You said you wanted war carts, we need more animals if we want to go that route. Don't try to downplay the value of it as simply my opinion.
I'm not trying to down play your value. If you read my previous post, I was advocating building war carts and expanding pastures the turn after next.
 
Last edited:
I just want to make the gdamn canal...

We'd better do Expand Fishing as a major action the turn after the settlement is established or so. I rly want improved ships so we can trade w/ people and have a route for growth that doesn't entail squabbling with the WC or pushing against nomad raids.
While I do like the idea of overwater colonies, we're still a long ways from that. But yeah improving our finishing and having deep water sailboats would be great.
 
I'm not trying to down play your value. If you read my previous post, I was advocating building war carts and expanding pastures the next after next.
Meh, part of the reason I would like to do it earlier is that that would be another generation for our people to get swole since that is still a big part of war in this time.
 
While I do like the idea of overwater colonies, we're still a long ways from that. But yeah improving our finishing and having deep water sailboats would be great.
They don't even have to be overwater colonies, they could just be a chain of coastal ones. Better ship access would let us reach the northern coastal terrain bordering the nomadic territory - i.e. the area the coastal river comes from - and its opposite to the south, areas previously rendered less accessible due to the particularly broken terrain. With work parties at either end, we could then establish trails connecting between these villages along the coast. From these points we would work inland, consolidating our grasp on the hills with step farms and forests until we hit a flatter and non-forested area, where we would establish walled settlements and from there slowly expand, establishing forests and pasture.
 
Last edited:
Meh, part of the reason I would like to do it earlier is that that would be another generation for our people to get swole since that is still a big part of war in this time.
My opinion on the matter depends heavily on what the Dead Priests do. In general, though, I have two ideas.

Plan 1:
Turn 1-
[Main] Build Wall-New Settlement
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] New Settlement- Lowlands

Turn 2-
[Main] Expand Woods
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Expand Pastures

Plan 2:
Turn 1-
[Main] New Settlement- Lowlands
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Expand Pastures

Turn 2-
[Main] Expand Woods
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Build Wall- New Settlement

We're going to want to expand our forests down there eventually, and the sooner we do it the sooner they can age into truly powerful defenses. My biggest concern is the Dead Priest Retaliation. If they are distracted enough I am willing to hold off on the walls, but I really want to get the woods up for a source of wood for the area, and so our people can fight in our favored terrain (woods).
 
Last edited:
My opinion on the matter depends heavily on what the Dead Priests do. In general, though, I have two ideas.

Plan 1:
Turn 1-
[Main] Build Wall-New Settlement
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] New Settlement- Lowlands

Turn 2-
[Main] Expand Woods
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Expand Pastures

Plan 2:
Turn 1-
[Main] New Settlement- Lowlands
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Expand Pastures

Turn 2-
[Main] Expand Woods
[Secondary] War Mission- Dead Priests
[Secondary] Build Wall- New Settlement

We're going to want to expand our forests down there eventually, and the sooner we do it the sooner they can age into truly powerful defenses. My biggest concern is the Dead Priest Retaliation. If they are distracted enough I am willing to hold off on the walls, but I really want to get the woods up for a source of wood for the area, and so our people can fight in our favored terrain (woods).
Why not expand forests in turn 1 of plan two, then expand pastures? While a Main action would allow for more forest to be planted, a more spread out Secondary action performed earlier would allow for the density to steadily fill itself in. Admittedly, however, the better diet provided by Expand Pastures will increase our people's musculature in a more delayed manner than the forest - due to cultural issues in addition to the normal biological ones.

You're also not increasing our War Cart or sacred soldier #'s at all, but I'll admit that the New Trails, New Settlement, and easier access to materials given by Expand Forest would lead to a natural increase in cart numbers.
It still leaves the Blackbirds and etc. underfunded, but they haven't proved exceedingly powerful as of yet.
 
Last edited:
Why not expand forests in turn 1 of plan two, then expand pastures? You're also not increasing our War Cart or sacred soldier #'s at all, but I'll admit that the New Trails, New Settlement, and easier access to materials given by Expand Forest would lead to a natural increase in cart numbers.
It still leaves the Blackbirds and etc. underfunded, but they haven't proved exceedingly powerful as of yet.
Because I want it to be a main focus. I fully expect it to take an immense amount of effort to get forests started in the lowlands, and I want a main action to do it with.

Also, yes, I fully expect increased logistics to greatly help with our ability to fund, but again, I don't expect this war to be over soon. If our answer to our problems is constantly 'increase troop count' then we may finish the war faster, but it will be more costly. By taking time to do economic projects that also increase the war effort during the war, we can make gains. In the case of the forest it would give us an advanced push against the desertification going on in the area, in addition to claiming more land. If we were to wait on that, the desertification may be much harder to fight. We can then wait 2-3 turns and then do another turtle expand, hopefully getting things like fishing, study forest, and survey land out in the mean time.

Edit: Also expand forest will be stronger if we already have a settlement set up.
 
Why not expand forests in turn 1 of plan two, then expand pastures? You're also not increasing our War Cart or sacred soldier #'s at all, but I'll admit that the New Trails, New Settlement, and easier access to materials given by Expand Forest would lead to a natural increase in cart numbers.
It still leaves the Blackbirds and etc. underfunded, but they haven't proved exceedingly powerful as of yet.
IIRC the black birds have excelled at assassination and recon, but not at straight up melee. Honestly, they seem very, very useful.
 
IIRC the black birds have excelled at assassination and recon, but not at straight up melee. Honestly, they seem very, very useful.
~ When I said "exceedingly powerful" I was including their skills at assassination and recon. If they end up regularly taking down the leadership of the DP I will considering them powerful - though their usefulness in that respect will depend on the DP not changing their habits. E.g. having subordinates pretend to be leaders, using tracking dogs, etc.
 
~ When I said "exceedingly powerful" I was including their skills at assassination and recon. If they end up regularly taking down the leadership of the DP I will considering them powerful - though their usefulness in that respect will depend on the DP not changing their habits. E.g. having subordinates pretend to be leaders, using tracking dogs, etc.
I'm pretty sure we could have the Black Birds specifically target the DP leadership (military leaders, priests, overseers, etc), they would need a larger group though in order to make a dent.

Yeah, they're just a squad at the moment...so they can't accomplish a whole lot (since they don't scale in population as much as our warriors do). But they did steal 2 different techs from the dead priests :)

Edit: Clearing up wording issue.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure we could have the Black Birds specifically target the DP leadership (military leaders, priests, overseers, etc), they would need a larger group though in order to make a dent.

Yeah, they're just a squad at the moment...so they can't accomplish a whole lot (since they don't scale in population as our warriors do). But they did steal 2 different techs from the dead priests :)
I thought they WERE going to scale? It just makes sense that they would recruit young kiddos and be like "you seem like you have justice and a love of flowers in your heart, how'd you like to shoot bad guys?" Or, Batman style, 1) they find a kid the night their parents get murdered 2) they find a kid stealing things and are like "instead of killing them I'll try to restore harmony by giving him/her/sie a job" 3) their identity gets discovered and they're like "wow, ur not a fucktard"
 
I'm pretty sure we could have the Black Birds specifically target the DP leadership (military leaders, priests, overseers, etc), they would need a larger group though in order to make a dent.

Yeah, they're just a squad at the moment...so they can't accomplish a whole lot (since they don't scale in population as our warriors do). But they did steal 2 different techs from the dead priests :)
They're very nice, but they aren't going to win the war. We have settlements we need to raid, armies to defeat, etc. I suspect we can't make enough of a dent in their leadership via assassinations before they wise up, and I'd rather have them just not even understand what stealth is in the meantime, let alone that we have it.
 
I thought they WERE going to scale? It just makes sense that they would recruit young kiddos and be like "you seem like you have justice and a love of flowers in your heart, how'd you like to shoot bad guys?" Or, Batman style, 1) they find a kid the night their parents get murdered 2) they find a kid stealing things and are like "instead of killing them I'll try to restore harmony by giving him/her/sie a job" 3) their identity gets discovered and they're like "wow, ur not a fucktard"
Sorry for the confusion, I was saying that they don't scale in pop as much as our warriors do, not that they don't at all.

They're very nice, but they aren't going to win the war. We have settlements we need to raid, armies to defeat, etc. I suspect we can't make enough of a dent in their leadership via assassinations before they wise up, and I'd rather have them just not even understand what stealth is in the meantime, let alone that we have it.

Yeah, they aren't gonna single handedly win the war, but they're a very good modifier to have. I'm just saying that, if we took 2+ actions towards expanding the ranks, they would have enough people to make a large dent in the DP leadership. I agree that other actions are better at the moment.
 
Yeah, they aren't gonna single handedly win the war, but they're a very good modifier to have. I'm just saying that, if we took 2+ actions towards expanding the ranks, they would have enough people to make a large dent in the DP leadership. I agree that other actions are better at the moment.
I just don't want them, or anyone else for that matter, to even consider units devoted to recon is even a thing for as long as possible. That is, I'd much rather be the only one to have map reveal than assassination power.
 
I just don't want them, or anyone else for that matter, to even consider units devoted to recon is even a thing for as long as possible. That is, I'd much rather be the only one to have map reveal than assassination power.
I think that being the only one with map reveal will last until they're like, "We've tried to do raids three times but they somehow were there all three times. How?" It doesn't help that we assassinated people otw to the wall, too. Though they may have been quiet, idk.

Sorry for the confusion, I was saying that they don't scale in pop as much as our warriors do, not that they don't at all.

Yeah, they aren't gonna single handedly win the war, but they're a very good modifier to have. I'm just saying that, if we took 2+ actions towards expanding the ranks, they would have enough people to make a large dent in the DP leadership. I agree that other actions are better at the moment.
We might as well just do it 20 times and convert all of our population into leaf-clad assassins.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if we could use them to incite a slave revolt? Like, have them kill all of the overseers in a few areas to the point where the slaves have no one watching them. If it succeeds the DP have crisis in their hands. And even if the revolt fails the DP might be inclined to make an example to the rest of the slaves, which would cause their economy to drop
 
I wonder if we could use them to incite a slave revolt? Like, have them kill all of the overseers in a few areas to the point where the slaves have no one watching them. If it succeeds the DP have crisis in their hands. And even if the revolt fails the DP might be inclined to make an example to the rest of the slaves, which would cause their economy to drop
It would successfully allow for a revolt by crippled slaves who would gradually hobble away, yes.
 
Why, when given those percentages, are you guys voting for it? We already have an option in Establish Annual Festival that we know will increase our stability back to 0, and it does so in a far more communal and harmonious manner than RoH which the author has stated "is a very aggressive method that is intrinsically disharmonious".
Primarily to head this shit off in the future. Stability issues stem from uncertainty, causing corruption and generating more corruption sourced uncertainty in a feedback loop.
We cannot practically do anything about the uncertainty in the future, but we CAN close off corruption as an aggravating element if we can just enforce it.
Secondarily, to attempt to evolve Holy War with a Justice fusion. Longshot, but that's one way out of this thing...

They've taken some from you and some from their "cousins" the Dead Priests from when they were a more unified people, so either you already have a better version, or the values are incompatible when taken together. You might pick up one of their honour values though.
Is that what happened when they tried to assimilate our Harmony practices?
From a past turn I think they might have copied Eye for an Eye(which gave them the change in slavery practies), then tried to copy Gardeners/Harmony and failed?
They collected six figures worth of human skulls and made a massive wall. It took generations to gather the resources together, although the actual wall only took about a generation to build an a few years to decorate.
That wall is solid heresy there.


So, New Values!
-Western Confederacy: Pioneering Spirit we already know the effects, and they're honestly not that great. While indubitably synergistic with Land of Opportunity, naturally, the problem of lowering Centralization concurrently with a Stability hit is what we are currently seeing with the past few turns. So, no go, really. (Also, since we got the hint that the WC adopted some of our traits at a lower level, does this mean the WC and the Spirit Talkers have a version of our Caretakers of the Land trait? It seems likely, since that's a reasonable representation of the export of our agricultural paradigm to another polity.)

-Nomads: Likely a Military Honour value, which from the list AN provided, is most likely the [Fighting is Glorious] value or the [Defend Weaker In-group] value, since those are the values most compatible to our own values. At a guess, we'll get the [Defend Weaker In-group] value, since that seems more compatible with our pre-existing values. The base level of it probably give a bonus whenever we fight in defense of our allies or with our allies but also gives a stability hit if we don't get into a war in defense of our allies. With the current war, the high chance that the Dead Priests will attack the WC relatively soon, and our inability to really see to the war to a favorable conclusion in a timely manner, I'm really not feeling this value. The other value, however good it'll be for stability, I'm inclined to dismiss out of hand, since that will combine easily with Sacred War (and with our Strong Opinions on Agriculture) into a militarily-aggressive expansionist culture. (And the con of it, considering the continuous raiding culture among the Northern Raiders, would be to take a stability hit if we are not currently engaged in a war.)

Of the non-military values-- The [Honour Your Word] value is a variation on the "Fairness" aspect of our [Eye for Eye] trait, which is okay since we lost it when [Eye for Eye] evolved. The [Family Above All] value on the other hand, looks to be a poison pill, considering our current troubles where individuals drift away from non-family harmony in times of trouble. That is, we get a worse version of the current troubles whenever our Stability drops into the negatives.

-Spirit Talkers: A more esoteric Mysticism value. Even with the closer look at their values from that one trade mission, I don't really have a good guess as to their core values that we'll likely take. For a completely wild guess that I don't expect to happen, something that rises from the study of non-seasonal weather cycles??? Which, given our current difficulties with the lowlands, may come from our elders and shamans looking at the weather cycles of the lowlands and then seeing the drought cycle, a possible weak period that'll let us attack the Dead Priests. --Then, expanding into a more general consideration on the natural, material, and spiritual cycles, and how that reflects on the People. I can see the vague form of the resulting trait, thought I can't articulate the substance of the effects.
Maybe getting warning of natural disasters before they arrive for the ST esoterica?

Sort of, and primarily no. The environment has changed over the past millennium, becoming much drier and trees don't grow well in much of the lowlands, but with effort some species can be grown.
Sounds like they're exhausting the mid-layer of the soil there systematically. Need to replenish the deep black soil.

It's not an issue of heat, it's an issue of decent topsoil being blown away, which gradually expands as more top soil is exposed to be blown away. It's basically the Blight 2.0, yes, though fighting it takes the form of windbreaks more than anything else.
Windbreaks, which basically meant trees, which not only steal energy from the wind, but also capture and return escaping debris via leaves, as well as maintain organic mass bulk to retain water with.
.......
So, we should expand into lowlands and repeatedly mash 'Expand Forests' button?
Basically, though we're going to need to push settlements first.
~ My concern is that forests aren't there already because there are periods where there's not enough water, killing the forests that grew when there was. I'd say that a more optimal goal is to expand into the lowlands in settlements and mash the Expand Forests button every 2 lowland settlements or so. This would lead to a scattering of less dense forest that would serve as a windbreak and cart-brake but not be an exceeding draw on groundwater.
Not quite. It's a cycle of bad soil. There's plenty of water, the problem is that the damaged soil would not support a sapling until it punches through the ruined layer and reaches the deeper soil and aquifers. Basically the trees need a little help getting anchored, and then they'd need to be irrigated(which we do!), until they hit the stabilizing point.

Most of the lowland trees have been cut down for materials to boot, as their clay working industry and constructions all use a lot of prized wood.

Where have we planted forests? In the forest. What does the forest have? 1) Shade from the trees that already exist, 2) microbes and mycorrhizae that are already adapted to a forest ecosystem, 3) unknown but probably important factors in a forest ecosystem.
1) Not quite. We've planted forests after burning and sterilizing entire sections of blighted forest, replaced the soil with Black Soil, then replanted it.
2) Fortunately you need a sample of soil with those things that can supply the microlife, which is what the Black Soil is.
3) However we're going to need to import the wildlife...after it's already cultivated. Transporting beehives would be...exciting.

I think we can leave Build Walls for a different turn, because your projected plan will simply consume all our Economy as that is two projects that use Econ, War Mission and Build Walls, and one that merely costs/produces 0 Economy. Then we're down to Economy 1 again. We need to avoid pushing it too far too soon.
As AN had said before, New Settlement is not Econ 0. It's Econ 0 on first turn, then starts generating more Economy on the next turn. Delayed gratification. We're still going to be on track.
I see your point, but the lowlands are open plains with little forest (if any at all). We have Black Birds, so i'm pretty confident that they would spot any large raiding parties that march near the settlement and stop them (especially considering the much larger cavalry we would have stationed there).
Blackbirds are much more powerful when used with fortifications incidentally. Having prior warning of an incoming raid means we can evacuate the farmers and field workers into the settlement walls, and then have our carts move out.
Yeah, against the Confederacy's 6-9 Settlements and the Death Priests ?? settlements, one settlement is totally going to make us a major player there(lol). Walling would do nothing about supply routes, that's trade mission and new trails. I'd rather supplement our war actions with a econ actions instead. All our villages have garrisons, we have warriors spread out everywhere we have a settlement.
Already know that's wrong btw. New settlement means a near-site workbase that can manufacture tools and weapons, as well as produce food locally. It also makes it easier to put another settlement further downriver and so on. New Trails help with logistics, but when it's a month's travel to replace any broken carts...yeah.

You're forgetting the cost of the long distance war
...wouldn't having a local source instead of a 1 month import route for even basic food and weapon supply dramatically cut the cost of prosecuting a war?
 
Primarily to head this shit off in the future. Stability issues stem from uncertainty, causing corruption and generating more corruption sourced uncertainty in a feedback loop.
We cannot practically do anything about the uncertainty in the future, but we CAN close off corruption as an aggravating element if we can just enforce it.
Secondarily, to attempt to evolve Holy War with a Justice fusion. Longshot, but that's one way out of this thing...


Is that what happened when they tried to assimilate our Harmony practices?
From a past turn I think they might have copied Eye for an Eye(which gave them the change in slavery practies), then tried to copy Gardeners/Harmony and failed?

That wall is solid heresy there.



Maybe getting warning of natural disasters before they arrive for the ST esoterica?


Sounds like they're exhausting the mid-layer of the soil there systematically. Need to replenish the deep black soil.


Windbreaks, which basically meant trees, which not only steal energy from the wind, but also capture and return escaping debris via leaves, as well as maintain organic mass bulk to retain water with.

Basically, though we're going to need to push settlements first.

Not quite. It's a cycle of bad soil. There's plenty of water, the problem is that the damaged soil would not support a sapling until it punches through the ruined layer and reaches the deeper soil and aquifers. Basically the trees need a little help getting anchored, and then they'd need to be irrigated(which we do!), until they hit the stabilizing point.

Most of the lowland trees have been cut down for materials to boot, as their clay working industry and constructions all use a lot of prized wood.


1) Not quite. We've planted forests after burning and sterilizing entire sections of blighted forest, replaced the soil with Black Soil, then replanted it.
2) Fortunately you need a sample of soil with those things that can supply the microlife, which is what the Black Soil is.
3) However we're going to need to import the wildlife...after it's already cultivated. Transporting beehives would be...exciting.


As AN had said before, New Settlement is not Econ 0. It's Econ 0 on first turn, then starts generating more Economy on the next turn. Delayed gratification. We're still going to be on track.

Blackbirds are much more powerful when used with fortifications incidentally. Having prior warning of an incoming raid means we can evacuate the farmers and field workers into the settlement walls, and then have our carts move out.

Already know that's wrong btw. New settlement means a near-site workbase that can manufacture tools and weapons, as well as produce food locally. It also makes it easier to put another settlement further downriver and so on. New Trails help with logistics, but when it's a month's travel to replace any broken carts...yeah.


...wouldn't having a local source instead of a 1 month import route for even basic food and weapon supply dramatically cut the cost of prosecuting a war?
I think Study Forest would impact the efficacy of the forest expansion, regardless.

Also, black soil wouldn't necessarily have all the appropriate micro-organisms. It depends on if it was done near trees and using soil from those trees rather than just clay shards, waste, and charcoal. Even if soil is used, of course, the environment of the black soil pits would partly skew the microbial populations... but whatever. Black soil will definitely help with a lot of things and all it would take to transplant the appropriate soil fauna and fungi is planting a sapling or two in pots w/ original soil and then replanting both the tree and the soil in the lowlands.
 
Last edited:
It doesnt matter how crippled they are, a good roll of the dice would still be enough to distract the DP. But then it hasn't really been an available option yet so...
It would 100% increase the caution in regards to managing the slaves which would help decrease their econ. And repeated raids on the overlords would steadily decrease the relevant population (of overseers*) and increase their unwillingness to do stuff w/o guards, eventually leading to instability starting from the lower class and moving upward.
 
Last edited:
Already know that's wrong btw. New settlement means a near-site workbase that can manufacture tools and weapons, as well as produce food locally. It also makes it easier to put another settlement further downriver and so on. New Trails help with logistics, but when it's a month's travel to replace any broken carts...yeah.

...wouldn't having a local source instead of a 1 month import route for even basic food and weapon supply dramatically cut the cost of prosecuting a war?
:jackiechan:
I think you're both misunderstanding my argument, I'm not arguing against settlement, I' arguing against walled settlement as an econ action.

Pastures also gives us more ponies and ox so we can start to specialize them as well.
 
Investing in Black Birds, even after the war, seems like a great idea. They can easily spy on neighbors, steal tech, act as a policing force for our civ, act as assassins too! God damn are they useful for a bunch of things.
 
I think Study Forest would impact the efficacy of the forest expansion, regardless.
I'm pretty sure Study Forest gives us Mysticism more than anything else- we're studying the secrets of the forest with our shamans. If we roll well it likely also gives us some other related advantages that the shamans decide are worth immediately publicizing, so it'll possibly help a little but probably not much. It's great if we want to make another sect of spiritual warriors though.

(Also, you probably should try to only quote the part relevant to what you're responding to)

@Sivantic
I really don't think that making an unwalled settlement is a good idea. The DP's entire system relies upon raiding unprotected towns, and that's basically what we would have if we didn't wall it off at all. A DP raiding group could get in and wreak some major havoc that we wouldn't be able to deal with. We could probably get away with delaying the walls by 1 turn, but any further and we're taking some major unnecessary risks.
 
I really don't think that making an unwalled settlement is a good idea. The DP's entire system relies upon raiding unprotected towns, and that's basically what we would have if we didn't wall it off at all. A DP raiding group could get in and wreak some major havoc that we wouldn't be able to deal with. We could probably get away with delaying the walls by 1 turn, but any further and we're taking some major unnecessary risks.
Yes I agree they should be walled, but they are on the far end of the Western Confederacy. They would have to go through them first. I'm fully willing to Main Wall them the turn after we build the Settlement so that we can Main Settlement this turn to ensure that our village is a viable trade spot, regardless of how new it is.
 
Back
Top