we could go insane and make so many free cities that most land is administrated by cities anyway and distribute land is no longer valid. :lol

but that is both A) near impossible, and B) dealing with someone threatening to stab you by shooting yourself.

That is what Chinese cities basically do and Chinese cities today still manage farmlands.
 
Cause I sure as hell don't have to prove it myself. I mean, unless you can pull evidence that says the rural poor and half exiles are against DL, then as far as we know there is still no group against DL.

Which, you know, was the important part.
  1. You claimed literally everyone supports distribute land

    despite literally everyone thinking it's either a good idea, or don't care?
  2. it was pointed out that factions are not everyone
    "Those who have the ear of the king" =\= "literally everyone"
  3. you claimed AN saying that the factions support it or are indifferent to it is evidence in support of your statement.
    AN has stated that every faction is for or not against DL.

    Get me proof that someone is against it, and would be able to counter the Patricians, then we can discuss crushing them. Until then, goodnight
  4. i said again the flaw is that faction do not represent the totality of all ymaryn and that notably there are no rural poor or half-exile faction
    Factions /= the majority of ymaryn.

    the majority of the ymaryn is still the rural poor, and half-exiles.
  5. You said that I have to prove that they hold a position contrary to your initial claim, or prove something irrelevant to your initial claim.
    And if you can point to evidence saying they'd don't want DL, and that they can counter the Patricians, then you have a point.
You made the initial claim that Distribute Land had either indifference or support in all Ymaryn, my pointing out that the evidence you used is bad does not represent me claiming the burden of proof.
 
Who would be doing the subverting? The king is a patrician, the high traders and guildsmen are all patricians. Just about the only way I can see to get rid of the patricians is to catastrophically lose a war to the point where confidence in them breaks.

"Us"! If we have no influence over the direction of the People it's not much of a quest, after all

The point of subversion is that there's no direct pushback
 
We also have a real problem now in that it's basically impossible to have a peaceful change of government now. As suppressing the ruling faction is impossible, they'll just gain and gain and gain power until it takes a civil war to get rid of them.
I disagree.

The truth is, getting rid of a ruling faction via suppression was always nearly impossible. Dropping a faction by 10 power would take 5 supressions, which is 5 secondaries, 25 stats, and TEN stability. We would never have gone for that.

The way we orchestrate a change of government is support some other faction so it surpasses the Patricians. For example, it would be pretty easy for us to make the Guilds our top faction; they are going to have 5-1=4 actions soon, and for two secondaries we can set all of them as repeated mains that we want, giving the Guilds +4 Power/turn. Give it three or four turns and the Patricians will go kaput as the ruling class.
 
If you're going to make a claim, I think it's only fair you be called to back it up. We haven't been given explicit information about the half-exiles' or rural poor's opinion on DL, so it seems weird for you to so boldly declare that they're fine with it. A priori I would expect them not to want to give additional rights to people who have a history of using and abusing them
...ok, you know what? Fine. You win.

Every faction that matters is for or not against it, and everyone else may or may not be against it with no proof one way or another.

Going to sleep now. Looks like most people, other than a vocal minority, is voting DL, so it's really not worth debating people who only care about morality.
 
I'd much rather bite the bullet and go forward with the civil war now, rather than let the patricians entrench themselves even further. It greatly helps that we have 2 genius martial heroes at our disposal.
 
I'm kinda finding it funny that we have forgiven Civi ending nomad hordes, willingly allowed anyone into our nation (Even if as WoAN is that most are bandits that are fleeing from there kingdoms...Though I will admit thats freely acceptable given that we have saved so many people.), and even allowed our people to leave freely...But now that its world war 2 electric boga loo kill all the Patricians, leave no survivors.

Doesn't really mesh well with our Harmony trait. (Though they were the ones calling for civil war), that's why it'd probably be best to subvert them over time, and use a genius admin plus a golden age bonus...Cause we can't forget that the Guilds will be just as bad, and they have the second highest power. (Mega corps worse then Nobles, but Nobles worse than regular people that can do whatever if you get what I'm saying.)
 
Yeah a civil war now is better than several civil wars later and vassals breaking away easier. As well as being to unocoordinated to resist a nomad horde.
 
I'm kinda finding it funny that we have forgiven Civi ending nomad hordes, willingly allowed anyone into our nation (Even if as WoAN is that most are bandits that are fleeing from there kingdoms...Though I will admit thats freely acceptable given that we have saved so many people.), and even allowed our people to leave freely...But now that its world war 2 electric boga loo kill all the Patricians, leave no survivors.

Doesn't really mesh well with our Harmony trait. (Though they were the ones calling for civil war), that's why it'd probably be best to subvert them over time, and use a genius admin plus a golden age bonus...Cause we can't forget that the Guilds will be just as bad, and they have the second highest power. (Mega corps worse then Nobles, but Nobles worse than regular people that can do whatever if you get what I'm saying.)

Subvert them to do what? Suddenly give up their land in a fit of madness?
 
I disagree.

The truth is, getting rid of a ruling faction via suppression was always nearly impossible. Dropping a faction by 10 power would take 5 supressions, which is 5 secondaries, 25 stats, and TEN stability. We would never have gone for that.

The point is previously we could suppress them if they asked for something outrageous.

Considering that this happened because the Patricians were unhappy about losing their de facto slaves, once we've demonstrated we'll cave now, why wouldn't their next but one quest be to legalise slavery or else civil war?
 
We other big problem we have is that the Patricians can force us to be a very low Centralisation state, which makes it even harder to control them. They can just spam distribute lands eternally to flat line our Centralisation, meaning that our kings won't even know what's going on. Combined with their ability to build Governor's Palaces and shift the Centralisation range down, we're screwed, as they can transition us to being a negative Centralisation state pretty trivially.

We basically need to be doing an Enforce Justice + Build Roads main every turn from this point. The Roads we can use a repeated action for.
 
Nope, it's also practicality. Patrician's having more control over their lands directly makes it much easier for them to secede with those lands, and gives them greater resources to use in whatever other agendas they want.
Except most societies can survive private ownership of land, and when the choice is endure civil war every couple generations or actually try to implement a working version of land ownership, guess which one I'll choose?
 
"Us"! If we have no influence over the direction of the People it's not much of a quest, after all

The point of subversion is that there's no direct pushback

Okay, but...how? How do you propose we subvert an increasingly entrenched and protected element of our society, who we have solid evidence will be doing everything in their power to cut off every avenue of opposition they can find? The explicit motive behind this DL push is to prevent future kings from acting against the Patricians' interests.
 
The point is previously we could suppress them if they asked for something outrageous.

Considering that this happened because the Patricians were unhappy about losing their de facto slaves, once we've demonstrated we'll cave now, why wouldn't their next but one quest be to legalise slavery or else civil war?

They would probably have to be pissed to ask for that.
 
Doesn't really mesh well with our Harmony trait. (Though they were the ones calling for civil war),
Yes, they are, indeed.

Did we forgive the Nomads WHILE they were attacking our villages? Of course not. We didn't allow them to raid us. And just the same, what we proposing is not allowing the Patricians to blackmail us.

They are breaching Harmony. They are breaching Greater Justice. They are breaching Lord's Loyalty.

All we propose is standing firm against that.
 
So I thought about this, how we might ab able the oppose the patricians anyway at least indirectly,

Since the priests are set against 'disturb land' action we could actively drive our RA into red by doing their quest early & supportting them politically, thus making them a political counterweight that revents us from disturbing land forcing the partricians to suppress them, allowing us to suppress the partricians the following main turn and then build acadmies in order to deal with the priests

@veekie what do you think? viable as an option ?
Note that we asked AN about it. He said the Priests oppose it because they want the land to be distributed to the temples where it'd be much better cared for.

Do we even know if our Genius War Hero Poet is even on our side if a civil war comes?
What if he supports the DL?
I mean, even the Genius general, who we're expecting to win the war for us thinks DL is a pretty reasonable idea. Not saying he won't fight since I don't think we have any evidence of a king ever balking a vote like that once we've been in position to cast it (As opposed to them taking over a turn), but I have to imagine that will influence how he feels about the whole thing, and how he would handle the fighting and the aftermath.

FYI in the update itself:
There was of course the yelling about laws and land distribution and the like, but Shunmyn honestly had no time for all that. He could tolerate the boring bits of war if he could do what his father had done, but the rest? Bah, that was what advisors and attendants were for.
Shunmyn doesn't give a shit. He's going to listen to his patrician advisors about who to back in the war.


If the thread is not willing to risk a civil war in the face of the patricians, there is one other solution that does not involve simply conceding to the Patricians.

Support the two other factions that can counterbalance the influence of the Patricians in rural areas: the Yeomen and the Priests. If we can empower them, it will ensure that the Distribute Land is not simply a naked powergrab by the Patricians. We know that the Yeomen want an internal reorg, and hopefully that will synergize with Distribute Land in a way that blunts the impact.

Empowering the Yeomanry is going to mean lowering city count.

And that is going to mean less player actions.

It's not an ideal situation, but this entire snafu is about as far from ideal as it gets.
Err, that's a bit of a problem because the Yeomen love Distribute Land even more than the Patricians.

So lets take a basic land allocation thingy:
-4x Main Distribute Land distributes about 5-10% of our land. Almost all of this is going to go to our high ranking Patricians.
-8x Main Distribute Land distributes about 10-15% of our land. We're running out of patricians here, further allocations will be going to Yeomen, who'd be pushing to become Patricians.
-12x Main Distribute Land distributes about 15-20% of our land. In order to maintain state function we'd start to redistribute land by subdividing it under the Patricians further.

I.e. Past a certain threshold you'd see the Patricians desire to take land BACK because it's now enabling social mobility.

Valleyguard is already a free city. I assume you meant Lower Valleyhome.
Yes. And fixed.

Faction policies are not doubled AFAIK.

According to AN, Free City policies aren't doubled. Faction actions and Faction policies should be at Crown strength

If you would be so kind, could you please vote with the [King's Agenda] and [Guild Secondary] tags so the tally doesn't get brought to tears?

I'm kidding. The tally doesn't have feelings; it won't care if you vote in a completely different way. So let me be more accurate - could you please vote with the [King's Agenda] and [Guild Secondary] tags so I don't get brought to tears?
Err, @PrimalShadow
You have eight [Sec] actions and one [Guild Sec] action available. You also have an [Agenda] choice available from the Active Policy list.
Who exactly are the ones making the tally cry?
 
The point is previously we could suppress them if they asked for something outrageous.

Considering that this happened because the Patricians were unhappy about losing their de facto slaves, once we've demonstrated we'll cave now, why wouldn't their next but one quest be to legalise slavery or else civil war?
Well, it would get blocked by Distribution of Power, which works on normal quests.
 
when the choice is endure civil war every couple generations

This continues to be unsupported. Once we have the first civil war, our values will likely evolve (or be able to be made to evolve) in such a way as to remove the need for further wars, as the Patricians (or replacements) should be suppressible again. This is a reasonably plausible outcome, as the war would be directly started by said inability to suppress them, and you yourself have acknowledged that war will likely impact our traits.
 
Except most societies can survive private ownership of land, and when the choice is endure civil war every couple generations or actually try to implement a working version of land ownership, guess which one I'll choose?

We probably are going to have to deal with civil wars from the Patricians having their own lands, but hopefully not the civilization-shattering kind.
 
Except most societies can survive private ownership of land, and when the choice is endure civil war every couple generations or actually try to implement a working version of land ownership, guess which one I'll choose?
Except it's not just private ownership of land, it's private ownership of land solely by aristocracy, that was a primary trait of feudalism a system which is not at all less prone to civil war than our current one.
 
Back
Top