscian cities, the Sabini, the Volsci, the Ausconi and nearly all the tribes of central Italy (and part of Campania but recent events might change that). And the war(s) that all but decides the fate of Italy are the wars against the Samnites. It's incredibly important that we are in a position to intervene at that point, if not before, and that's considerably easier to do (but not impossible otherwise) if there isn't an independent Dauni between us and the Samnites.

Because again, if the Dauni are independent and the Samnites do conquer them the balance of power shifts and the deterrent we can present is lessened it will be harder to gain a peaceful, positive, relationship with them.

So by maintaining the status quo and eventually conquering the Dauni we not only make the Eretrian homeland considerably more secure. We also increase our wealth through tribute and gaining the Salt Pans and the salt cannot be underestimated. And beyond that we also lessen the threat of the Dauni towards us because we're taking said tribute from them. And as if that wasn't enough we get the extra benefit of lessening the chance we end up at war with the Samnites and gain the opportunity to open diplomatic relations with them.

There are factions and tribes that it will be better to make peace with, to slowly pull into our sphere of influence via trade and patient diplomatic annexation. The Dauni are not, in my view, one of them.
 
Last edited:
We have been agitating for war for some time, so why is he picking now to try to get us to make peace I wonder?

I am wondering if he is feeling he needs the income re-opening the salt works would give him and since he needs to work with Eretria for that... I also wonder if he is posturing to show that he is stronger than he really is. Things among the Dauni may be less stable than we think, so he might be trying to goad us into war or goad us into peace, either of which might be better than the current cold war for him.

fasquardon
 
[X] [Hyria] Allow Artahias to subjugate Hyria [+10,900 freemen providing tribute and levies, Hyrian revolt is crushed and Artahias becomes an Eretrian vassal just as the Peuketii].
[X] [Dauni] The Path of Pain [Eretria will continue to recieve options relating to war against the Dauni, there will be no easing of hostilities].
[X] [Athenai] Refuse the Treaty [Taras will be extremely grateful, Athenai will be unhappy, Eretrian grain trade may be superseded in favor of the Bosporos].

Hrrggghhhh...

Let us take a chance. We had the opportunity to call Kerkyras bluff all those years ago. It seems every time we try to make friends with Taras someone meddles and keeps us at odds. What happens when we rebuff them and try to make peace instead?

We will not repeat the dishonor forced upon our forefathers by the Kerkyrans all those years ago. We gave our oath to Taras, let us see what the fates have in store for our hubris for cleaving to our word so.
 
Last edited:
I am wondering if he is feeling he needs the income re-opening the salt works would give him and since he needs to work with Eretria for that... I also wonder if he is posturing to show that he is stronger than he really is. Things among the Dauni may be less stable than we think, so he might be trying to goad us into war or goad us into peace, either of which might be better than the current cold war for him.

fasquardon

He could probably want to send a message to everyone else that think about oopposing him and counting on Eretria to help them.

Basically i just killed bunch of pro Eretrian nobles, sent their heads to Eretria and forced them to accept my conditions.

Because really he doesn't have much to lose, with war on Dauni being proposed in every elections it could happen and with elimination of those who oppose him, his kingdom pretty much ready for war and knowledge that he would lose it anyway is stating the obvious.

Plus it's not like us refusing will mean war.
 
Last edited:
And we want the treaty so we can get our finances in order, expand our force an deal with our subjects and allies so we are preprared for the moment the Dauni show weakness due to a succession criris or an especially bloody raid by the Samnites etc. And unlike the Dauni who are hemmed in by semi-hostile forces on all sides we have the majority of the adriatic to expand into, direct connection to the largest trade-network in the world and a near endless stream of new men coming from Greece itself to strengthen our army. Therefore I would argue that we are far more likely to benefit from this peace than the Dauni are.

And it seems pretty clear that the men he killed were those willing to collaborate with us during the last crisis and that his motivation to do so was their clear disloyalty and I don't really get how you and other make a connection from that to his general stance on the salt trade and espeiucally how this is all just a big trap.
A. Our finances would be greatly helped by huge amounts of Salt.

B. Do you actually expect the thread to be the ones to declare war or break a peace treaty unless they have to? Because I would bet my entire bank account on that not being the case.

C. That expansion comes at the cost of ramming us straight into Korinthinos when they finally get free of their current conflicts, also making us reliant on naval competition after alienating Athens and will require us to expand our fleet anyway. Trade is also greatly helped by having something to export, such as Salt.

D. It was just made extremely clear he butchered all the collaborators, not just the worst examples. And the fact of the matter is it has been a long term policy of the Dauni to not cultivate Salterns or trade salt with us. They destroyed their own Salterns, banned the trade to the extent the nobility of the two salt trading cities were willing to revolt, before then killing them all at peace talks where the draw for them was reopening the trade.

You can not say 'I don't really get how you and other make a connection from that to his general stance on the salt trade' unless you haven't been looking at the long term policy of the Dauni, the personal policy of their current King, the internal diplomacy and literally anything mentioned about the salt trade in Dauni lands to us.

And yes, I do think it's a big trap because he's literally just showed off the heads of people he spent years luring into a trap before killing.

That's not even mentioning him trying to invade us during the Salentine war before we bribed his vassals and the long standing Iapgyian use of trickery. Which they have employed over a dozen times by this point.
 
He could probably want to send a message to everyone else that think about oopposing him and counting on Eretria to help them.

Basically i just killed bunch of pro Eretrian nobles, sent their heads to Eretria and forced them to accept my conditions.

Because really he doesn't have much to lose, with war on Dauni being proposed in every elections it could happen and with elimination of those who oppose him, his kingdom pretty much ready for war and knowledge that he would lose it anyway is stating the obvious.

Plus it's not like us refusing will mean war.

Yes, that could well be it... And if it were so, I'd be inclined towards path of pain...

fasquardon
 
[X] [Hyria] Grant Hyria autonomy and Artahias allyship [+5,500 freemen providing tributes and levies including heavier infantry, Artahias becomes a loyal Eretrian ally rather than vassal].
[X] [Dauni] The Path of Peace [Eretria and the Dauni will cease hostility, open trade to one another, and stop plotting against one another].
[X] [Athenai] Refuse the Treaty [Taras will be extremely grateful, Athenai will be unhappy, Eretrian grain trade may be superseded in favor of the Bosporos].

Updating my vote concerning Hyria.
 
And yet, in this specific case, we refused these would-be revolters (because we were busy with Taras).

So this is "selling out" people we never wanted.

fasquardon

Yet in specific case it's because those people that Danui didn't open second front when we were at war with Taras, so they basically did risk their lives for us and paid the price. Question is how will we respond?
 
It's worth remembering that the Path of Pain is simply us continuing with the current state of affairs, we're not committed to anything by selecting it. It simply keeps our options open.

Well, it explicitly closes the door to peace with the Dauni. There won't be an opportunity like this again.
 
Back
Top