- Location
- Austria
We had an option to support Gwygotha's son's attempt to claim nomadic throne. If we did it, instead of letting him go it alone, we wouldn't have this current crisis on our hands now.
Well no, although that would because if we still failed the war would've begun far eariler and we might not have been able to fight the Blight properly.We had an option to support Gwygotha's son's attempt to claim nomadic throne. If we did it, instead of letting him go it alone, we wouldn't have this current crisis on our hands now.
Doesn't assure a greater failure either. Not that I know much, I completely missed that debate!Just because we commit more forces doesn't mean we'd be assured success.
Well no, although that would because if we still failed the war would've begun far eariler and we might not have been able to fight the Blight properly.
Just because we commit more forces doesn't mean we'd be assured success.
Note it was of one tribe. Just one. Theres dozens of nomads out there.We had an option to support Gwygotha's son's attempt to claim nomadic throne. If we did it, instead of letting him go it alone, we wouldn't have this current crisis on our hands now.
Or for the matter, that success would enable us to unify and assimilate the nomads before the hordemaster shows up to do it his way.Well no, although that would because if we still failed the war would've begun far eariler and we might not have been able to fight the Blight properly.
Just because we commit more forces doesn't mean we'd be assured success.
Long term solution is just to peel off peripheral tribes and territory through terraforming.
Terraforming is however, what we have to work with. We don't have the concept of a settlement for the sole purpose of defense, and steppe soil is less fertile, so intensive agriculture would present a large, vulnerable target, with fewer warriors to each settlement than the nomads can bring to bear on a raid.Terraforming is going too far, series of forts and slow encroaching and assimilating tribes should be it.
Again, I am looking at historical Muscovy/Russia example of how to encroach into steppes at average rate of Netherland's territory/year for couple of centuries.
Terraforming is however, what we have to work with. We don't have the concept of a settlement for the sole purpose of defense, and steppe soil is less fertile, so intensive agriculture would present a large, vulnerable target, with fewer warriors to each settlement than the nomads can bring to bear on a raid.
That's where terraforming comes in with our new Expand Forest option. Once we stabilize our economy, we 'push' forests up north, planting them around our allied settlements as we assimilate them. The increased trees would immediately choke off the nomads mobility, and at the same time, do not look like a target to fight(also trees are a lot harder to kill and kidnap than farmer). Then the tree shaded and black soil enriched earth can feed another population boom, and continue onwards.
It's a tower-walk strategy without towers to use.
There is a reason Ukraine was breadbasket of Russian Empire and USSR.
Well...no reason to wait for the natural black soil when we can bring our own. Hook up roads, lay down walled settlements, lay down forests around the walled settlements, expand until secured, then repeat.Well, not forts for the sole purpose of defense, no, but slowly assimilating tribe after tribe and forting them up after they become more sedentary is possible way to do things.
Expanding forests probably takes time and is generally slower, especially since steppes are indeed not all that fertile. Usually. Although, Eurasian natural black soils belt begs to disagree - one of the most agriculturally rich types of soil, and is mostly in steppes of Ukraine, southern Russia and the like.
Also, heh.
There is a reason Ukraine was breadbasket of Russian Empire and USSR.
Were going to outpace the other civs in POP quick. I mean we have like 3 villages, and we outpopulate most of our neighbors despite them most likely expanding naturally and frequently.
Half to a third.Mannan said:
How is our number of settlements in comparison to our peers?
General populations are:
Spirit Talkers < Dead Priests = The People < Northern Nomads < Western Confederacy, although the differences are currently relatively small.
The south valley village. The one founded by WC migrants. Their part of us nowI count two, not three, the main farmer settlement and the fishing settlement. Which one is the third?
Just before this war began, we found out we are outnumbered and others have between double and triple the number of settlements we have. Our lack of population and settlements is a big problem
Thank you.The south valley village. The one founded by WC migrants. Their part of us now
I was not aware of that, I fought the WC were the migrants we helped, I thought that we failed to absorb them and they were now just semi-allies.The south valley village. The one founded by WC migrants. Their part of us now
Who needs settlements when we have trees!Thank you.
Nishiphur's village, for some reason I thought it was not a full Settlement. I remembered they joined us when we helped with their farms, but kept on thinking of them having a small village.
So everyone else has 6 to 9 Settlements, and we have only 3. At one per a full turn it will take a minimum six turns to catch up. We really need build another Settlement and diplo-annex someone soon.
Yes...though we have absurd population density, so we have a lot of specialized trades and are probably the only people who have a dedicated caste to just count how much shit we have.Just before this war began, we found out we are outnumbered and others have between double and triple the number of settlements we have. Our lack of population and settlements is a big problem
Thank you.
Nishiphur's village, for some reason I thought it was not a full Settlement. I remembered they joined us when we helped with their farms, but kept on thinking of them having a small village.
So everyone else has 6 to 9 Settlements, and we have only 3. At one per a full turn it will take a minimum six turns to catch up. We really need build another Settlement and diplo-annex someone soon.
Do recall that trees take quite a while to grow. While we are working on a generational level, it'd probably still take two-three turns for new growths to be useable.With regards to next turns option discussion, I'm not going to be voting for expand forest. The only reason we should be taking that is when there is no longer natural forest to found a settlement in, and given we haven't once founded a new settlement that's going to take a while as our influence over the area is much greater than our actual control or ability to harvest it.
I was not aware of that, I fought the WC were the migrants we helped, I thought that we failed to absorb them and they were now just semi-allies.
They were a small clan from the WC that ventured too far from the confederacy's core territories in their search for better landI was not aware of that, I fought the WC were the migrants we helped, I thought that we failed to absorb them and they were now just semi-allies.
Then Strong Opinions on Agriculture happened.They were a small clan from the WC that ventured too far from the confederacy's core territories in their search for better land
We have at least 2 settlements before we start running out of forest to use.Do recall that trees take quite a while to grow. While we are working on a generational level, it'd probably still take two-three turns for new growths to be useable.
Do recall that trees take quite a while to grow. While we are working on a generational level, it'd probably still take two-three turns for new growths to be useable.
For fast growth trees, 5 years to maturity is possible, but these tend to be smaller and immensely water hungry, while also with less deeply penetrating roots.Depends on the trees, really. I'd say one generation is enough to grow young forest?
I want to. If we don't get to annexing tribes, new Drogo will happen eventually, and that will be annoying
Huh, wonder how well it'd last past its purpose...The Western Confederacy is about a dozen different tribes who are loosely associated with each other for defensive purposes against the Dead Priests.
Rule #2: the first 10% of the posters decide 75% of the votesWhen I finished the first sentence, I almost ignored the second, assuming it would be "The moment someone points out something is a shiny, everyone bandwagons onto it."
Someone should make a list of all the SV quest rules. I think we all deserve the power to nod sagely, completely confusing new questers, whenever someone says "typical Quest Rule #6."
It'd happen even if we do. Their culture is structured to be very hard to assimilate or annihilate alike.