ThrawnCA
Carbon-based biped
- Location
- Australia
Mostly yes, but something that requires just *one main* could even be done this turn. The ROI is huge.
Paths of Civilization
- Thread starter Academia Nut
- Start date
- Original
While we probably do want to open up the Med eventually I'm not 100% sure it's in our best interest to do that before expanding in some other directions. The Metal Workers are actually extremely vulnerable right now and looking closer at the river they live on... I'm pretty darn sure it's the Danube River. Which is absurdly long itself and approaches the Rhine.
Now, on the one hand, holding the Bosphorus gets us access to all those coastal Med civilizations. On the other hand, everyone who is trading on the Med is trading with everyone else on the Med. In contrast, there probably isn't a lot of trade going along the Danube River right now or we'd hear about it. We're in a unique position to leverage riverine trade because of our boats and their ability to portage and inland people will go crazy for our goods.
Trading north is just a pain in the arse because nomads nomads nomads. Going west could be a lot more feasible.
Now, on the one hand, holding the Bosphorus gets us access to all those coastal Med civilizations. On the other hand, everyone who is trading on the Med is trading with everyone else on the Med. In contrast, there probably isn't a lot of trade going along the Danube River right now or we'd hear about it. We're in a unique position to leverage riverine trade because of our boats and their ability to portage and inland people will go crazy for our goods.
Trading north is just a pain in the arse because nomads nomads nomads. Going west could be a lot more feasible.
Last edited:
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Seems fitting to me to put this on page 3001.
The Exterminatus Protocol
The Army of Fear Edition
The Army of Fear Edition
This is a terrible idea, why are you still reading.
No seriously this is horrible. Suicide I say.
Still reading?
Ok. Here.
{Glass box containing big red button}
"Break when only necessary."
This post entails how we could use a Main War Mission, Terrify, and the Policy and Law bonus on one target.
Three assumptions first though: I am assuming that Terrify's stability drop in major civs can trigger econ gain from CA. How exactly this is explained narratively is uncertain but I figure that in the context of Exterminatus I imagine it would be through kidnapping and making "refugees" like we did in the sacking of Xohyr.
Assumption two is that a normal Main Terrify can only do one stability hit unless it crits, but war missions can improve this.
Assumption three is that as a "floating" main war mission and a part of our people, and some of our worst, we can kick war missions of the Red Banner.
1st Phase:
Be drawn into a defensive war. Switch to Offense policy for free.
Main War Mission - Exterminatus Target
Secondary Terrify - Exterminatus Target
Secondary Terrify - Exterminatus Target x2
Kick War Mission - Exterminatus Target
2nd Phase:
Provinces Main War Mission - Exterminatus Target x3 due to Law bonus.
Kick x3
The Red Banner Main War Mission - Exterminatus Target
Kick
So the original Exterminatus could throw around 10 at any one time and this one can do 9. This new version costs 5 stability in total, same as the old one and is a total commitment of our Econ and Martial stats near as I can figure.
However, I would consider this one far deadlier because of the synergy between war missions and Terrify. This is because the original Exterminatus was said by AN to be capable of crippling or out right destroying our neighbors and now a lot has changed. With the synergy of terrify/war I think we would be hitting them for more than 4 or 5 stability in one go with the sheer amount of shit we throw at a target, which means that along with the Econ and Martial damage we stand a good chance of just making them crack due to stability. Also note that if we do enough Econ damage to drive them negative from this war mission then that triggers further stability hits.
Finally we could if we had the stability take in even more "refugees" with the use of CA, but that rapidly ups the stability cost. So much in fact that we can only take up to the second tier because there is only enough stability room for the -1 hit and that might kill us with the possible chance of further loss. Which is almost certainly magnified.
The Costs:
5 stability at max, all of our Martial and Econ put on the table as one gamble. Our civ's sanity and threatening all of our traits.
The Damage Evaluation:
With the example of the Xoh my evaluation of the strength of all our neighbors went down a small amount.
Would probably shatter the HK like glass. They aren't strong enough to survive considering the whooping we just gave them and how quickly they folded in a life or death struggle to them, and then the climate damage.
The Thunder Speakers would also crack into dust like we dropped a hundred ton hammer on them. The Terrify would be possibly less effective due to lack of proximity and lack of urbanization, but how much that would affect things when we are stacking the deck this much is minimal.
The Eastern Thunder Horse are far enough that they may survive in some form, but with the sacking of Xohyr I have some doubts as to this possibility. The Terrify would work on them, given their city state nature. Basically I think they would only end up a little more dead than the Xoh.
The Swamp People probably have the best chance to survive in some form considering the distance and their lack of urbanization to our knowledge. How ell is up for grabs, but I think it likely they split up into successor states that carry some culture but the level of the destruction the Xoh felt would probably be dodged.
And then of course there would be the nigh eon long cultural scarring we would inflict on ourselves and the target. Horrible myths and legends would spring up everywhere after this of Daemons of the West and if we survived they'd be kinda right.
Aside from that the really terrifying thing is that we can throw lesser versions of this around pretty damn easy. One or two stab if we are at max 3 would be survivable and do scary amounts of damage. And we could do it several times in a row if they survived the first time.
And there you go @Concho117 the thing at the Top of my Scary Shit the Ymaryn Can Do List.
- Location
- United States
I'm not really liking all this talk of conquest and such.
What happened to people wanting the Ymaryn to be generally nice and helpful?
I can see fighting back against those who struck us first, but actively conquering when there's so much relatively unclaimed land around seems excessive.
I would eagerly support diplomatic vassalage or something similar, but I am generally going to be against wars of conquest.
What happened to people wanting the Ymaryn to be generally nice and helpful?
I can see fighting back against those who struck us first, but actively conquering when there's so much relatively unclaimed land around seems excessive.
I would eagerly support diplomatic vassalage or something similar, but I am generally going to be against wars of conquest.
While we probably do want to open up the Med eventually I'm not 100% sure it's in our best interest to do that before expanding in some other directions. The Metal Workers are actually extremely vulnerable right now and looking closer at the river they live on... I'm pretty darn sure it's the Danube River. Which gets close to the Rhine.
Now, on the one hand, holding the Bosphorus gets us access to all those coastal Med civilizations. On the other hand, everyone who is trading on the Med is trading with everyone else on the Med. In contrast, there probably isn't a lot of trade going along the Danube River right now or we'd hear about it. We're in a unique position to leverage riverine trade because of our boats and their ability to portage and inland people will go crazy for our goods.
Trading north is just a pain in the arse because nomads nomads nomads. Going west could be a lot more feasible.
I am more interested in the Volga river. This way lies the Baltic sea, and a possible route to the America.
But I guess the Danube river works too, if we get access to the Rhine river, and then eventual access to the America.
- Location
- his hidden lair
The problem isn't their relative trade power, the problem is they have near total control over every trade route besides our immediate neighbors. We can't just 'ignore' them without limiting ourselves because at the end of the day- we need those trade routes. Unless we want to look entirely east for trade (which is almost strictly worse than playing both sides) the Trelli have, at the very least, got to limit their restrictions on our trade. Tariffs? Cool. Preventing every form of travel beyond their city? Ah hell naw.
So...
Found Trading Post - Near Trelli (West), then? The Trading Post will probably send sailing missions up the river in question.
ThrawnCA
Carbon-based biped
- Location
- Australia
I think you misunderstand, or else I do. The proposal is, we simply build better ships than theirs and sail right through.
They haven't physically blocked the strait, just built fast boats to intercept anyone trying to pass through. If our boats are bigger, faster, and better, we can just do as we please - thus, ignoring them.
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Same here. Wars of Conquest are wasteful in resources and strain our delicate system, it also makes people you don't conquer fear and hate you which means they are far more likely to stab you in the back. Those pragmatic reasons aside, there are also the moral ones that attacking someone like that is going to cause mass amounts of suffering. I'd like to avoid that. If they attack us then fine, I am totally okay with beating their teeth in as quickly as possible till they stop.
Mostly though I think this talk is I think it's people being bored at waiting for the update, we start talking about something to pass the time, in this case the Trelli Trade Post vs the North Trade Post then as it goes on it devolves into what to do about the Trelli which then devolves into conquest.
Last edited:
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
In theory. In reality, there just isn't enough wealth there. Why do you think everyone ignored Siberia until Russia?
Phygrif should never have been elected King. He IS a black mark on our history.
And that was still wrong. America stealing the Natives' land was a bad thing. Why would we want to replicate that?
----
There is no "necessity". Of course conquering Trelli would be better for us, but that goes for just about any conquest. You could also say "We need to conquer the HK to better our access to our Lowland vassals" or "we need to conquer the Swampfolk because they have all the good soil in the Lowland". It's the exactly same. There is no necessity here, only greed and jealousy for something the Trelli own. Justice means letting them have it.
What you want is flat out imperialist conquest. Don't try to couch it in terms of "necessity". After all, we obviously can exist with Trell occupying the strait; we currently do! So this isn't an existential threat to us. Open straits is just something we want, and your attitude is basically "I want it, so I'll take it". That is no different than going on a conquering spree in the Lowlands, so once again, don't tr to present it as a "necessity".
Also, I'd rather we not develop a Manifest Destiny complex. If we can expand, fine. But we neither have an inherent right to expand, nor a duty to expand. "Manifest Destiny" bullshit is always inherently imperialist and violent. It wasn't a good thing when the USA did it (see: Native tribes), it wouldn't be a good thing if we did it.
Freedom of navigation is a modern concept and not necessarily applicable to territorial waters anyway. Frankly, we have no inherent right to pass into the Med. It is inconvenient we can't, but c'est la vie.
No, we're not. Not if we actually want to be a good civilization, instead of just yet another power and war mongerer. This relies on us having standards. Ethical standards. That IS what being good means! Why do you think people turn to evil? Because being evil gets you stuff! You rob your neighbour, you get his stuff! Being good does mean constraining oneself now and then, yes. Being good means accepting a disadvantage for the sake of being good. Otherwise, you can't claim to be good. And if we're just yet another power mongering culture, what's even the point?
Oh right. Here comes the usual "Hard men making hard decisions" bullshit.
Your entire argument rests on "But... but... muh RL history!". But that's a descriptive statement, not a normative one. It's a statement of "This is how it has been done in reality". Okay, it has. But you can't derive a normative statement from a descriptive statement. That's the naturalist fallacy - you can't derive ought from is. Just because it maybe has always been done doesn't mean it's good or even only acceptable. Slavery has been an integral part of the vast majority of human existence on Earth, yet that doesn't mean it's a good or acceptable thing.
You speak of winning and losing, but what even is the point of winning if we have gazed so long into the abyss that the abyss is gazing into us? We do have an obligation to our people, of course, yes, and an obligation to our people first and foremost. But you seem to be forgetting that we have reached everything we have WITH Trelli in control of the Bosporus and WITH them denying us passage through it. Once again, having the Bosporus would be nice, but it isn't necessary. Conquering Trelli just because it sits on the Bosporus is no different than conquering a country for its natural resources or trying to get slaves. Both is imperialist conquest to get something that would be convenient. It makes no difference if that something is resources or sea access. It's the same!
The well-being of our people is secured. We don't need the Bosporus for that. Other things threaten that well-being far more, see all the administrative and taxation troubles we have. It is far more important to carefully keep and maintain our excellent society than to go out and conquer, something that most certainly would ruin that society - and I'm not even speaking about moral values here, I'm speaking about its social fabric (warrior caste becomes more important), additional administrative strains, resources to be spent on such conquests...
You don't have the well-being of the Ymarrin in mind. What you have in mind is empire building. What you have in mind is that we HAVE to become a global world power. Well, no we don't. As long as we can in fact secure the well-being of our people I frankly don't care if we'll end up as a world power or not. Thinking that we have to is hubris, and thinking that not being a world power is "losing" is a Trump attitude.
I can tell you one thing: I will not only vote against any military landgrabs. I will vote to actively sabotage them if necessary!
Last edited:
ThrawnCA
Carbon-based biped
- Location
- Australia
I just got a vibe kind of like our prior attitude toward the Xoh; "yeah, we're not keen on their child sacrifice, but they're a long way away; wonder what we could do about it? Should we let them hire our mercs, or are their practices just too far? Would we be a positive influence, or would doing business with them send the wrong message?"
And then all of a sudden a king gets motivated and there's a city on fire.
- Location
- his hidden lair
And you lost me. Strawmen tend to do that. I don't care if you've come up with a viable cure to world hunger, but if you can't do me the courtesy of actually contemplating my argument, I don't see any need to do the same.
Not really? The Trelli are way too far south to near the Danube.
Actually, Greenshore Trading Post is probably sitting smack dab on the Danube River. What we'd probably want to do is convert Greenshore Trading Post to a colony. Possibly do a 'Sailing Mission'.
- Location
- Australia
How is it not? To my knowledge the US has taken every possible opportunity that would've resulted in harm to others but advantages for themselves. It's not evil for evil's sake, but that excuse what the country has done.
It is not good or neutral to do evil for the sake of profit. It is evil.
Last edited:
- Location
- his hidden lair
See that works, but it's going to be incredibly provocative for one thing, and there's a difference between out running a blockade, and consistently bypassing a blockade that is waiting for you to try exactly that.
I mean, I'm not against it, I just don't think it's a solution in its own right and is likely to escalate the issue.
DocMatoi
Theoretical Lover of Girls
- Location
- within 2 hours of the White House
- Pronouns
- They/Them
seconded
- Location
- United States
Something that I've actually forgotten, since it's been so long in thread since it mattered:
Symphony
All have their part to play in this world, be it their interaction with each other or with the spirits. When all the parts of a group are moving in accord, the result is greater than the sum of the parts.
Pros: Bonus to collective action, spiritually and ecologically harmonious actions, and to concerted efforts
Cons: Disharmony is to be corrected, require casus belli to declare war
Even if people suddenly want to beat up the Trelli, we can't until we get a casus belli.
So far, I've only seen us have 3; the baby eater one for the Xoh, the Treachery one for the HK and TS (Possibly others, can't recall), and the Rage Against the Steppes CB against nomads in general.
Unless we get some sort of trade dispute CB (unlikely unless we get Center of Trade), there won't be a worthy reason to attack them anyways.
Symphony
All have their part to play in this world, be it their interaction with each other or with the spirits. When all the parts of a group are moving in accord, the result is greater than the sum of the parts.
Pros: Bonus to collective action, spiritually and ecologically harmonious actions, and to concerted efforts
Cons: Disharmony is to be corrected, require casus belli to declare war
Even if people suddenly want to beat up the Trelli, we can't until we get a casus belli.
So far, I've only seen us have 3; the baby eater one for the Xoh, the Treachery one for the HK and TS (Possibly others, can't recall), and the Rage Against the Steppes CB against nomads in general.
Unless we get some sort of trade dispute CB (unlikely unless we get Center of Trade), there won't be a worthy reason to attack them anyways.
These two comics sum up my feelings nicely. I want to spread love, wisdom, and trees, but some people may not appreciate that. And, in the terribly disturbing possibility that that happens, well...
That's when we start spreading Iron.
ThrawnCA
Carbon-based biped
- Location
- Australia
That would lose our saltern boost
Which probably wouldn't have an immediate effect, since I think it would drop us from 1.5 Wealth to 1 - and it rounds down anyway. But then, building a single extra trading post would just bump us back up to 1.5, and thus not do anything.
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
That too.
- Location
- Philippines
Many Ymaryn would disagree with you Phygriff broke the xoh and gave us siege engines his descendants gave us shield wall and tactical phases and are protecting our north eastern territory which is why the nomads are not really a problem anymore, voting him in also made it so that Rulwynna the second become an intrigue hero rather than a puppet which resulted in us getting a clearer image on the problems at hand Phygriff was a lot of things but a black mark he is not.
- Location
- Hell
?
Which was missing my point?
My point was bypassing them
Strawman implies that is not exactly what you said. Otherwise you vastly misrepresented your point as now multiple people are taking this view of what you just said.
- Location
- Voidbetweenstars
Because it was successful?
I like that our traits forced us into more peaceful solutions.
- Location
- his hidden lair
Okay, I'm really not going to touch this- but if you honestly think it's that black and white I envy you ( or at the very least if you refuse to realize there's a reason for such behaviour)