Remove ads

Paths of Civilization

Reader mode
Plus it seems to me like having Mass Levy up for even longer would noticeable increase the risk of negative effects, even only narratively. Having tens of thousands of former soldiers who spent nearly 20 (?) years, aka the majority of their working life, on various battlefields suddenly flood the cities seems like asking for trouble in my opinion. I mean the urban poor were already a force to be reckoned with but after this their potential for violence (and perhaps internal org. and things like that) should make a notable jump, at lest for this generation.

Granted a lot of that is probably beyond the scope of this quest ( I mean there is only so many "crisis" a GM can give the players any given time before it become unfair/ not fun) and may have only relatively little impact on the stats themselves but in my opinion there is a lot of room for "plot" development (another example could be crime syndicates hiring former soldiers and thus massively increasing in power) there if AN wanted to focus on it.
 
Last edited:
Erandil said:
Granted a lot of that is probably beyond the scope of this quest ( I mean there is only so many "crisis" a GM can give the players any given time before it become unfair/ not fun) and may have only relatively little impact on the stats themselves but in my opinion there is a lot of room for "plot" development (another example could be crime syndicates hiring former soldiers and thus massively increasing in power) there if AN wanted to focus on it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I remembered when we had multiple crisis going on at once. It was distinctly not fun.

But the plague was fun to deal with, I guess, especially since after that, we were given breathing room.
 
Citino said:
Quick question, why didn't we just support the Particians so we could delay the annex a turn? We could have kept up the levy that way, Since we would have had 2 Econ banked.

Didn't think about it before, but it seems like an obvious solution that I didn't hear anyone discuss.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because we felt we really needed that governmental upgrade.

agumentic said:
2 econ wouldn't help much, basically.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Actually it would have. AN said that 1-2 was the usual loss of Econ.
 
SyntheticTrevor said:
We have had continuity for a long time while our neighbors haven't, so I was wondering if our alphabet had spread anywhere?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The nomads, Metal Workers SY, Hatwhatevers Freehills, Trelli Spice Isles, Pre-HK HK, Xohyssiri possibly Harmurri, possibly Khemetri all use our alphabet. Or rather, they use a character system derived from our logo-syllabic writing system, presumably adapted to their language and purpose.
 
Last edited:
Erandil said:
Granted a lot of that is probably beyond the scope of this quest ( I mean there is only so many "crisis" a GM can give the players any given time before it become unfair/ not fun) and may have only relatively little impact on the stats themselves but in my opinion there is a lot of room for "plot" development (another example could be crime syndicates hiring former soldiers and thus massively increasing in power) there if AN wanted to focus on it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Lol.
Do you realize that, for example, superplague was followed by first nomadic invasion on horses on worst possible terrain to meet them and the only reason we survived both plague as hyperurbanized civ and nomad attack was luck?
Well, luck and lots of baths. Still. We could have easily died due to that combo if we had worse rolls.
 
Here's a question: Could we set up a repeating action to build infrastructure, and if so would it be worthwhile?

Obviously, taking actions ourselves to build infrastructure is substantially less efficient than using passives for it, but a potential repeating action could be directed to build specific infrastructure that our infrastructure policies avoid, like Markets, Libraries or Academies.
 
HeWhoAdds said:
Here's a question: Could we set up a repeating action to build infrastructure, and if so would it be worthwhile?

Obviously, taking actions ourselves to build infrastructure is substantially less efficient than using passives for it, but a potential repeating action could be directed to build specific infrastructure that our infrastructure policies avoid, like Markets, Libraries or Academies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

*raises finger*
Uhh.

That's....actually a damn good, if situational, idea. Repated Libraries + Repeated Mills is how we paper, and how we compensate for academies.

Markets are hella inefficient to build manually because of the price, and they are going to be favoured by policies because ~Wealth~. Plus it is urbanization, and we all know that Infrastructure is actually Urbanization: The Policy.

Salterns are an option; we can never have too much salterns.
Problem is....all those would be nice to have, buuut roads and forests are things we desperately need. If we have "space" for other stuff - sure, we can take repeated libraries as a Priest action, for example. But roads and forests are, IMO, non-negotiable.

Depending on how many repeated actions we can afford, I am likely to push for some Forestries. 1 forest/turn is not enough with 4.5 Infrastructures obeying Guilds.
 
The only repeated/invested actions we need are roads, watchtowers and docks. We need to focus on connectivity and defense. Forget everything else and let our passives and policy actions take care of them.
 
ctulhuslp said:
*raises finger*
Uhh.

That's....actually a damn good, if situational, idea. Repated Libraries + Repeated Mills is how we paper, and how we compensate for academies.

Markets are hella inefficient to build manually because of the price, and they are going to be favoured by policies because ~Wealth~. Plus it is urbanization, and we all know that Infrastructure is actually Urbanization: The Policy.

Salterns are an option; we can never have too much salterns.
Problem is....all those would be nice to have, buuut roads and forests are things we desperately need. If we have "space" for other stuff - sure, we can take repeated libraries as a Priest action, for example. But roads and forests are, IMO, non-negotiable.

Depending on how many repeated actions we can afford, I am likely to push for some Forestries. 1 forest/turn is not enough with 4.5 Infrastructures obeying Guilds.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, I was mostly think of it in terms of building intellectual infrastructure, Libraries mostly, because they seem like a distant last priority behind public health, block housing, and guild stuff.

Obviously, these are lower priority than roads and forests, but making information more broadly available is really great for us long-term.
 
ETA50M said:
The only repeated/invested actions we need are roads, watchtowers and docks. We need to focus on connectivity and defense. Forget everything else and let our passives and policy actions take care of them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I actually hadn't thought about repeated Docks, but that's an excellent idea. It's an extremely cheap action, and we do need to improve our connectivity in the Black Sea.
 
Legion0047 said:
Either Umi or max go nuclear about wasting the bonus GSF gives to expand forest by having forestry running.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not them. max is chill about mechanics, he will be miffed if we do not go manorial after upgrade, or if we do not build theater and temples, but not much else.

Workers owning means of production might trigger him. :V

Not sure about Umi. I think most ardent opponents of Forestries here are notgreat and PrimalShadow.

HeWhoAdds said:
I actually hadn't thought about repeated Docks, but that's an excellent idea. It's an extremely cheap action, and we do need to improve our connectivity in the Black Sea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, it's pretty decent idea and is basically a naval equivalent of repeated roads.
 
So that's... four repeated actions we want? We're probably going to need 4 True cities permanently active to keep them up as still retain a reasonable level of flexibility.
 
ctulhuslp said:
Not them. max is chill about mechanics, he will be miffed if we do not go manorial after upgrade, or if we do not build theater and temples, but not much else.

Workers owning means of production might trigger him. :V

Not sure about Umi. I think most ardent opponents of Forestries here are notgreat and PrimalShadow.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The feudalistic furry nutcase, umi, veeki , oni and a few others are the regulars i remember and max and umi have some preety extreme views if i remember.
i am kinda out of the loop.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top