- Location
- Illinois
Well, the only way we'd get that is through experience, or roads/canals.Another thing that would improve our levies, woud be ore sophisticated logistics.
Well, the only way we'd get that is through experience, or roads/canals.Another thing that would improve our levies, woud be ore sophisticated logistics.
Well it does make us a bigger prestige pinata.
I wonder if we'll get a boatload of prestige from opening up the Artisan Games. In the normal games we've basically been trashed for the last few centuries, barely getting any prestige. But with the artisan games opening up, we should dominates those for centuries to come.
Pretty useful.
There's also the whole war thing. We've got the Forhuth to kill which should give us a good bit of prestige plus it's looking likely that we'll be pulled into the HK war this turn as well. Both of those should give us even more prestige.
Now if only we were using that prestige for anything...
[X] [Inno] Looks important, invest heavily (-3 Wealth, -3 Mysticism, -1 Tech, ???)
[X] [AG] They may join (Open games, ???)
[X] [Policy] Switch to Mass Levy
[X] [Trade] Smiths work overtime! (-2 Tech/turn but can meet demand for trade)
[X] [Kick] 1 Stability, 2 Temp Econ damage
There's no such thing as a free lunch. Between the half-exile thing, opening up the games, and now this, we really shouldn't push the guilds any more than we have to. We may lose Stability or face an angry faction looking to do damage.
We really ought to do our best to prevent a gilded age. We can't afford the stability and we need overflow to stay productive right now.
And we won't drop into -1 stab when those 10+ light cavalry bumrush us why?
I wonder how the usual nomad scenario changes when the settled nomads actually have a home we can assault.
Theoretically speaking, we could take half our ginormous army and just march for the Forhuch lands. All manoeuvring won't help them if they end up having to defend their own settlements, and that is something where our infantry would perform better even against massed cavalry as defeat in detail is vastly harder.
Is anyone excited about this despite the serious risk of losing?
Nice. Even if we don't use as much Yeomen as we used to - nowadays it's "All the levies".
The key word here is conquest. They aren't coming just to raid and pillage, they want to take our land. If they followed the Pure's idea of destroying every settlement they came across, we would have no way to pin them down, and we would be stuck reacting to an enemy that has far faster reaction time than we do.he also declares that he shall lead his warriors against us, for pride, honour, and conquest
The other thing is that this king is not his predecessor. He's an example of a common problem, a man who comes after a truly impressive historical figure, and feels as if anything he does is compared unfavorably to his predecessor. This is a massive weak point, especially in their society. If we can get people to doubt his leadership, to believe that he massively fucked up by warring against us, we have a strong chance of either toppling him or starting an enemy civil war.any demanded to know what could possibly cause this, and it was soon decided that the issue may in fact be one of internal structure. The new king was young, and while a skilled leader of armies, his tongue was not quite as silver as his predecessor and he also clearly did not have the same skill at administration. He was in his (grand-?, not quite clear how their succession had worked) father's shadow and the shadow of the People, and he had elected to lash out in the way he best knew how
Not really? Slaughtered by nomads isn't my idea of a good time.Is anyone excited about this despite the serious risk of losing?
Not really? Slaughtered by nomads isn't my idea of a good time.
So, thinking about it a bit more, I think we are making a mistake in planning our goals. We're assuming Forhuch is going to be Nomad Horde 2.0: The Horse Nazis Return.
But from what we know about their situation, their goals are completely different from that of a nomad horde's.
The key word here is conquest. They aren't coming just to raid and pillage, they want to take our land. If they followed the Pure's idea of destroying every settlement they came across, we would have no way to pin them down, and we would be stuck reacting to an enemy that has far faster reaction time than we do.
But they don't plan to destroy everything. They want useable land, slaves, settlements, all the good stuff. We might be able to use this to give us a fighting chance, if we are willing to use the lost territory to our advantage.
The other thing is that this king is not his predecessor. He's an example of a common problem, a man who comes after a truly impressive historical figure, and feels as if anything he does is compared unfavorably to his predecessor. This is a massive weak point, especially in their society. If we can get people to doubt his leadership, to believe that he massively fucked up by warring against us, we have a strong chance of either toppling him or starting an enemy civil war.
[X] [Inno] Looks important, invest heavily (-3 Wealth, -3 Mysticism, -1 Tech, ???)
[X] [AG] They may join (Open games, ???)
[X] [Policy] Switch to Mass Levy
[X] [Kick] 2 Stability, 4 Temp Econ damage
[X] [Trade] Push the guilds to the limit to meet demands (Trade Tech for Wealth, up to 5 per phase, to attempt to top up Wealth)
As such, I'm switching to the 2 stab hit to make it so that every inch of land he takes is only taken by fighting through oceans of blood and fire. We know that higher kicks makes our people start to do more and more insane things. If we can't counter the Forhuch with our vanguard, then we make it seem as if fighting that vanguard is to fight madmen. Then when our Levies show up, we might be able to break their morale.
After all, if our vanguard fought so fearsomely, what would our main army do?
Raise army and retrain in the same turn has long been said by those of us that want a military reform to likely push our military more towards a term of service or genuinely stronger direction. It would make us more militarized, yes, but we border the steps, we're going to be militarized. This would do so in a more professional way.Hmm, we need to do more training, if levies take a year to call up.
That's way too slow.
We ought to test effectiveness by calling a drill every 5 years or so, until we can pull up people within a week.
And keep them all pre-trained via National service (all 18 year old are compulsory trained in the crossbow before released)
Didn't we take the choice for training draftees occasionally in the reform?
I think it's also a good way to weaken the caste nature of our society.Raise army and retrain in the same turn has long been said by those of us that want a military reform to likely push our military more towards a term of service or genuinely stronger direction. It would make us more militarized, yes, but we border the steps, we're going to be militarized. This would do so in a more professional way.