Please define what you mean by "this turn" and "next turn".

I am assuming "this turn" is two updates from now.
By "this turn" I mean this turn. The one we're where we're Double Main New Trails, Secondary Expand Forest, and Offensive Policy. "Next turn" refers to the next main turn after this turn. I speak in turns, not updates.

As far as I am aware King and Greenshore payout on main turns only.
We should still start at 8 on the beginning of next turn.
 
By "this turn" I mean this turn. The one we're where we're Double Main New Trails, Secondary Expand Forest, and Offensive Policy. "Next turn" refers to the next main turn after this turn. I speak in turns, not updates.


We should still start at 8 on the beginning of next turn.
Then your math is not borked if I understand your timing. And I was wrong King and Greenshore apparently payout on mid turns(Thank you Abby's Diff Checkers!).

I was also not disputing that we would start at 8 next turn, there was no point.

Thank you for clearing that up.
 
No, I'm not. Balanced does a lot of stat-consumption actions. Trade is the best for stat generation. Veekie and notgreat hashed that out quite a while ago.
What? I don't remember that, or if it was it was so long ago as to be effectively irrelevant at this point.

Trade is a good policy, but it takes a lot of actions like Boats that have other effects. Balanced is a better idea here because we need the econ and the extra versatility is very nice.

It is the best at giving us more permanent income, which has value in and of itself.
 
What? I don't remember that, or if it was it was so long ago as to be effectively irrelevant at this point.

Trade is a good policy, but it takes a lot of actions like Boats that have other effects. Balanced is a better idea here because we need the econ and the extra versatility is very nice.

It is the best at giving us more permanent income, which has value in and of itself.
My point right now isn't that trade is optimal right now, but rather that it's the best for generating stats.

Your example of More Boats, for instance, is an efficient LTE and Diplo production action.
 
You know, I kinda wish there was a hall of fame for all of the silliest stuff that happens in this thread.

Some examples:
Boats
Minotaur Sex
Naruto Shipping
 
Last edited:
Technically there are goat herders who are "nomads", but they can't support the larger and more numerous kind of nomadic groups that you see in the north. The land is scrubby and hot and is mostly desert with a few watering holes. The People secured a number of wells along the route as part of their efforts, and there is likely mining possible, but all in all its just not a good place to live.
Hmm, we can make that work. Just need Black Soil and trees.

And things not being on fire so we can deploy those.
I don't think holding the lowland minors for any period of time is strategically tenable unless we also conquer either the Highlanders or the Thunder Speakers.
They're away from good land and any major routes of trade and share borders with the most dangerous groups, unless we get a drastic victory and conquer the Highlanders within three turns I have to recommend cutting them loose.

Edit, or just not defending them
If we lose iron exclusivity AND a lowland foothold, you can expect to be conquered by a lowland army in about 20-30 main turns, because there's just that damned many of them and iron is pretty much the only reason we're in the game at all.

Currently what works(if we weren't busy with internal strain problems) is to secure the minors, link them up to our greater networks, then fund their fortification efforts.
Maybe integrate everything else and take stability boosting actions?

Mind you I'm still hoping for a victory over the Highlanders that'll give us population centers close enough to the minors to defend them.
The highlanders are barely holding against the weather and we outnumber them, alongside siege tech and armored troops they don't know how to deal with so it should be doable.
it'll make the admin problem worse, but that's better than a military problem.
Personally I'm hoping the highlanders crumple into internal woes rather than conquest or collapse. That'd be largely ideal for the short and mid-term.
They've probably seen enough that they could given pointers to a society with their own access to ores to assist in reverse engineering much of the process.



It's the lords fault for not providing sufficient direction for it to have got that far. Even if the subject is a dipshit, their superior shouldn't abandon them until such point as the subject is in open defiance of the law and have thus broken their obligation. The superior will likely be strongly criticized even then if they were not visibly attempting to correct the situation first.
So basically no go, we can't let it go unless they rebel first, and then we'd be obligated by justice to punish them for it(and reconquer them again)
They're currently on a path to drop branches like crazy.
Hmm, with the burnouts I think we'd also see faster growth cycles?
Wouldn't they just end up using coal? our neighbors are all pretty big geographically, i would imagine they'd have a source of coal somewhere within each of them, right? Or am i underestimating the rarity of coal and/or the difficulty in mining and using it?
Coal is not that hard to get, relatively common in fact, and any metalworking civilization would figure out that it burns pretty fast.

...but the trick is that they'd be looking in the wrong places unless they're already working Iron or actually looking for limestone. Gold, Silver, Copper and Tin are mostly found in igneous rock, so prospecting in those areas would not give you any coal at all.
In fairness, even if they figure out iron, all the other issues still exist. Access to fuel, ore, experience and we still have a chance of becoming the single biggest state if we solve the admin issues and north/south divide.

The secret getting out merely equalizes the field again. But if we can vassalize then integrate the HK, we still end up top dog as the HK have roads galore and are still fortified.

Besides, we have the next big game changer already in the works thanks to the Heavens Hawks. Another few turns should be enough for them to start fielding real cavalry and maybe even horse archers, which is a whole new level of pain.

Our longships give us some incredible strategic mobility as well. Basically, if there is a river nearby, we can strike at it. Which is a strategic nightmare to defend against.

Add our trade networks that are beyond the lowlanders reach and we can keep financing ourselves reasonably well. Including churning out Companies to do war on our behalf while we build up our territory. I know veekie doesn't like them, but professional armies do have a lot of advantages in this situation. The action economy alone means that we can do other stuff as long as we can keep the mercenaries paid.


Put simply, losing the iron monopoly would suck, but it's not the end of the world.
Noting that I recommended a short term cap of TWO mercenary companies, and a mid term cap of THREE. We're at ONE, so we can(and really should) form an additional company if we want to be able to hold onto our provinces.

However, losing the iron monopoly and the lowlands at the same time can be catastrophic. Any iron wielding civilization with access to floodplains soil is going to rapidly expand and consume their neighbors.

Remember the Highlanders attacking us? This is why. The first ironworking civilization to claim the lowlands will rule it by dint of being able to roll everyone else before they can finish research.

Sorry for the late reply. The comment about the Odyssey was distinct from my statements in regards to the use of winds and currents. Your opinion in regards to the latter is identical to that stated by myself.

My opinion that he was sent off into uncharted lands so that he can go off to invented countries remains. However, I would argue that the use of maps would negate the lack of familiarity for people rich enough to own a boat and hire men to man it. I suppose, though, that in the Late Bronze Age maps might not be entirely common and worthy navigators difficult to press-gang.
Accurate charts of sea currents and weather is...difficult in the bronze age. A lot of it is not particularly codified, mostly because people are terrible at tracking distances at sea.
Huh. During their heyday the Hat were much larger then I thought they were then.
Not quite. Everything indicates that the Trelli are a breakaway trade post, rather than a far flung province. I mean, Greenshore isn't exactly representative of Ymaryn geographical extent.
Okay, I realize that people have strong opinions about what to do next, but we have to do one thing. Aquaducts in the Stallions territory. Here's my thought: The Stallions have been planting forests in the steppes. Great! Except while it will be wetter, it might not be wet enough. More, what happens the next time there's a drought? The whole damn steppe forest becomes a tinderbox, that's what!
1) Aqueduct in the north is currently an explicitly terrible idea(really, if you want one, putting them in the Eastern Hills or Southeastern Hills which are dry as hell makes more sense), as we cannot sustain another city at present.

2) Sacred Forest project eliminates the risk of forest fires, due to extensive harvesting of deadfall and regularly performed controlled burns.
We are fighting the HK directly and the Vassals are fighting the Swamp People and probably the East Thunder Horse too. We can send the Vassal the support of the Red Banner, especially if we are mopping up the HK. E: I think that will be sufficient for a very brief moment, especially if we are on Offense Policy.

I'm mostly okay with integrating the Stallions, the Econ and Martial will be nice. I'd like the Palace started and finished ASAP too.

As to the forming a new merc company, the hardliners would migrate from the Stallions to the New Mercs and would basically have no moderation so I would expect problems.
Moving the hardliners to a mercenary band is actually helpful. We can culturally assimilate a mercenary band more easily than a March, simply by parking it in Valleyhome for 3 generations to normalize them.

Well, we'd be deploying them a lot so I'm not sure whether we'd have that luxury, but a culturally divergent mercenary band is a much smaller problem.

the disease might actually have died out by now, or can't survive in the envrioment created by our forest collapsing. As for the tinder issue, he said it's starting to pick up but it might not be at the point where it's super dangerous yet. We also manage the draining so it's possible the forest would end up too waterlogged to burn.

basically it's a complex system with a lot of things that could go wrong, and some things in ways that mitigate or change each others fallout.
Actually, not quite on the disease. Normally the forest canker fungus dies off along with the forest, but since we're keeping the forest alive and regularly burning out the worst hit patches, the disease sticks around.

Tinder wise, it's worse than it sounds, the forest is growing at a density greater than natural forests because we harvest the deadfall heavily for our increasing charcoal demands, and because we actually fertilize the soil.

And then there's the animal biome. By now, most large predators in the forests are deliberately adapted to human presence. Predators which target people are going to be picked off by hunters, and generally underpopulated compared to the prey animals we harvest.

Overall if we collapse to the point where we can't sustain the Sacred Forest, it's going to be spectacular while it rebalances.

My whole point is we have no reason to do either immediately. I get that mercenary companies have advantages, but we don't need those advantages right now. Why not just leave it as martial until we actually have an immediate reason to make a company?
Because red martial(such as that caused by integrating the Stallions), will cause things like "your army went out to attack someone on it's own" when our stability drops.

Which would be a MAJOR problem now that we've stuck our dick into the lowland clusterfuck, because that's a good way to overstretch admin or lose martial.

Integrating the Stallions and then immediately budding off a Mercenary Company helps in that we can lend aid without committing more actions.
Probably a chariot or cavalry band though.
 
You know, I kinda wish there was a hall of fame for all of the silliest stuff that happens in this thread.

Some examples:
Boats
Minotaur Sex
Naruto Shipping
Some of the stuff in The Tax Crisis, if you have a certain kind of humor.
Manus being embarrassed.
TREEEEEEES!
 
Last edited:
Because red martial(such as that caused by integrating the Stallions), will cause things like "your army went out to attack someone on it's own" when our stability drops.
So long as we're sending 3 main war missions per turn I don't think red martial is likely to be an issue no matter what we do.

Edit: to clarify, I mean I don't think we're likely to hit red martial.
 
Last edited:
So for next turn, we have two acts to balance:

1) Investing enough in the north to discourage breakaway. Assuming trails are enough.
2) Defending the lowland so that we don't encounter stability loss/territorial loss.
 
Moving the hardliners to a mercenary band is actually helpful. We can culturally assimilate a mercenary band more easily than a March, simply by parking it in Valleyhome for 3 generations to normalize them.

Well, we'd be deploying them a lot so I'm not sure whether we'd have that luxury, but a culturally divergent mercenary band is a much smaller problem.
Yeah I realized this after ThrawnCA pointed out some reasoning.

I'm okay with this course of action.

Are you sure it's when it drops, or when it hits negative? If you think it's drops too, where are you getting your thought on this? Logic based on the narrative meaning of dropping stability when at over capped Martial?

So for next turn, we have two acts to balance:

1) Investing enough in the north to discourage breakaway. Assuming trails are enough.
2) Defending the lowland so that we don't encounter stability loss/territorial loss.
Integrating and then into Merc company for the Stallions is a simple solution to both of these since it removes a nexus and provides a mobile force we can stick in the Lowlands.

I need to give it some more thought though.
 
Last edited:
You know, I kinda wish there was a hall of fame for all of the silliest stuff that happens in this thread.
Some examples:
Boats
Minotaur Sex
Naruto Shipping

While i like to see such a hall, i think some of the participants would have a very awkward expression.



Present party excluded, i'm a proud supporter of Sasuke X Naruto X Naruko.
 
So for next turn, we have two acts to balance:

1) Investing enough in the north to discourage breakaway. Assuming trails are enough.
2) Defending the lowland so that we don't encounter stability loss/territorial loss.
Also, raising stability would be lovely. It helps keep our government properly in place, and also gives us a cushion against stability loss.
 
Personally I'm hoping the highlanders crumple into internal woes rather than conquest or collapse. That'd be largely ideal for the short and mid-term.

..............(cut)

Because red martial(such as that caused by integrating the Stallions), will cause things like "your army went out to attack someone on it's own" when our stability drops.

Which would be a MAJOR problem now that we've stuck our dick into the lowland clusterfuck, because that's a good way to overstretch admin or lose martial.

No I mean our vassals are surrounded by enemies or potential enemies and if we want a reliable route to reinforce them and avoid them getting cut off we need either the highlanders or the thunder speakers land.
If we actually want to hold the lowland minors we need to go on a conquest or two. and we need to hold them to have any hope of keeping the iron monopoly.

I think that the red martial low stability malus is mitigated when all of your troops are already too engaged with something to cause additional trouble. I'd think it would instead result in troops not following orders against currently engaged enemies, though I have no confirmation.
Edit: and there are a bunch of ways I could be wrong on this second point.
 
Last edited:
So long as we're sending 3 main war missions per turn I don't think red martial is likely to be an issue no matter what we do.

Edit: to clarify, I mean I don't think we're likely to hit red martial.
The Stallions have likely 8 Martial on their own and a considerable chunk of Econ to add to Reserves.

Also, having more soldiers than your command structure can manage is not good at all. In war that charitably means they can attack the wrong targets, including allies and neutral parties from order mix ups, or worse, wind up fighting your own dudes.
Are you sure it's when it drops, or when it hits negative? If you think it's drops too, where are you getting your thought on this? Logic based on the narrative meaning of dropping stability when at over capped Martial?
Last time it happened was when we dropped to -1 so it could be either...but now would be a really bad time to find that out, yes?
No I mean our vassals are surrounded by enemies or potential enemies and if we want a reliable route to reinforce them and avoid them getting cut off we need either the highlanders or the thunder speakers land.

We don't.
Explicitly:
Special: Main new settlement in south of cataracts, far eastern Redhills, or far north-eastern Redhills can produce new provinces. Far eastern Redhills will also give territorial continuity with your vassal and allow for their integration
 
No I mean our vassals are surrounded by enemies or potential enemies and if we want a reliable route to reinforce them and avoid them getting cut off we need either the highlanders or the thunder speakers land.
If we actually want to hold the lowland minors we need to go on a conquest or two. and we need to hold them to have any hope of keeping the iron monopoly.

I think that the red martial low stability malus is mitigated when all of your troops are already too engaged with something to cause additional trouble. I'd think it would instead result in troops not following orders against currently engaged enemies, though I have no confirmation.
Edit: and there are a bunch of ways I could be wrong on this second point.
Conquest is unnecessary I believe since we can expand into the Far East Redhills province and have the border connection. Defense though is not unnecessary.

And this shall be my only comment in this argument since I don't have anything else to go on.
 
Weren't suppose to also integrate parts of the WW as well? Besides having high diplomancy means our vassals are less likely to break away as well.
 
Last time it happened was when we dropped to -1 so it could be either...but now would be a really bad time to find that out, yes?
[Agreement]

Weren't suppose to also integrate parts of the WW as well? Besides having high diplomancy means our vassals are less likely to break away as well.
They are less critical as I understand it, noting that they leave when we can no longer provide them what they want and likely after the Stallions leave with the North, and they strike out for independence from anyone to form their own state.
 
Last edited:
Technically there are goat herders who are "nomads", but they can't support the larger and more numerous kind of nomadic groups that you see in the north. The land is scrubby and hot and is mostly desert with a few watering holes. The People secured a number of wells along the route as part of their efforts, and there is likely mining possible, but all in all its just not a good place to live.
Is there any chance you could put up another map with land quality? Or at least pointing out exactly where the fertile lowlands are. Because the are you're calling the lowland minors is where I thought the high quality land was. And its made all the more confusing because you had previously discussed the lowlands as a place we could expand to a long long time ago. But now I'm starting to get the feeling that they're far enough away that we could fit an entire contemporary country between them and us.
 
Is there any chance you could put up another map with land quality? Or at least pointing out exactly where the fertile lowlands are. Because the are you're calling the lowland minors is where I thought the high quality land was. And its made all the more confusing because you had previously discussed the lowlands as a place we could expand to a long long time ago. But now I'm starting to get the feeling that they're far enough away that we could fit an entire contemporary country between them and us.
Lemme at it:

 
The Far East Redhills settlement will end up worryingly close to the Thunder Speakers territory. We may want to spend a bit of time on defensive policy to improve our fortifications, in preparation for fortifying our lowlands settlements the way the Highland Kingdom has. Especially since we're likely to be taking the same general area they claimed before retreating.
 
Provided the stat we care about isn't econ, anyway.

If we want econ specifically, we want balanced.

Let's not forget that, because econ's the stat that's hardest to get from other sources; the only stat slower to get overflow is Martial.
First of all, many balanced actions burn econ. It's not particularly good for stockpiling it

Secondly, econ is our easiest stat to raise due to iron blooded. We lose value when we overflow other stats into it.

Still, Trade isn't particularly good at raising Econ. That much is true.

Last time it happened was when we dropped to -1 so it could be either...but now would be a really bad time to find that out, yes?
Negative Stability + Max Military Malus Activated!
Actually, we know quite explicitly.
 
Last edited:
First of all, many balanced actions burn econ.
It gains us +4, minimum, because expand econ is the only action The Law can double on Balanced. And very frequently the other actions aren't econ consumers; both Study Stars and Build Mills are likely at the moment, honestly.

Pretty much no other policy is likely to produce Econ at all, barring being too short on econ to do whatever the policy's about.

Well, Expansion. Which'll blow us up.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top