Provinces will never takr actions that drop Stability. Restoration policy means sacrifices and festivals.
Paths of Civilization
- Thread starter Academia Nut
- Start date
- Original
Provinces will never takr actions that drop Stability. Restoration policy means sacrifices and festivals.
- Location
- Diamond City
[X] Attempt to capture the errant warriors and then make amends with the Highlanders (-5 Diplomacy, probable war with Highlanders)
- Location
- United States
@Academia Nut Just realized this but...why were we going into the lowlands? The vote was on sending trading caravans to the metal workers and hathatyn...
- Location
- United States of America, Michigan
Hopefully that by choosing to get our warriors to try and enact justice we will evolve our Protective Justice trait or at the very least reinforce it because that seems like the only real positive that will come out of this situation because even if we avoid war that means that the status quo was kept.
Trading expeditions meant for the Hathatyn and the Metal Worker got hijacked.
- Location
- United Kingdom
[X] Attempt to capture the errant warriors and then make amends with the Highlanders (-5 Diplomacy, probable war with Highlanders)
- Location
- United States
If we were going to the metal workers and the hathatyn then we would've used boats or atleast hugged the coast.
- Location
- Simi Valley, CA, United States
I stated my reasons for the vote in-depth within the very post you quoted.
But if you're asking about militarism in general I can say more:
To start off, I don't think we've seen "nothing but problems by becoming more militaristic". Before this, I didn't see any clear problem with pursuing militarism and it more had to do with unlocking metal weapons/having high Martial and Negative Stability. Are you going to argue that we shouldn't of unlocked ironworking?
Additionally, I toyed a few times the idea of forging an empire (if only to gauge how open people were to the idea). We have an advantage over our Cooper Age counterparts and I think capitulating on it will be useful in the long run.
Last edited:
[X] Attempt to capture the errant warriors and then make amends with the Highlanders (-5 Diplomacy, probable war with Highlanders)
- Location
- Illinois
Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but if we want to make sure we have the biggest edge possible in a war with the HK then we really want to pick the diplomacy option.
At the very least, we try to figure out who or what caused this fuckup, and what reasons for this plan were, which is nice if we don't want to become somebody's puppet.
But more importantly, if the HK attacks this becomes a defensive war in the eyes of our people. And our traits are geared most towards defensive wars. Thus, we get all our bonuses if they do attack.
If they don't, well, now we have time to fix the clan screwup and finish the temple, plus we keep our true strength hidden for a bit longer.
Compare that to going against all of our traits and starting a war that is unquestionably our fault. I imagine there is going to be some sort of malus for doing something like that, or we might even lose or damage one of our traits in the worst case. I'd much rather have them start something after we tried to take constructive action to fix it, and thus have an excellent casus belli for this war, rather than strike with no real casus belli and possibly suffer problems from doing so.
At the very least, we try to figure out who or what caused this fuckup, and what reasons for this plan were, which is nice if we don't want to become somebody's puppet.
But more importantly, if the HK attacks this becomes a defensive war in the eyes of our people. And our traits are geared most towards defensive wars. Thus, we get all our bonuses if they do attack.
If they don't, well, now we have time to fix the clan screwup and finish the temple, plus we keep our true strength hidden for a bit longer.
Compare that to going against all of our traits and starting a war that is unquestionably our fault. I imagine there is going to be some sort of malus for doing something like that, or we might even lose or damage one of our traits in the worst case. I'd much rather have them start something after we tried to take constructive action to fix it, and thus have an excellent casus belli for this war, rather than strike with no real casus belli and possibly suffer problems from doing so.
- Location
- Staring into the void
Tally
The nice thing about giving weregild to the Highlanders is that they are probably going to be interested in military-oriented concessions- salt and 'starmetal' weapons. We can give them a metric ton of iron weaponry and they won't learn jack squat about ironworking itself, and likewise they're hardly going to start manufacturing salt. So the likely scenario is that we give them weapons and the means to hold out under siege and they use that to win against the Thunder Horses.
Umi-san
Procrastinating.
- Location
- ꙮ
yeah, no, I'll be damned before we give them iron weaponry. I'll give them salt, copper, and even military support in the form of an expansionary movement toward TH land but not iron. Regardless of how likely or not it is that they'll learn from it I'm not willing to risk that chance.
Last edited:
- Location
- United States
[X] Let the Highlanders extract their vengeance and attempt to make amends after (-1 Legitimacy, -3 Diplomacy, possibility of war with Highlanders, chance of spawning new faction in the lowlands)
It's always a great idea to arm your enemies enemies. They'll never use them against their supplier.
/s
Help the fuck no. Gift them bronze instead.
- Location
- Simi Valley, CA, United States
Ditto that thought. Ideally, they would acknowledge that the People are not weak and could have pulled out starmetal weapons at any time but didn't and actually be more closely allied with the People than before. Ideally, we would (peacefully) add them in instead of giving them a couple of iron weapons and expect them to fend for themselves.
- Location
- Illinois
tbf, the weakness of iron is that it rusts, so unless you can replace it or you spend time maintaining it, you will slowly lose your stockpile over time. So we might give them 100 weapons, but after 10 years of wartime use (1 turn for us) there would only be 80. 10 more years, now you have 70. And so forth.
Still, we should probably avoid giving them weapons. Lowlanders tend to be assholes, so we can't really trust that they won't fuck us over in a few generations.
That would be nice if we had fucking bronze. We don't.
Speaking of bronze, unless the Highland Kingdoms get rolled by the Thunder Horses, they'll have captured bronze soon enough, and it's better than iron in every way. Plus, as stated, iron will probably rust to pieces inside ten years with poor maintenance- maintenance we won't teach them.
Last edited:
- Location
- Voidbetweenstars
Same thing could be said about guns or really any good weapon, giving them out is in the end not something you do lightly after all we don't want them to win we simply don't want them to lose.
- Location
- United States of America, Michigan
Yeah but seeing our starmetal iron rust lead us to discover that there is also iron in the earth that we can mine so assuming that the rust will solve the problem might backfire.
- Location
- Illinois
Yeah, though we could just equip their king and some of their chiefs. 20-30 weapons of iron would go a long way diplomatically, and really doesn't present much of a danger when our lowest soldier is just as well equipped.
Or we just throw salt at them. That has worked before well enough.
Yeah, it took a mad genius during a golden age who spent years breaking multiple holy relics from two different civs to really get past that point. Unless they get their hands on one of our shamans/metal workers, that won't happen.
- Location
- Simi Valley, CA, United States
If they have an actual sample they will have turns (I.e. generations) to study it. Also, I just don't to reveal that we have iron to the lowlands in such a lackluster way.
Last edited: