What should your focus for the rest of the Quest be?


  • Total voters
    234
Voting is open
The only reason we "Don't" have two AP per turn free in the next two turns is that you've somehow convinced yourself that Van Zandt can materialize 6-7 SBGs per turn and hurl them at us repeatedly without actually compromising any of their other fronts, and if we don't get ahead of their magical hull production we're all dead.
Who said they could do it without compromising their other fronts? I could very easily imagine a situation where they might allow losses on other fronts in order to retake their literal primary recruiting world. This is not something we should be gambling on.

[X][Flyssa Wrecks] Study By All Means
 
We're at 1/2.5 on one of the the SBGs, which means next turn if we take two actions, we'll complete one and be at .5 on another, therefore allowing us to get another SBG for 2 actions and spend the rest of them on other improvements... including Psytech if we go with the three action rush.

Like, to clarify here, I do have a plan if we choose the PsyTech Three Turn Rush, and it can afford 1, 1, and 2 actions put towards PsyTech over the next three turns. I'm pretty sure that does come out positive, unless I'm missing some of the math, though it does come at the cost of fucking over any other Research we might do, and making our Ship Design options narrow.
 
When the QM warns us that we have to be battle ready, that doesn't seem the time to do your lackadasical fucking plan of not working on the damn SBGs.

Wow, it's like "I don't think we need to produce an SBG every turn to be able to weather the counterattack" somehow means that "I think we should bow down and lose!"

For fuck's sake, am I even allowed to play this game any more? You've never failed to break into calling me out whenever I had an opinion that differed from yours, no matter how I reasoned it. First it was "So you're happy to be complicit with atrocities by not wanting to push Voxx Primus as soon as humanly possible? Even when we're in the middle of a war?" Then it was "Now we've committed and we have to put everything towards this project", and now it's "We need to be building an SBG every turn before the Imperialtide falls on us to maybe survive."

So what'll it be next? "Now that we've won, we need to keep attacking or else we'll get overrun by their Maximum Ruthlessness?" When am I allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours that doesn't get you calling me out? No matter how much I reason it?

Should I just leave the game? Will that make you happy now that everyone is happily in line with your Perfectly Ideal Plan for Universal Prosperity? I have an opinion that differs from you, I am doing my best to argue in it's favor. I don't think this makes me a bad person! I've even explained my logic and you're breaking off into the cussing and treating me like I'm an insane lunatic!

For goodness sake, I love this quest, but you have not shut up ever since you've begun this crusade, and now you're trying to throw away one of the best opportunities to pull away from the pack we've gotten since the game started, and you're attacking me for thinking this isn't an open and shut case!

How am I supposed to enjoy this when I can't so much as present an opinion without being told I'm trying to kill us all?
 
Actually, taking a deep breath. Am I missing something here, @Alectai , 50% more means that each action is 1.5 actions, which means that four actions over three turns, what we can actually manage without explicitly neglecting everything else, would still be better than the "3 action lump" in pure PsyTech results, at least?
 
Actually, taking a deep breath. Am I missing something here, @Alectai , 50% more means that each action is 1.5 actions, which means that four actions over three turns, what we can actually manage without explicitly neglecting everything else, would still be better than the "3 action lump" in pure PsyTech results, at least?
Generally speaking 50% is dependent? Because 1.5 isn't a thing we did with SBGs but there were multitudes. Like it works there but the last time we had a 50% it gave us two actions(dev actions). So...hard to say? It can either reduce the tech(which is hard to do with research) or it gives us two actions for the price of one(which is how I am interpreting it)

Edit: Or what @Alectai said. That was much better than my word salad
 
Last edited:
Actually, taking a deep breath. Am I missing something here, @Alectai , 50% more means that each action is 1.5 actions, which means that four actions over three turns, what we can actually manage without explicitly neglecting everything else, would still be better than the "3 action lump" in pure PsyTech results, at least?

Right. Every 2 AP is worth 1 AP, spend 2 AP each turn on a Psytech project, put that free AP where it can do the most good. For instance, get Force Staves and we can now get a 2 AP Psytech project for 1 real AP spent. Three turns of this is the duration of the effect. 2 AP per turn = 1 Free AP per turn = 3 total, 9 total spent on Psytech projects, which is anywhere from 4 to 5 completed depending on costs, and because we control it, we get to say where those free AP go.

We need 2 AP to finish establishing another SBG, 1 AP to completely make good our losses, and 1 AP to re-do our Doctrine. That's 4 AP, which we have 3 left over. Since we have no intention of designing a new ship class in the immediate future, since it'll take a long time to disseminate anyway and we can field more Sagi-Ss to check Flyssas, we can skip doctrine for now, so we spend 3 AP to field another SBG and make good our losses, putting us at 6 SBGs + the Lamenters, which is a force of overwhelming strength in the local region, surpassed only by Lone Wave. Even if every single force left in Breskal is mobile, that's not remotely enough to threaten it.

We go from there.
 
Last edited:
Right. Every 2 AP is worth 1 AP, spend 2 AP each turn on a Psytech project, put that free AP where it can do the most good. For instance, get Force Staves and we can now get a 2 AP Psytech project for 1 real AP spent. Three turns of this is the duration of the effect.

We need 2 AP to finish establishing another SBG, 1 AP to completely make good our losses, and 1 AP to re-do our Doctrine. That's 4 AP, which we have 3 left over. Since we have no intention of designing a new ship class in the immediate future, since it'll take a long time to disseminate anyway, we can skip doctrine for now, so we spend 3 AP to field another SBG and make good our losses, putting us at 6 SBGs + the Lamenters, which is a force of overwhelming strength.

We go from there.

Um, no? I'm disagreeing with you on a few things, though we seem slightly closer. I think, yes, 2 AP to finish establishing another SBG, 1 AP to re-do our Doctrine, and it seems pretty sensible to spend 1 AP on the Van Zandt Ships. That leaves one left over.

I also do intend on designing a new ship class in the relatively immediate-ish future. I think the point of getting the new Doctrine and studying the Van Zandt ships is to allow us to Design new and better ships... which through the power of mass-production via SBG Action we can get out there faster than you'd think.

E: That said, I do have enough room that this would be strictly superior to the Lump 3, if not as whole hog on it as you seem to be in favor of:

[X][Flyssa Wrecks] Send Them Back For Study
 
Um, no? I'm disagreeing with you on a few things, though we seem slightly closer. I think, yes, 2 AP to finish establishing another SBG, 1 AP to re-do our Doctrine, and it seems pretty sensible to spend 1 AP on the Van Zandt Ships. That leaves one left over.

I also do intend on designing a new ship class in the relatively immediate-ish future. I think the point of getting the new Doctrine and studying the Van Zandt ships is to allow us to Design new and better ships... which through the power of mass-production via SBG Action we can get out there faster than you'd think.

I think the value of spending an AP on the Van Zandt ships in the immediate future has passed, and the value of the action will increase as we continue to engage them--we've learned the biggest lessons in the School of Hard Knocks. That can definitely be thrown out.
 
I think the value of spending an AP on the Van Zandt ships in the immediate future has passed, and the value of the action will increase as we continue to engage them. That can definitely be thrown out.

And... I disagree? We just had a major engagement with them. This is in fact the perfect time to take a look at their ships and etc while we're remaking our doctrine.
 
We're at 1/2.5 on one of the the SBGs, which means next turn if we take two actions, we'll complete one and be at .5 on another, therefore allowing us to get another SBG for 2 actions and spend the rest of them on other improvements... including Psytech if we go with the three action rush.

Like, to clarify here, I do have a plan if we choose the PsyTech Three Turn Rush, and it can afford 1, 1, and 2 actions put towards PsyTech over the next three turns. I'm pretty sure that does come out positive, unless I'm missing some of the math, though it does come at the cost of fucking over any other Research we might do, and making our Ship Design options narrow.

My read is that we want to do 1 SBG a turn for a bit. That would have demanded a ton more actions before we got an SBG down to 2.5 actions. Now it means we actually do have 2-3 spare actions a turn for a bit.

Wow, it's like "I don't think we need to produce an SBG every turn to be able to weather the counterattack" somehow means that "I think we should bow down and lose!"

For fuck's sake, am I even allowed to play this game any more? You've never failed to break into calling me out whenever I had an opinion that differed from yours, no matter how I reasoned it. First it was "So you're happy to be complicit with atrocities by not wanting to push Voxx Primus as soon as humanly possible? Even when we're in the middle of a war?" Then it was "Now we've committed and we have to put everything towards this project", and now it's "We need to be building an SBG every turn before the Imperialtide falls on us to maybe survive."

So what'll it be next? "Now that we've won, we need to keep attacking or else we'll get overrun by their Maximum Ruthlessness?" When am I allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours that doesn't get you calling me out? No matter how much I reason it?

Should I just leave the game? Will that make you happy now that everyone is happily in line with your Perfectly Ideal Plan for Universal Prosperity? I have an opinion that differs from you, I am doing my best to argue in it's favor. I don't think this makes me a bad person! I've even explained my logic and you're breaking off into the cussing and treating me like I'm an insane lunatic!

For goodness sake, I love this quest, but you have not shut up ever since you've begun this crusade, and now you're trying to throw away one of the best opportunities to pull away from the pack we've gotten since the game started, and you're attacking me for thinking this isn't an open and shut case!

How am I supposed to enjoy this when I can't so much as present an opinion without being told I'm trying to kill us all?
I definitely feel like I've gotten a thicker skin arguing here recently, especially against The Laurent. They do seem to assume the worst of whoever disagrees. But that being said, it's always about whatever base assumption we differ on. Here I think it's how many SBGs we need to make per turn. I think that number is 1 or so, they think it's 2ish. I think?

Actually, taking a deep breath. Am I missing something here, @Alectai , 50% more means that each action is 1.5 actions, which means that four actions over three turns, what we can actually manage without explicitly neglecting everything else, would still be better than the "3 action lump" in pure PsyTech results, at least?
I think the thing we're worried about is that the 3 action lump is pretty useless spread out over the 6 options, and we need to invest 4 more actions anyway to get what we need.
 
And... I disagree? We just had a major engagement with them. This is in fact the perfect time to take a look at their ships and etc while we're remaking our doctrine.

The real issue is that the important part--the Flyssas--is being dissected automatically. What we're deciding is whether we're sending it to the labs or military R&D. The major tricks of the ships they've deployed have already been seen.
 
My read is that we want to do 1 SBG a turn for a bit. That would have demanded a ton more actions before we got an SBG down to 2.5 actions. Now it means we actually do have 2-3 spare actions a turn for a bit.


I definitely feel like I've gotten a thicker skin arguing here recently, especially against The Laurent. They do seem to assume the worst of whoever disagrees. But that being said, it's always about whatever base assumption we differ on. Here I think it's how many SBGs we need to make per turn. I think that number is 1 or so, they think it's 2ish. I think?


I think the thing we're worried about is that the 3 action lump is pretty useless spread out over the 6 options, and we need to invest 4 more actions anyway to get what we need.

No? The disagreement is even pettier than that. I said that in my vision of the turn plans for the next three turns, there was room for maybe 4 PsyTech actions total (just under 1/3rd of our total actions), which is still enough that the 50% might be worth it, but is seen as too little for Alectai, who is advocating for at least 6 PsyTech actions, and maybe more, I'm not sure, over the next three turns.
 
I think the thing we're worried about is that the 3 action lump is pretty useless spread out over the 6 options, and we need to invest 4 more actions anyway to get what we need.
6 options is a lot of spread yeah. Like off the top of my head we got the Orrey, the sabers(1 action), the lance(more than 2) and something else(just 2). Meaning that a random three could give us Orrey, sabres and lance or could give us Lance, 2 Orrey...which is...a lot rougher
 
6 options is a lot of spread yeah. Like off the top of my head we got the Orrey, the sabers(1 action), the lance(more than 2) and something else(just 2). Meaning that a random three could give us Orrey, sabres and lance or could give us Lance, 2 Orrey...which is...a lot rougher

While I've switched to the 50%, I'm pretty sure that since the Orrery is 0/1, if it's chosen it just leaves contention.
 
Yes, and they also have Three or four other enemies they're in a state of total war against Which you seem to keep ignoring.
And like you said, we just took not only their biggest recruiting world but their primary source of Psykers which allows them to make something as bullshit as the Rhyssa Destroyers. I count 3 SBGs in Breskal that currently look like they're in reserve. It is reasonable to assume that once word reaches that they're losing Voxx Primus they're all going to beeline back towards us, and they're most likely going to have their own Rhyssa Destroyers and every Light Cruiser will likely have a Null Net. And even if they can't break into Voxx Primus, all they need to really fuck us over is just good Voxx Secundus then most of the people we're trying to save will starve to death so we need to at least hold the line there. And we all saw what their rolls are like, and this was us cheating like motherfuckers.

If we want to actually hold ground, we need a numbers overmatch so we get more dice in our favor.

Actually, taking a deep breath. Am I missing something here, @Alectai , 50% more means that each action is 1.5 actions, which means that four actions over three turns, what we can actually manage without explicitly neglecting everything else, would still be better than the "3 action lump" in pure PsyTech results, at least?
Our Jolly Economic Cooperation also said it was 50% and that effectively gave us double the actions for Infra development, so I think it will be the same here where one action for Psytech would actually be 2.

With that said, I still am not too interested in dedicating the next 3 turns to studying Psytech and focus on other stuff like Civ XV, military R&D, new Songs, Temple Ship, etc.
 
With that said, I still am not too interested in dedicating the next 3 turns to studying Psytech and focus on other stuff like Civ XV, military R&D, new Songs, Temple Ship, etc.
I think Civ XV is like gone. We are not gonna be getting that. The rest is...possible. Also is it 3 actions from like right this second? Or 3 actions whenever we feel it necessary? Because Jolly didn't specify. This one say "for three turns". Is it concurrent or not?
 
Last edited:
I definitely feel like I've gotten a thicker skin arguing here recently, especially against The Laurent. They do seem to assume the worst of whoever disagrees. But that being said, it's always about whatever base assumption we differ on. Here I think it's how many SBGs we need to make per turn. I think that number is 1 or so, they think it's 2ish. I think?

Though to be clear here, this began with Alectai claiming that we needed fewer than one SBG a turn.

My desire for four actions this coming turn to get 2 SBGs in a turn kinda faded when I saw the Doctrinal Overhaul needed, among other things.
 
Another thing I think is worth asking, do we want any specific bit of psytech right now?

Because the lump sum allows us to basically shelve it for later while the 50% forces us to develop it now or waste the bonus.

So I'm asking are we planning to use psytech in our upcoming ship designs or get one psytech specifically for a reason?
 
Another thing I think is worth asking, do we want any specific bit of psytech right now?

Because the lump sum allows us to basically shelve it for later while the 50% forces us to develop it now or waste the bonus.

So I'm asking are we planning to use psytech in our upcoming ship designs or get one psytech specifically for a reason?

The Phalanx Shields, that hellish Lance weapon--which even if we can't copy it exactly because it's an atrocity given form, just having it would be a hell of a thing. It's at least comparable to a Super Heavy Prow Lance apparently, but you can put it on a Destroyer.

The point is, there's a lot of really good Psytech, and we'll be hard pressed to get it later if we don't have an incentive to get it now.
 
Last edited:
Another thing I think is worth asking, do we want any specific bit of psytech right now?

Because the lump sum allows us to basically shelve it for later while the 50% forces us to develop it now or waste the bonus.

So I'm asking are we planning to use psytech in our upcoming ship designs or get one psytech specifically for a reason?
Probably for any ship we have that we want to go really fast. They are outspending us. This is no bueno. Also we are getting like 6 techs next turn and I expect it to be fomo before we do ship design.
 
The Phalanx Shields, that hellish Lance weapon--which even if we can't copy it exactly because it's an atrocity given form, just having it would be a hell of a thing. It's at least comparable to a Super Heavy Prow Lance apparently.

The Shields, yes, not sure about the Lance. It's neat, but a part of me wants to bite the bullet and finally do the fucking Orrery, or have our Choirs be a mini-boss squad armed with magic laser swords. :V
 
The Shields, yes, not sure about the Lance. It's neat, but a part of me wants to bite the bullet and finally do the fucking Orrery, or have our Choirs be a mini-boss squad armed with magic laser swords. :V

The Phalanx Shields would be amazing, yeah. The other part is that every Psytech item we complete is another ticker on the chart that allows us to finally convert it over to Research Dice, and if we can unlock that project, we will be dancing
 
The Phalanx Shields would be amazing, yeah. The other part is that every Psytech item we complete is another ticker on the chart that allows us to finally convert it over to Research Dice, and if we can unlock that project, we will be dancing
Psytech not being Research is actually painful lol. Our somewhat insane 1.4 points for one action is very good for this...sadly it is a different category and I blame Van Zandt
 
Voting is open
Back
Top