Magna Graecia: Titanomachia (A City State Quest)

[RagnvarOdinson]

Our Hoplites aren't as good as they could be that is true. The rest of our military however is one of the best in the region. Our cavalry is composed of above average Greeks and skilled Iapyges auxiliaries. Meanwhile our Iapygic skirmishers proved themselves to be quite versatile in the Tarantine war and should at the very least be as good as their Daunii counterpart. Our Ekdromoi give us access to both good marines and a much more flexible hoplite force than is normal. And the original Kleos Exoria where some of the best in the Medditerenean, even if quality has degraded (which it probably has) they should not be underestimated. Saying our military is weak really isn't accurate.

Click to shrink...

We have good troops yes but actual knowledge of war, strategy, siege, logistics and all that jazz? that's what needs improvement also the only truly outstanding troops we have right now are our cavalry and even then they are more of a light/skirmish type that probaly would still need improvement to actualy be one we could use in the batteflied in some other methods other then harassing enemy lines and being a shield against the enemy cavalry only. We've won every battle we've been in so far not because our troops are of high quality but because of luck and the tactics we used.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

We have good troops yes but actual knowledge of war, strategy, siege, logistics and all that jazz? that's what needs improvement also the only truly outstanding troops we have right now are our cavalry and even then they are more of a light/skirmish type that probaly would still need improvement to actualy be one we could use in the batteflied in some other methods other then harassing enemy lines and being a shield against the enemy cavalry only. We've won every battle we've been in so far not because our troops are of high quality but because of luck and the tactics we used.

Click to shrink...

Skirmishing and harassing supply lines is pretty much the primary job of cavalry right now. If our cavalry is doing other stuff something has probably gone wrong somewhere. As for the other stuff its either stuff we are already good at or can't do much about. Our logistics are top tier thanks to the military slaves we instituted way back in the first quest. Siege will remain stagnant until the war in Hellas provokes innovations which we will then quickly pick up on by word of QM. As for strategy we've seen time and time again that our chosen strategoi are able to pursue their goals while rapidly adjusting on the fly when complications inevitable pop up. I can't really see any situations where we won because of luck not skill. Even in the Tarantine war where bad luck forced us into fighting a pitched battle we wanted to avoid we see our strategos taking stock of the situations, faking a sack of Taras (hoyl fuck Linos this is impressive) and besting one of the Great Powers in Italia. Only reason we weren't able to press on and go for a full victory is because the rest of Italia got so scared of us they stepped in and enforced a peace.

EDIT Accidentallyd a word

 

[RagnvarOdinson]

Alright, I admit when you put it like that then we seem to be fairel acomplished in war. Which confuses me because if we are that damn good at it as you put it, why do so many seem to be afraid of waging war in the first place be it because they think we'd loose too many people or some other excuses/reasons.

Luck as in the actions taken by the chosen strategoi at the time actualy working out well enough for it to be considered a success, as for the cavalry thing yes. it's their current job but it shouldn't be only that, a decent cavalry is one who can be used both in skirmish and in a head on charge. Maybe in time we weill even have Horse Archery, who knows. But I'd rather not be dependant on having our military ideas come from some other faction first atleast not always. But that's besides the point and way in to the future, we would actualy need to vote for that military reform for anything to really be done in that area anyway.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

Alright, I admit when you put it like that then we seem to be fairel acomplished in war. Which confuses me because if we are that damn good at it as you put it, why do so many seem to be afraid of waging war in the first place be it because they think we'd loose too many people or some other excuses.

Luck as in the actions taken by the chosen strategoi at the time actualy working out well enough for it to be considered a success, as for the cavalry thing yes. it's their current job but it shouldn't be only that, a decent cavalry is one who can be used both in skirmish and in a head on charge. Maybe in time we weill even have Horse Archery, who knows. But I'd rather not be dependant on having our military ideas come from some other faction first atleast not always. But that's besides the point and way in to the future, we would actualy need to vote for that military reform for anything to really be done in that area anyway.

Click to shrink...

I looked at the opportunity cost of waging the war (monetary expenses, population loss, delays in finally getting that damn sewer etc etc) and decided i'd rather devote our energy towards consolidating our hold on the Adriatic. With money streaming in from the Amber monopoly and a rapidly growing system of colonies it shouldn't be hard to cement our role as one of the secondary powers in the Mediterranean.

 

[Star]

I looked at the opportunity cost of waging the war (monetary expenses, population loss, delays in finally getting that damn sewer etc etc) and decided i'd rather devote our energy towards consolidating our hold on the Adriatic. With money streaming in from the Amber monopoly and a rapidly growing system of colonies it shouldn't be hard to cement our role as one of the secondary powers in the Mediterranean.

Click to shrink...

Actually just to add here that option path of pain only says that we will continue to receive options related to war, not go to war which means that war won't start until we want it.

Also there is really small chance that Dauni will attack us if we aren't busy somewhere else, because as they themselves said if we attack them they have forts and even them they will lose, so attacking us means loss for them.

So this really is more how you want to achieve our goals (salt mines) and weather you believe that Dauni King will keep his word and not attack us if we are busy in another war.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

Actually just to add here that option path of pain only says that we will continue to receive options rrelated to war, not go to war which means that war won't start until we want it.

Also there is really small chance that Dauni will attack us, because as they themselves said if we attack them they have forts, attacking us means loss foe them.

Click to shrink...

We also know picking it locks us into permanent hostility with the Dauni. It might not come immediately but the option makes war inevitable and until then the Dauni will do all they can to incite unrest and revolts in the lands of our vassals. Eventually we would be forced to attack them in order to stop the endless raids and revolts.

 

[Star]

We also know picking it locks us into permanent hostility with the Dauni. It might not come immediately but the option makes war inevitable and until then the Dauni will do all they can to incite unrest and revolts in the lands of our vassals. Eventually we would be forced to attack them in order to stop the endless raids and revolts.

Click to shrink...

As said it's all about weather we believe their King, or not.

 

[fasquardon]

Alright, I admit when you put it like that then we seem to be fairel acomplished in war. Which confuses me because if we are that damn good at it as you put it, why do so many seem to be afraid of waging war in the first place be it because they think we'd loose too many people or some other excuses/reasons.

Click to shrink...

Maybe we are not afraid, but simply do not see the profit in fighting wars needlessly.

If we NEEDED to fight the Dauni or a similar opponent, the costs could be borne. However, since we do not NEED to fight, each man who falls, each farm left to grow weeds while the men are away, each talent of silver that might have been spent upon more useful endeavours is its own small tragedy.

(OOC: the issue here is not cost but opportunity cost, if we fight a war, what were the other things we could have been doing if we weren't fighting. If the war were one of defense, the opportunity cost would be "war or war" if the war is one we choose, the opportunity cost would be "war or sewers, trade and farming".)

I do want to adress again the fact that the treaty won't make us a subject of the athenian empire, the confusion in that regard seem to be that the members of the Delian League are called allies despite the fact their status is closer to what we would call subjects.

Click to shrink...

Athens doesn't only treat its Delian allies poorly however. It is a feature of these wars between Athens and Sparta that allies are stepped on at the convenience of the great powers. Which is why Eretria heartily should want none of that.

"This rejection of the offer of the friendship of Athenai is foolish and fickle. I see Men around me acting like boys, demanding one thing but then refusing it when it arrives. Did we not send wise Obander to treat with the Athenians, learn of their mood and thoughts towards us, and affirn our friendship though avoiding an alliance? And yet when the men of Athenai wish to put these words to record, along with greatly increasing the amount of grain they wish to buy from us I see men turn away, and for what? For fear of the Tarentines and their war faction. If those men are willing to break a peace sworn before the gods over some grain and goodwill given to others, then such madness will draw down the curse of all the gods upon them as oathbreakers. As we have stood together in the storn of bronze, I know that you are Men and not foolish boys, so act as Men!

So speaks Sarpedon, son of Sarpedon.

Click to shrink...

Only we've been told quite plainly that what Athens offers IS an alliance, only one that uses clever language to avoid technically breaking the treaty with Taras. Accepting the Athenian offer is a breach in spirit of our treaty with Taras, which is not to be feared because it will anger Taras, but rather to be feared because it will show Eretria to be a den of untrustworthy weasels before all of Hellas.

Do you really want to be a greasy weasel Sarpedon? Is that what you want for yourself? For our city?

Had Obander returned with a message of true friendship from mighty Athens, I would be the first to seize it. For when Athens has dealt with us as equals, they have been fair and loyal. But even great cities have moments of foolishness. I do not think that the citizens of Athens think to shackle us to them. To them we are generous Eretria where the grain grows tall. And as hunger and sickness wrack their city, they doubtless reach for us in their anxiety. Yet the text they offer us does not reflect the best of Athens. And we would be poor friends if we accepted it.

The war between Athens and Sparta has been marked by hubris on both sides, which has caused needless death and destruction. Yet as things stand, Athens clearly comes out of the latest war the better. Should the war to widen into Epulia or even beyond, it will make things worse for Athens, not better as they hope.

(OOC: We DON'T want an Athenian expedition into Italiote matters turning into this timeline's Sicilian expedition, something which mostly failed due to Athenian political dysfunction and so would be liable to fail in this world if the target of the expedition were changed but the politics were as dysfunctional as OTL, which so far seems is so. Eretria will benefit from Athens winning the wars, we want them to maintain their focus.)

So says Kleon son of Aristophanes.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

As said it's all about weather we believe their King, or not.

Click to shrink...

In this case I am going to believe that a polity will do all it can to damage another polity when given proof that that polity rejects peaceful co-existence.

 

[RagnvarOdinson]

To that whole focusing on other things first part I'd like to repeat what I've said a few posts ago.

Focusing on the Adriatic is a good idea and something I defiently support but first let us consolidate our growth and power in the mainland first, make neighbours such as the Dauni can't be a problem at all in the future by conquering them and fully bring the Peuketii and Messapi to heel. THEN focus on colonization and expansion in the Ionian and Adriatic. I mean shit people, don't you know that you NEVER leave a job half finished?

If we do focus on our navy, colonies and the Adriatic now it means that we will have to ALWAYS be watching our back with the Dauni, looking over our sholders all the goddamn time to make sure they ain't doing nothing that could cause problems for us. Trust me, they will jump at the first chance they get to invade Eretria, they've made it clear that they want the land we control before, we've been enemies with them since we first landed in Italy, all that just isn't forgotten over night just because we throw a bit of silver their way to buy salt. Sorry but I'm honestly a bit frustrated with how short sighted this is, peace is not a long term solution for the Dauni problem.

 

[RagnvarOdinson]

(OOC: the issue here is not cost but opportunity cost, if we fight a war, what were the other things we could have been doing if we weren't fighting. If the war were one of defense, the opportunity cost would be "war or war" if the war is one we choose, the opportunity cost would be "war or sewers, trade and farming".)

Click to shrink...

What are the things we will HAVE to put on hold in the future that could be WAY more important then what we are doing now should we have to turn around and wage war with the Dauni then instead of now?

Edit:
There will always be something other that we should be focusing on, something we need to build, some trade deal we should put our efforts in instead of war. Ignoring something and pushing it back until some other time does not solve the issue it only makes the problem bigger.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

To that whole focusing on other things first part I'd like to repeat what I've said a few posts ago.

Focusing on the Adriatic is a good idea and something I defiently support but first let us consolidate our growth and power in the mainland first, make neighbours such as the Dauni can't be a problem at all in the future by conquering them and fully bring the Peuketii and Messapi to heel. THEN focus on colonization and expansion in the Ionian and Adriatic. I mean shit people, don't you know that you NEVER leave a job half finished?

If we do focus on our navy, colonies and the Adriatic now it means that we will have to ALWAYS be watching our back with the Dauni, looking over our sholders all the goddamn time to make sure they ain't doing nothing that could cause problems for us. Trust me, they will jump at the first chance they get to invade Eretria, they've made it clear that they want the land we control before, we've been enemies with them since we first landed in Italy, all that just isn't forgotten over night just because we throw a bit of silver their way to buy salt. Sorry but I'm honestly a bit frustrated with how short sighted this is, peace is not a long term solution for the Dauni problem.

Click to shrink...

Likewise i'm of the opinion that your side is short sighted for believing that the Dauni stance towards us will remain the same. The reason we our people have always fought is because Eritrea has always been an enemy of the Iapygic people, the only times we have trusted an Iapygic tribe is after we humiliated them on the battlefield. If we can make this peace work out we will finally have an opportunity to address that and move towards mutual respect. Of course making this first move towards peace is a gamble that risks backfiring but right now I view it as less risky than the guaranteed cost of pursuing the war. So far none of the jingoist camps arguments have made me reconsider that evaluation.

There will always be something other that we should be focusing on, something we need to build, some trade deal we should put our efforts in instead of war. Ignoring something and pushing it back until some other time does not solve the issue it only makes the problem bigger.

Click to shrink...

Likewise there will always be some kind of threat that we need to focus on and deal with instead of dedicating resources towards building up our polis. The Mediterranean is a dynamic place filled with emerging powers who all have their own agendas. We will never be without at least some kind of polity that we need to keep an eye on. At first it was the Peuketti, then it was the Dauni and the Messapii, then Taras, then Syrakousai and now the Dauni again. If we seek the kind of ultimate peace required to dedicate yyears towards our trade and great works we will never find it for it is impossible. We will simply have to take what few moments of calmness we can find.

 

[Random Member]

Only we've been told quite plainly that what Athens offers IS an alliance, only one that uses clever language to avoid technically breaking the treaty with Taras. Accepting the Athenian offer is a breach in spirit of our treaty with Taras, which is not to be feared because it will anger Taras, but rather to be feared because it will show Eretria to be a den of untrustworthy weasels before all of Hellas.

Do you really want to be a greasy weasel Sarpedon? Is that what you want for yourself? For our city?

Click to shrink...

Dareios: "Cities break treaties and promises all the time, and nobody even bats an eyelash anymore. Breaching "the spirit" of our treaty with Taras will only make Hellas shrug their shoulders. They will simply continue to do what they were doing and not spent another thought on Eretria's so-called "betrayal" of Taras. "Such things are normal, why should we care this time?" They will care even less about us breaking "the spirit" of the treaty than if we had actually broken it in its entirety. Except for Taras itself, no one will treat us differently."

"A storm is threatening to engulf all of Hellas, and Magna Graecia with it! Soon Eretria will be dragged into it, whether it wants to or not. To think we are strong enough to survive the incoming storm on our own, without friends more powerful than ourselves, is hubris. Taras will be more of a burden than a help here. And sticking your head in an amphora and hoping the storm goes away if you can't see it is just foolish. As Glaukommes said, remaining "in splendid isolation" forever just doesn't work. The best way for our city to not only survive but to catapult itself to new heights is to ally itself to the ones most likely to come out of the storm on top: the Athenians!"

 

[RagnvarOdinson]

Likewise i'm of the opinion that your side is short sighted for believing that the Dauni stance towards us will remain the same. The reason we our people have always fought is because Eritrea has always been an enemy of the Iapygic people, the only times we have trusted an Iapygic tribe is after we humiliated them on the battlefield. If we can make this peace work out we will finally have an opportunity to address that and move towards mutual respect. Of course making this first move towards peace is a gamble that risks backfiring but right now I view it as less risky than the guaranteed cost of pursuing the war. So far none of the jingoist camps arguments have made me reconsider that evaluation.

Click to shrink...

A risk we don't have to take and will ultimately blow up in our face. We already have our hands full in making proper Greeks out of the Peuketii and even the Messapi in the future..hopefully. It may be that in the future we could maybe and this is a big maybe have some sort of friendly relationship with the Dauni. But by that time they will have grown enough in power, maybe even equal us to take a shot at Eretria, by that time we will have also grown of course but such a conflict would be costly, maybe even so much that we will be right back where we started. You simply don't allow a threat such as the Dauni to remain independant and uncontrolled for long. Let us secure the area around our home in-land first before look to the Sea.

At this point I may as well just be repeating myself, if you are interested you can look at my previous posts about the thing with the Dauni I think I've said everything I can say on this matter already maybe even more then once.

 

[Walker Of Chaos]

A risk we don't have to take and will ultimately blow up in our face. We already have our hands full in making proper Greeks out of the Peuketii and even the Messapi in the future..hopefully. It may be that in the future we could maybe and this is a big maybe have some sort of friendly relationship with the Dauni. But by that time they will have grown enough in power, maybe even equal us to take a shot at Eretria, by that time we will have also grown of course but such a conflict would be costly, maybe even so much that we will be right back where we started. You simply don't allow a threat such as the Dauni to remain independant and uncontrolled for long. Let us secure the area around our home in-land first before look to the Sea.

At this point I may as well just be repeating myself, if you are interested you can look at my previous posts about the thing with the Dauni I think I've said everything I can say on this matter already maybe even more then once.

Click to shrink...

For the record I have read all of the posts on this debate. And yeah it seems like neither will convince the other, we just view things too differently.

 

[Erandil]

You're making the mistake of assuming the Samnites would willingly choose to provoke the combined might of the Dauni, Peuketii, Messapii, Eretria, the League and our allies rather than seeking easier gains on the western coast of Italia.

The benefit, one of them, in subjugating the Dauni is that we as their overlord and the forces we can bring to bear represent a significant enough deterrent to the Samnites that it makes more sense for them to continue to look to the west rather than to the Dauni on the east. Further, once the Dauni actually are our vassals (and yes for the purposes of this discussion I'm assuming they are) and we have a vassal bordering the Samnites we have a significant enough reason to actually make contact with them. The Samnites, unlike the Dauni imo, are one of the factions we want to deal with via diplomacy rather than war.

The reason that we have an opening to do this now is because the Samnites and the Lucani have just sent off all their excess men and conquered Campania so there's a period of time - probably at least a decade - where they won't be raiding or seeking to found any new settlements. This means there is the time - and it is a limited window - to both vassalise the Dauni and make contact with the Hirpini and Pentri tribes within the Samnite Confederation to ensure they don't seek war with the Dauni and by extension us.

In this way we can take actions that mean the Dauni cities who boarder the Samnites won't have to fight and die for us because having the Dauni as a vassal gives us the reason we need to proactively make contact with the Samnites and makes the Dauni an unappealing enough of a target that war simply isn't in either of our interests.

On the other hand, if the Dauni remain independent they are an appealing target and likely will face the ongoing raiding you describe.

Click to shrink...

Look,you once again state that being our vassal would protect even the weakened Dauni from opportunistic raiding but that simply doesn't seems realistic to me. Like I said the size and strength of our army will be great if they start a massive invasion and I would honestly give us good odds at defeating them in open battle but I fail to see how that necessarily translates into being fearsome enough to prevent the Samnites from raiding the weakened Dauni. Like I said the natural reaction to raiding would be a punishment expedition to the Samnite lands but that is exactly what we don't want and honestly the thing we as likely to lose as win and the Samnites know it. The whole problem with the Samnites is that bringing the battle to them is dann near impossible without spending a shitton of resources and men on it. So what exactly do you suggest we do? Station a large portion of our militia based army on the border for extended periods of time. (Which isn't really realistic) And to be clear here a weakened Dauni remnant full of people angry at us is pretty much as ideal a target as the Samnites can hope for.

For gods sake we are unwilling to seriously consider besieging the hillforts of the Dauni because of how difficult and expensive it would be so what do you propose we do if those lands were to fall to the Samnites, even more suited for that kind of warfare and far deeper reserves to draw from, due to treachery/colloboration and dislike of us? Commence exactly the kind of military campgain we tried to avoid for so long?
(Indeed that would more or less be exactly the position we would be in if the Dauni decide to go for the nuclear option and make common cause with the Samnites as they threaten)

I mean sure we could give up on the hinterlands and focus on the lowlands with its salt, which are far more suited to us anyhow but I think we wpuld have to get immensely happy if your plan of subduing the Dauni and turning them into a shield against the Samnites works without massive investments from our side.

 

[RagnvarOdinson]

I mean sure we could give up on the hinterlands and focus on the lowlands with its salt, which are far more suited to us anyhow but I think we wpuld have to get immensely happy if your plan of subduing the Dauni and turning them into a shield against the Samnites works without massive investments from our side.

Click to shrink...

That's something I've talked about before, taking only Salapia, Herdonia and Auscula which are directly north of our border and stop at the river unless we want Apri too to make a better conection between Eretria, Garnae, Pylona and Sipontion. Ending our conquest at the river should also serve to give us a good advantage in any defensive action against an army coming from the North. My goal in a war with the Dauni would not be to utterly crush them merely take those 3-4 cities, with their capital being one of the cities that would fall into our hands that should atleast deliver a mighty blow to Dauni morale, if we are lucky we kill their King too. From such a position forcing the Dauni into peace or even a tributary of Eretria should be manageable.

Edit: Also, the Dauni seem to have built a number of forts along their shared border with the Samnites, if the Dauni come to be under Eretrian rule we could garrison those forts should the Samnites decide to raid into our lands, unless of course we make some effort into establishing a good relationship with them.

 

[phil03]

Athens doesn't only treat its Delian allies poorly however. It is a feature of these wars between Athens and Sparta that allies are stepped on at the convenience of the great powers. Which is why Eretria heartily should want none of that.

Click to shrink...

Like when in Athens case?

The only case I can see technically fitting the bill is Kerkyra and the politics of the day simply made it so that a polis having weakened itself to that degree would be stepped on, as you put it, wheter by its declared ennemy or its allies. If that happen to us we will be in big trouble, treaty with Athens or no.

Syracuse? While it was definitely something of a war of agression by Athens I also definitely wouldn't call their previous relations friendly, let alone deem them allies.

Besside, as stated before we aren't becoming their ally. We are merely signing a treaty of commerce and friendship. At most that would make us non-belligerant who somewhat favour Athens, we would still be very far from actually getting involved in the Peloponesian War.

 

[Secretariat]

It depends. If we're trading with them, their revenue stream will partly be redirected to us in exchange for goods we excel at producing. Moreover, beggaring our neighbors in an attempt to weaken them doesn't necessarily actually work in the long run. Impoverished neighbors can be chronic long-term threats, because they have strong incentives to raid their neighbors, and to hate and envy their richer neighbors. Consider the relationship between the Scots and English from the Middle Ages up through the early 1700s for examples of this.

Moreover, Dauni merchants growing fat and comfortable trading and interacting with Hellenes may have other benefits. They will learn to appreciate Greek culture and manufactured goods more, they will be more secure, and that may make them less inclined to desperate, adventurous measures to preserve their independence.

Remember that almost everything the Dauni have ever done to us was motivated by the fear of us conquering them. Remove the fear, and they may well turn out to be much better neighbors than we'd thought.

Click to shrink...

This seems like wishful thinking - based on their actions to date, what evidence do you have that the Dauni are treating in good faith? I really do not see any of the offers we've gotten this turn that way.

I've outlined the reasons I'm skeptical of their motives, and why a treaty would benefit them more than it benefits us. I've seen a lot of talk about "opportunity cost" - there's, what, the expanded harbor that will reap economic benefit, compared to access to Lake Salapia and expanding the tribute base?

 

[Cavalier]

"Athens does not ask us to join their League, or break our treaty with Taras. We are their friends, and all of Hellas knows that much. We have benefited from Athens' friendship in the past; they have stopped the Corinthians from taking more aggressive measures to dispute our Adriatic hegemony, they aided our efforts to stop Syracuse from gaining hegemony in Sicily, they have been reliable trade partners, and they hosted our contingent in the war against the Mede that we might regain our honor among the Hellenes. This was all to their best interests, but the strongest relationships between poleis are based on common interest. Now Athens would strengthen that common interest by greatly expanding our trade and coming to rely upon our grain to feed their city.

If we wish to avoid having the war of Athens and Sparta visit Italia then it would be for the best to give Athens an incentive to support our neutrality and the stability of Epulia. Should we spurn them they make seek the grain they need elsewhere by force. We know they had previously interfered in the Messapii, and the Sallentine Peninsula lately secured by Taras is fertile for the growth of grain. Likewise we know of their interest in Sicily, with its seas of amber wheat. Even if they turn to the Bosporos their attention will be drawn to the wealth of our region, and the Athenians can be fickle. Should we reject them we may underestimate the reaction of the masses who look upon our city as a beacon of righteousness.

But if we provide their grain, they have every interest in maintaining our peace and security. Since the only way the Hellene powers may interfere with us is by the sea, we would gain the Athenian navy as our shield ever more closely than before. We will also be able to influence their counsels by our contacts with their merchants and the opportunity of our proxenos to make inroads among the leading Athenian statesmen. And with their grain secure we might anticipate the Athenians will turn instead to the winning of victory over the Spartans and their allies more directly, turning their eyes away from Italia for good.

And more than anything the Athenians are our Ionian brothers, closest to us among the Hellenes. Their brilliance shines brightly in comparison with the dullard Spartans. It is only natural that we should wish for their victory and do what favors we can for them within the constraints of our treaty with Taras. The Tarantines will do the same for their founding city and we should not begrudge them that. But it is naive to think that our neutrality, which has relied upon Athens from the very beginning in the face of Corinthian hostility, can be sustained without Athenian friendship. For that reason we should make our position clear and do the utmost to favor Athens, which in turn will keep the Athenians from needing to make a direct intervention into Italia. And in that, though they may not appreciate it, we would keep the war further away from our neighbors rather than bringing it closer."

 

[Cetashwayo]

Accepting the treaty does not make you an Athenian vassal.

 

[Cavalier]

I think the primary concern is that the Treaty will make it more likely that we will be involved in the Peloponnesian War, but I would argue accepting makes it less likely. Athens would not want the war to visit its principle source of grain, as war has a habit of disrupting the farming of grain. It would have zero interest in having any armies, whether its own or those of Sparta and its allies, trampling through our grain-fields. Our neutrality as a source of grain would be to Athens' advantage, and it is Athens that is the biggest threat of expanding the Peloponnesian War to us. Corinth might be more inclined to take a swing at us... if it could gets its ships out past the Athenian patrols at the head of the Adriatic, which it cannot. The Athenian Navy would then serve as our best guarantee of neutrality against the powers of Hellas, and it is perhaps the best guarantee we could ask for.

People are also worried about how Taras will take it. Our peace still runs for multiple years and Taras will dare not break it, or face an even stronger Italiate coalition to enforce said peace. They will have time to get used to it. We should not oppose them making a similar treaty with Sparta and that will become the new status-quo. It's hard to see anyone benefiting from escalating further, though we should be sure to keep an eye on diplomacy among the Italiote powers lest we risk becoming isolated among them again.

 

[Oshha]

[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] Accept the Athenian treaty [Athenai will be grateful, Taras will be disturbed, Eretrian grain trade will grow faster in the future].

 

[Godwinson]

It's hard to see anyone benefiting from escalating further

Click to shrink...

Counterargument: Alkibiades exists.

 

[Cavalier]

Counterargument: Alkibiades exists.

Click to shrink...

Well what I'm really concerned with is the prospect that Erasmos Dion put Alkibiades up to offering the Treaty. Dion is being set up as the successor to Kleon in the Athenian War Party, except he's been slaughtering people since the start of the war and appears to be a lot more personally capable. In any case better to have Athens on our side than against us, by far.