Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
Umi-san said:
@Academia Nut does the King Still Stands legacy still take effect even if they back out of the war during the midturn?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Partially. They would have a chance at losing Stability from going this long, instead of the guaranteed Stab (well, RA) loss they would have from going the full turn. Not that they care really, they can tank Stab hits stupidly well.

maximillian said:
how likely is it for some of our values/traits to be upgraded after this war ? (WHR in particular)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Depends on how long the war goes, but there will be some choices about that in the midturn.

Deathbybunnies said:
I'm pretty committed to tribute now, but out of interest by our reckoning of the score how much Martial do the Khemetri have? And is that just what they can locally bring to bear, or their entire empire's stat?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Locally they are depleted, but they probably have like 5 right now and can probably call up another 5 to 7 over the midturn.

Abby Normal said:
how many and what type of reaction actions are we likely to have this coming midturn?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

At least 2 Main worth of actions.

Arlos said:
What happened to the Treilli Mercenary? Were they completely lost in the Melee?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The companies folded into each other due to depletion. They are likely to abandon this campaign at the first opportunity.
 
[X] Offer tribute (-5 Prestige, -10 Wealth, keeps King of the Hill, chance of +1 Stability)

I don't care to get our asses conquered by nomads because we're not willing to let the other guy save face.
 
Gavoon said:
What happened to the people that raged against the steppes? Have we decided appeasement is the way forward? That we should pay our enemies off rather than beat them back?

Edit: Also notice the "all lands currently settled" Doesn't that sound like they'll screw with us if we try to expand?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We raged against the steppes primarily because there was a significant amount of evidence that tribute would not have been accepted. The last nomad we gave tribute to started war anyway, and the nomad leader at the time saw our marches as threats which must be eliminated.

This time, we know with near-certainty that it will be.

Also, we have plenty of room to expand in the lowlands and to the north. That'll be hard, but easier than fighting a peer power.
 
You all have the chance to end the equivalent of an ancient world war and you guys wanna keep fighting? Think with your heads guys, not your hearts, as much as it pains us, I'd rather not have a generation of orphans on my conscience. That's bad for both my head And my heart.

[X] Offer tribute (-5 Prestige, -10 Wealth, keeps King of the Hill, chance of +1 Stability)
 
Last edited:
[X] Offer tribute (-5 Prestige, -10 Wealth, keeps King of the Hill, chance of +1 Stability)

My knee jerk reaction will always be Khemetri Delenda Est now, but this is probably for the best. There's very little chance of us gaining anything substantial out of this war, and quite a few potential benefits for ending it. For one, using our two martial heroes to squash the HK in a turn or so. You know, just get that squared away finally. Setting up a trade post with the Khemetri may destabilize the Trelli enough for a good ol' conquering eventually too.

Additionally, now is just not the best time for us to go warring. We're on the cusp of so many military tech advantages that it's kind of silly. Far better to get those up and running before going on a warpath.
 
Ghazkull said:
What i feel is that the Ymarin have in previous wars made each and every time very clear that there is no war with the Ymarin. You do not fuck with us. You just don't or we show up at your doorstep and burn you to the ground till you are nothing but an afterthought of history.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yep. That's why the Highlanders, Thunder Horse, Metal Workers, and Swamp Folk have all been relegated to the history books. Because we fought until they were completely and utterly destroyed, even unto our own destruction.
 
Gavoon said:
What happened to the people that raged against the steppes? Have we decided appeasement is the way forward? That we should pay our enemies off rather than beat them back?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually you know what

[X] Continue the war

Either we'll conquer or we'll be destroyed by our own hubris. Either way is fine with me :V

Certainly there have been no cases of polities suffering devastating setbacks at the hands of a third party after exhausting all their resources and manpower in a prior struggle.
 
Last edited:
Academia Nut said:
Ooops. Yes, it guarantees peace.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Good enough.

[X] Offer tribute (-5 Prestige, -10 Wealth, keeps King of the Hill, chance of +1 Stability)

Don't go all-in against the other nearby superpower when we started off taking extra losses because of two other minor polities taking a swing at us AND two other nearby polities keeping an eye on things. Get out of the fight as nominal winners, then go pound in the face of the Highlanders for being idiots.
 
Give the Khem tribute, spend our midturn on regaining wealth, doing a Study action or two, establish a TP w/ the Khem (if available).

Martial build up is not necessary, we will be at 10 + Reserves benefit.

We can then attack the HK the turn after (1 turn CD on CB) using our genius general, which risks the heroic nomad son attacking us. Or we can wait until he is dead, which risks the CB disappearing.
 
We won't gain anything from continueing this war.
there's a chance that we'll lose and there's a good chance for our values to chance to the worse.
 
This General is going to be forced to absorb some subordinates to tank the prestige hit meaning their stat caps will probably increase at the end of his rule.
 
The arguments that everything will go great for us in the interim while everyone else stagnates so of course we'll be much better positioned in the future do not exactly feel particularly convincing to me.

Right now we have a decent to good chance to put a solid finishing condition on the Khem that will heavily rattle their governing system due to their set up, a defeat here sends them into chaos and colonies may secede. Either way they won't be setup for much but cleanup duty for a long time into the future.

On the other hand expecting that things will be better for us when they come next is relying on a bunch of other factors we can't control moving in our favor. I personally think best case scenario is we have a slight improvement to our current relative positions. But if world events could easily tank that chance. By then iron will have fully proliferated to everyone, different nomads will rule the steps who knows what the Trelli situation will look like...

I just don't see that it looks like a great gamble in comparison to our current choice, which looks like one that is certainly in our favor.
 
Last edited:
I'm guessing the reason we are having so much trouble despite having tons of advantages is because our military Art are completely Atrophied, we bow out of fight to often and thus don't develop them, let's hope it doesn't bit us in the ass one day.

Having our genius General be barely Sane certainly isn't going to help develop it...
 
[X] Offer tribute (-5 Prestige, -10 Wealth, keeps King of the Hill, chance of +1 Stability)

Yeah, lets end this pointless dick measuring contest... We have already lost more than 1% of our total population in warriors alone.
 
Thomasfoolery said:
The arguments that everything will go great for us in the interim while everyone else stagnates so of course we'll be much better positioned in the future do not exactly feel particularly convincing to me.

Right now we have a decent to good chance to put a solid finishing condition on the Kem that will heavily rattle their governing system due to their set up, a defeat here sends them into chaos and colonies may secede. Either way they won't be setup for much but cleanup duty for a long time into the future.

On the other hand expecting that things will be better for us when they come next is relying on a bunch of other factors we can't control moving in our favor. I personally think best case scenario is we have a slight improvement to our current relative positions. But if world events could easily tank that chance. By then iron will have fully proliferated to everyone, different nomads will rule the steps who knows what the Trelli situation will look like...

I just don't see that it looks like a great gamble in comparison to our current choice, which looks like one that is certainly in our favor.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This isn't fucking CK2 where everyone is a compulsive clay stealer. If it's better for them to have a friendly neighbour to the North who's wealthy and interested in regular trade, then they'll go with it. Especially since we've proven that we don't fuck around on the battlefield and that our magic is strong. For them to want to try again even after we make it profitable for them would be the height of stupidity--and if they have an Idiot King, they're not going to be nearly as dangerous as this one with a Heroic Warleader.

And our military tactics and tech is great, remember--half the reason this was hard is because their Heroic Prince copied our Tactical Phases. They didn't have that initially, but learned it from fighting us.

We do a pretty damn good job keeping our mil-tech flowing thanks to the Red Banner, which is why it's great we saved them from annihilation.
 
Last edited:
To everyone voting to continue the war, can you explain to me why doing so is more important than 100 years of peace, more important than 10s of thousands of lives, more important than insuring the prosperity of our people?

Because the current arguments for it have left me unconvinced on those fronts.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top