Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
No7sHere said:
[X] Build more boats and attempt a flank attack (Costs Econ to build new boats, which you will keep no matter the result)
Is this not a little risky with a leader who has poor martial?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To an extent, but we have a War Chief to prop up the role, and our Honor value minimizes the risk of failure.
 
Candesce said:
Settlements pay out more than once. They're worth more than a single point of econ - if they're not getting raided, anyway. We know they'll take some econ-positive actions automatically, if they can - expanding farmlands and pastures, and that entire business with getting that last action into step-farms.

My estimate is that the confluence settlement payed out 1 immediately, 2 the next turn, and maybe one more after.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There is no evidence to support the idea that settlements pay out multiple times, nor does that particular settlement have much reason to pay out multiple times or in great excess since it was already there, we just organized things officially, nor does the working definition of economy support that idea (Economy being a roughly permanent ability to allocate manpower and food to endeavors, a definition at odds with the idea that a settlement (again, especially the river confluence which was already fairly populous, we just organized it) can repeatedly grant additional economy).
 
[X] Build more boats and attempt a flank attack (Costs Econ to build new boats, which you will keep no matter the result)

Just going to leave this one vote im sure of before going to bed.
 
Powerofmind said:
There is no evidence to support the idea that settlements pay out multiple times, nor does that particular settlement have much reason to pay out multiple times or in great excess since it was already there, we just organized things officially, nor does the working definition of economy support that idea (Economy being a roughly permanent ability to allocate manpower and food to endeavors, a definition at odds with the idea that a settlement (again, especially the river confluence which was already fairly populous, we just organized it) can repeatedly grant additional economy).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We didn't just organize it, we expanded it, too. It was a proto-settlement focused around supporting the elders and fostering trade and became an actual one.
 
@Academia Nut, shouldn't vaccination, or some variation there of, be in our medicine tech? Or does our decision now determine whether it goes up there or not?
 
[X] The ritual is incomplete, more study is required before it can be safely used on a widescale (Temporarily unlocks Scourge Warding megaproject)
[X] Build more boats and attempt a flank attack (Costs Econ to build new boats, which you will keep no matter the result
[X] Bynwyn (Poor Martial, Mediocre Admin and Diplomacy, Heroic Mysticism, accelerates Scourge Warding megaproject while alive, chance for bonus Stability)
 
[X] The ritual is incomplete, more studyis required before it can be safely used on a widescale (Temporarily unlocks Scourge Warding megaproject)
[X] Build more boats and attempt a flank attack (Costs Econ to build new boats, which you will keep no matter the result)
[X] Bynwyn (Poor Martial, Mediocre Admin and Diplomacy, Heroic Mysticism, accelerates Scourge Warding megaproject while alive, chance for bonus Stability)

Well, since it seems like my questions aren't being answered, I'm going with the bandwagon under the assumption that the lowlands haven't had any major developments. Going with the boats since constructing them is almost a free action (since we'd totally be building them soon anyway) and our massive hierarchy should be able to deal with the side effects of not having a high chief not good at war; he seems to know what he doesn't know enough to trust his advisors.
 
Last edited:
Umi-san said:
We didn't just organize it, we expanded it, too. It was a proto-settlement focused around supporting the elders and fostering trade and became an actual one.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Which is not an especially strong argument in favor of assuming this settlement granted two economy in a single turn. Our territory is so densely worked and populated that AN admitted we'd likely have our land management (fishing, pasture, farms) completely locked until we got more land to manage if we'd taken the full pack of LoO. There's no reason to believe that an ultimately minor improvement to the area would give two economy at once, on what @Candesce argues is the second turn of economic gain from that settlement.
 
Academia Nut said:
Not yet.

Also...



Still kind of crap, but now you know where people are a bit better now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

am I correctly seeing more unclaimed coastlands to the southwest that if colonized let us:
-become a trading chokehold on the southern plains as far as the western waters are concerned
-edge around the mountains on the west of the southern plains by following the coastland
-continue to enjoy the benefits of internal shipping using water routes
-continue to build in the hilly river valley environment the People are used to

Is that what I'm seeing?
 
Last edited:
Powerofmind said:
Which is not an especially strong argument in favor of assuming this settlement granted two economy in a single turn. Our territory is so densely worked and populated that AN admitted we'd likely have our land management (fishing, pasture, farms) completely locked until we got more land to manage if we'd taken the full pack of LoO. There's no reason to believe that an ultimately minor improvement to the area would give two economy at once, on what @Candesce argues is the second turn of economic gain from that settlement.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think the settlement provided 2 in one turn, but I think assuming it provides econ slowly over time is somewhat reasonable. Though an equally reasonable argument is that it provides a delayed 1 econ but other benefits through increasing the total pop. cap, Econ expansion cap, and possibly the rate at which population grows. Considering that all forests are automatically managed, though, even if only the latter were originally true it's likely that increased access to the forest will result in yet another Econ. But while this would be viable in a game it seems like a bit too much to keep track of w/o computer aid, and AN is probably doing this with memory, paper, or a Word doc.
 
So notably we're just selecting the heir not replacing the High Chief right now, so taking the boat action may not be negatively effected by Bynwyn's low martial score, given this is happening in the same turn. We've also developed heirarchy enough to have war chiefs to negate the poor attributes of the High Chief, and our previous honor value selection means that our critical failure chance has been reduced so it's even less likely to go bad.

@Academia Nut - is the above correct?
 
mastigos said:
ch

but don't you know innovul

am I correctly seeing more unclaimed coastlands to the southwest that if colonized let us:
-become a trading chokehold on the southern plains as far as the western waters are concerned
-edge around the mountains on the west of the southern plains by following the coastland
-continue to enjoy the benefits of internal shipping using water routes
-continue to build in the hilly river valley environment the People are used to

Is that what I'm seeing?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
These benefits would be provided by the lowlands settlement, since it will be built on the west side of the river and thus cut off the WC from expanding that way.
 
Neptune said:
So notably we're just selecting the heir not replacing the High Chief right now, so taking the boat action may not be negatively effected by Bynwyn's low martial score, given this is happening in the same turn. We've also developed heirarchy enough to have war chiefs to negate the poor attributes of the High Chief, and our previous honor value selection means that our critical failure chance has been reduced so it's even less likely to go bad.

@Academia Nut - is the above correct?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ehhh... somewhat. There's enough else going on that the first strike back may not be affected by a poor Martial leader, but next turn will definitely be affected.
 
Candesce said:
Say, by founding a settlement, yes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Don't give me that crap. You know as well as I that the settlement that was founded was founded dead in the middle of our territory, in a place already long-worked and populated by disorganized steads, also ignoring that you've taken the point I made entirely out of context. Of course, if you have decided to acquiesce the other three-odd points I made... then you've basically already surrendered the argument.
Umi-san said:
I don't think the settlement provided 2 in one turn, but I think assuming it provides econ slowly over time is somewhat reasonable. Though an equally reasonable argument is that it provides a delayed 1 econ but other benefits through increasing the total pop. cap, Econ expansion cap, and possibly the rate at which population grows. Considering that all forests are automatically managed, though, even if only the latter were originally true it's likely that increased access to the forest will result in yet another Econ. But while this would be viable in a game it seems like a bit too much to keep track of w/o computer aid, and AN is probably doing this with memory, paper, or a Word doc.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The initial assumption was that the canal only consumed 1 economy per action, which I provided a feasible explanation for being the case by pointing out the turn in question held economy 6 before and after, despite having 3 econ-consuming actions and only taking a 1 stability/3 econ LoO trigger. Candesce argued that, because the settlement gave 2 points of economy at once, that the canal was still 2 economy per action.

Considering the focus of my argument, you're basically agreeing with my original assessment.
 
[X] The ritual is incomplete, more study is required before it can be safely used on a widescale (Temporarily unlocks Scourge Warding megaproject)

[X] Build more boats and attempt a flank attack (Costs Econ to build new boats, which you will keep no matter the result)

[X] Bynwyn (Poor Martial, Mediocre Admin and Diplomacy, Heroic Mysticism, accelerates Scourge Warding megaproject while alive, chance for bonus Stability)
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top