Having a look at the two vote counts, the people who voted for [] Glorious Jewel and [] Sustainable Commitment don't match, aside from @w34v3r. So really it's not a matter of saying one thing and doing another, at least on a meta level - we just got outvoted by the opposition from last vote and some newcomers.
Well that sucks. I'm a bit put out that the opposition just acted like the last vote didn't matter though and came up with a plan that didn't mesh at all with the speech - it compromises the Jedi's ability to get things done if we constantly change direction because whoever loses a vote refuses to go "ok fine we'll go with the winning idea and see how it goes". It was frustrating back during the early days with the one student one master vs. many students one master where for like three of four voting rounds I had to keep rehashing and winning the exact same debate, and it's frustrating now, doubly so that it's effectively changed the actual outcome before we could do literally anything.
Scheduled vote count started by Voikirium on Dec 14, 2021 at 11:04 AM, finished with 58 posts and 20 votes.
22
[X] Plan Sustainable Commitment
-[X] Destroy Hutt Affiliated Physical Infrastructure, such as warehouses, freighters, etc. (Requires investment of Combat)
-[X] Heavy (You will hit very hardened targets, such as mercenary barracks (AT LEAST 45 Combat))
-[X] 16 Jedi Guardians (80 Combat)
-[X] Strike Hutt Illicit Operations and Operators (Requires investment of Skill)
-[X] Heavy (Moguls, Kajidii, Overbosses (AT LEAST 45 Skill))
-[X] Mira, 1 Watchman, 15 Jedi Sentinels, 17 Padawans) (71 Skill)
-[X] Try and funnel support to the Rebels (Requires Investment of Diplomacy)
-[X] Medium (The Mid-Rim, far, though not far enough, from the Hutts, though considerably wealthier than the nearby (AT LEAST 30 Diplomacy))
-[X] Grandmaster Bao-Dur, 7 Consulars, 8 Padawans (48 Diplomacy)
[X] Plan: A Wider Net
-[X] Destroy Hutt Affiliated Physical Infrastructure, such as warehouses, freighters, etc. - Medium (You will hit somewhat hardened targets, like freighters) - 3 Sentinels, 6 Guardians (36 Combat)
-[X] Try and funnel support to the Rebels - Medium (The Mid-Rim, far, though not far enough, from the Hutts, though considerably wealthier than the nearby) - 1 Sentinel, 4 Guardians, 2 Consulars, 3 Padawans (35 Diplomacy)
-[X] Physically Aid Rebel Forces - Medium (You will position Jedi in Rebel Bases) - Brianna, 2 Sentinels, 5 Guardians (36 Combat)
-[X] Offer Technical Support to Rebel Ships - Medium (You will help refit the Rebel Fleet with heavier weaponry) - Visas Marr, 9 Sentinels, 2 Padawans (35 Skill)
-[X] Facilitate Hutt Defections - Heavy (You will attempt to convince higher ranking Hutts, such as Vogga who has business interests in selling his fuel, to defect to the Rebels) - Bao-Dur, Atton Rand, 4 Sentinels, 5 Guardians, 1 Consular, 2 Padawans (51 Diplomacy)
-[X] Develop Force Abilities within Syncretic Cults - Heavy (You will establish a Praxeum proper on a Rebel held world) - Mical, 2 Sentinels, 7 Consulars, 2 Padawans (51 Wisdom)
[X] Plan: Glorious Jewel In Action
-[X] Destroy Hutt Affiliated Physical Infrastructure, such as warehouses, freighters, etc. (Requires investment of Combat)
-[X] Physically Aid Rebel Forces (Requires investment of Combat)
-[X] Offer Technical Support to Rebel Ships (Requires investment of Skill)
-[X] Develop Force Abilities within Syncretic Cults (Requires Investment of Wisdom))
[X] Plan Eyes Forward
-[X] Destroy Hutt Affiliated Physical Infrastructure, such as warehouses, freighters, etc. (Requires investment of Combat)
-[X] Heavy (You will hit very hardened targets, such as mercenary barracks (AT LEAST 45 Combat))
-[X] 16 Jedi Guardians (80 Combat)
-[X] Offer Technical Support to Rebel Ships (Requires investment of Skill)
-[X] Heavy (You will help redesign the Rebel Fleet from its Hutt Origin (AT LEAST 45 Skill))
-[X] Mira, 1 Watchman, 15 Jedi Sentinels, 17 Padawans) (71 Skill)
-[X] Try and funnel support to the Rebels (Requires Investment of Diplomacy)
-[X] Medium (The Mid-Rim, far, though not far enough, from the Hutts, though considerably wealthier than the nearby (AT LEAST 30 Diplomacy))
-[X] Grandmaster Bao-Dur, 7 Consulars, 8 Padawans (48 Diplomacy)
Version 2.0 lets you assign personnel to every patrol route simultaneously, showing you how many remain unassigned as you go, and it produces neatly formatted text when you're done to copy/paste into a plan, like so:
Putting this together was extremely tedious, but it should take all the work out of preparing patrol route plans.
Let me know if you spot any errors, or if anyone defaces it, or it needs updating to include new patrol routes or character types. I'd recommend making your own copy of the sheet to work off of so you don't have to worry about anyone else using it at the same time.
Version 2.0 lets you assign personnel to every patrol route simultaneously, showing you how many remain unassigned as you go, and it produces neatly formatted text when you're done to copy/paste into a plan, like so:
Putting this together was extremely tedious, but it should take all the work out of preparing patrol route plans.
Let me know if you spot any errors, or if anyone defaces it, or it needs updating to include new patrol routes or character types. I'd recommend making your own copy of the sheet to work off of so you don't have to worry about anyone else using it at the same time.
@Voikirium, could you give this post an Informational threadmark so it's easy to find?
Why we've reserved all but two of our hero units to patrol duty, I don't know. We overrun the Vigilance requirements for each sector at least three times over even without them.
Why we've reserved all but two of our hero units to patrol duty, I don't know. We overrun the Vigilance requirements for each sector at least three times over even without them.
Beats me, but I guess we'll have to wait until next time interval to actually address any of the roots of the Hutt problems, if anyone trusts us to keep our word by that point.
It's because we failed quite a few patrols last cycle with numbers larger than this. The vigilance requirements are a bare minimum, not really sufficient to avoid failures.
I do wish we knew what mechanics the patrols operated on, it's unfortunately all guesswork based on past results.
By the way, @Voikirium, should we be at 101 Padawans and 10 Initiates?
Newcomer here, sortakinda, I took a year and a bit-ish break from SV but this is one of the quests I used to follow. Yeah, idk. I'm just voting with what my heart, gut, and usually brain tell me. I personally would've argued against the speech for reasons I'm uninterested in getting into after the fact, but I wasn't there. I imagine a similar thing goes for whatever other newcomers swayed the vote. It's also possible that the winning vote won because some people thought it was better-written. That happens. Probably a mix of everything, there are a lot of different reasons. Put eighteen voters in a room and you get two coalitions with thirty-five different lines of reasoning.
Why we've reserved all but two of our hero units to patrol duty, I don't know. We overrun the Vigilance requirements for each sector at least three times over even without them.
Because Vigilance isn't the only stat important for patrolling, and because it's nice to exceed minimum thresholds. The minimum Vigilance required has repeatedly proven to be at best a very vague benchmark for the challenge faced. Plus, we may catch out some Hutt counterstrikes against the Republic's diplomatic acts in the process, since the war actions are just the offensive actions. That's what I reckon, anyway, as someone who voted for that plan. There are reasons.
I wouldn't say it's nearly that disastrous. It was a statement to the Supreme Chancellor in private, which she responded to with a verbal shrug. Even then it doesn't seem like anything particularly binding was said, since all that we really said we'd do about it was "The Jedi shall make its own [choice]", and the rest was more a recommendation to the Republic instead of a policy statement of ours. The Jedi's reputation for integrity should be alive and well.
More broadly, I hear you. Were our positions reversed, I'd be upset too. I have been upset too. However, it was one vote, a write-in vote which inherently filters out most of the quest's participants because it tends to be only a select few that submit write-ins like that. It simply can't be expected that people will vote all the way against their unchanged opinions because you outvoted them last time. I wouldn't expect it of you, and with no disrespect intended, I don't think you would do it. I certainly don't think I would, seeing as how I didn't. Not everybody quests with the same philosophy, and most people really do believe that what they're voting for is playing nice with the previous vote. I fall in that latter category, for the record. I think that while Bao Dur would definitely have liked to go all fire and blood on the Hutts, he recognised that it wasn't feasible/was too risky to the still-fragile Jedi Order to do so without them. That feels completely believable and natural to me. If it doesn't to you then, well, people argue and vote from their viewpoints just as much as you do from yours. It's not malicious or antagonistic in intent. People just accept the outcome of previous votes while retaining their beliefs and voting with those in mind instead of feeling compelled to fall in line behind said previous votes' architects.
I empathise with your frustration, especially since I've been there, but it's important to not lose perspective, I guess is what I'm trying to get across. People aren't obligated to adopt your opinions and vote against their conscience because you won a related past vote, or for any reason short of you actually convincing them, really, even if it feels from your end like they should. It's an irritating fact, but not worth letting yourself get worked up or bummed out over, you know? Especially at Christmas. In my experience, you've just got to roll with the punches and move on sometimes, because you can't change it. The most you can do is marshal your strength and be ready when the issue next pops up, because this kind of shit can work for you just as much as it does against you.
I hope that came off as more peaceable sharing of understanding than mean-spiritedly condescending lecture, and that it wasn't a completely overblown response. My apologies, in either case. It was written sincerely, as much as that's a worthless addendum because anyone who believes I was insincere in the rest of my post would also believe that of my assertion of sincerity. Still, it feels right to say.
I wouldn't say it's nearly that disastrous. It was a statement to the Supreme Chancellor in private, which she responded to with a verbal shrug. Even then it doesn't seem like anything particularly binding was said, since all that we really said we'd do about it was "The Jedi shall make its own [choice]", and the rest was more a recommendation to the Republic instead of a policy statement of ours. The Jedi's reputation for integrity should be alive and well.
More broadly, I hear you. Were our positions reversed, I'd be upset too. I have been upset too. However, it was one vote, a write-in vote which inherently filters out most of the quest's participants because it tends to be only a select few that submit write-ins like that. It simply can't be expected that people will vote all the way against their unchanged opinions because you outvoted them last time. I wouldn't expect it of you, and with no disrespect intended, I don't think you would do it. I certainly don't think I would, seeing as how I didn't. Not everybody quests with the same philosophy, and most people really do believe that what they're voting for is playing nice with the previous vote. I fall in that latter category, for the record. I think that while Bao Dur would definitely have liked to go all fire and blood on the Hutts, he recognised that it wasn't feasible/was too risky to the still-fragile Jedi Order to do so without them. That feels completely believable and natural to me. If it doesn't to you then, well, people argue and vote from their viewpoints just as much as you do from yours. It's not malicious or antagonistic in intent. People just accept the outcome of previous votes while retaining their beliefs and voting with those in mind instead of feeling compelled to fall in line behind said previous votes' architects.
I empathise with your frustration, especially since I've been there, but it's important to not lose perspective, I guess is what I'm trying to get across. People aren't obligated to adopt your opinions and vote against their conscience because you won a related past vote, or for any reason short of you actually convincing them, really, even if it feels from your end like they should. It's an irritating fact, but not worth letting yourself get worked up or bummed out over, you know? Especially at Christmas. In my experience, you've just got to roll with the punches and move on sometimes, because you can't change it. The most you can do is marshal your strength and be ready when the issue next pops up, because this kind of shit can work for you just as much as it does against you.
I hope that came off as more peaceable sharing of understanding than mean-spiritedly condescending lecture, and that it wasn't a completely overblown response. My apologies, in either case. It was written sincerely, as much as that's a worthless addendum because anyone who believes I was insincere in the rest of my post would also believe that of my assertion of sincerity. Still, it feels right to say.
I guess it's just... I don't see a tangible difference between results now. If the first vote had gone the other way, would this second vote be meaningfully different? Not particularly, I think, and it very much reads as if that vote had won. It makes that first vote feel kinda pointless and like I needn't have bothered, I suppose, or like immediately turning the proverbial car around. We aren't doing even anything small in Hutt space, and even in private, the write-in was very much a statement of intent that would presumably be conveyed onwards.
I think in future it'd be better if we just did this sort of stuff all in one vote, that way we don't get this "well yes but actually no" outcome.
And, I guess this could hypothetically work for me in reverse, but I don't want it to. I have no desire to reactionarily pull against a vote I've lost after the fact with a vote right after. If I lose a vote I lose a vote. We'll all be reaping the outcome of failing to do anything to hit the Hutt internals and I'm not going to try to drag up Hutt intervention again until there's actually been enough time to try the other way.
It's not an obligation thing, I just don't really see the point of drag out wheelspinning about it until I get what I want. It's a quest, not next month's rent.
Version 2.0 lets you assign personnel to every patrol route simultaneously, showing you how many remain unassigned as you go, and it produces neatly formatted text when you're done to copy/paste into a plan, like so:
Putting this together was extremely tedious, but it should take all the work out of preparing patrol route plans.
Let me know if you spot any errors, or if anyone defaces it, or it needs updating to include new patrol routes or character types. I'd recommend making your own copy of the sheet to work off of so you don't have to worry about anyone else using it at the same time.
@Voikirium, could you give this post an Informational threadmark so it's easy to find?
It's because we failed quite a few patrols last cycle with numbers larger than this. The vigilance requirements are a bare minimum, not really sufficient to avoid failures.
I do wish we knew what mechanics the patrols operated on, it's unfortunately all guesswork based on past results.
By the way, @Voikirium, should we be at 101 Padawans and 10 Initiates?
Under the status page, we've got 65 Initiates, 46 Padawans, and 101 Jedi Knights or Masters. I'm wondering if that should be 101 Padawans with the empty teaching spots being filled from the ranks of the waiting Initiates?
Under the status page, we've got 65 Initiates, 46 Padawans, and 101 Jedi Knights or Masters. I'm wondering if that should be 101 Padawans with the empty teaching spots being filled from the ranks of the waiting Initiates?
It's because we failed quite a few patrols last cycle with numbers larger than this. The vigilance requirements are a bare minimum, not really sufficient to avoid failures.
I do wish we knew what mechanics the patrols operated on, it's unfortunately all guesswork based on past results.
By the way, @Voikirium, should we be at 101 Padawans and 10 Initiates?
Numbers are not going to save us from shit rolls, and the consequences for failing the rebellion are worse than for the patrols. Failing a patrol means people die, the pirates get away to their hidey-hole, whatever, and while it's bad it's not catastrophic. If we fail to provide adequate aid to the rebels (and I personally consider the plan that won a bare minimum, speaking of which) then they all die, the rebellion crumbles, and we lose our best chance at cracking open and breaking up one of the largest criminal enterprises and general purveyors of misery in the galaxy, for at least the next generation. With that in mind I would have preferred to bolster the more pivotal effort.
(Remember, only @TaliesinSkye gets to vote. Please vote with 'O')
[] A Historian: Kreia once claimed the Handmaiden would become a Historian of the Jedi Order, giving up the ways of battle for the way of peace. Perhaps it has already started... +20 Knowledge
[] A Tech Specialist: Bao-Dur's tinkering has created a smaller power generator fit to power entire wings of Academies and Temples. +40 to development of one location of your choice.
[] A Leader: Develop a member of either the High Council or the lesser Council of Ossus to be placed when a new Master is joins, or earmark an already extant character.
Hmm, if I may offer my two cents, I'd go for the tech specialist - the leader one is pretty vague, and I don't think it's necessarily the best idea to swap one of our best combat specialists over to an entirely different career at this stage. Though maybe that's somewhat coloured by a stubborn desire to middle finger Kreia also.
Hmm, if I may offer my two cents, I'd go for the tech specialist - the leader one is pretty vague, and I don't think it's necessarily the best idea to swap one of our best combat specialists over to an entirely different career at this stage. Though maybe that's somewhat coloured by a stubborn desire to middle finger Kreia also.
[X] Plan Sustainable Commitment
-[X] Destroy Hutt Affiliated Physical Infrastructure, such as warehouses, freighters, etc. (Requires investment of Combat)
-[X] Heavy (You will hit very hardened targets, such as mercenary barracks (AT LEAST 45 Combat))
-[X] 16 Jedi Guardians (80 Combat)
-[X] Strike Hutt Illicit Operations and Operators (Requires investment of Skill)
-[X] Heavy (Moguls, Kajidii, Overbosses (AT LEAST 45 Skill))
-[X] Mira, 1 Watchman, 15 Jedi Sentinels, 17 Padawans) (71 Skill)
-[X] Try and funnel support to the Rebels (Requires Investment of Diplomacy)
-[X] Medium (The Mid-Rim, far, though not far enough, from the Hutts, though considerably wealthier than the nearby (AT LEAST 30 Diplomacy))
-[X] Grandmaster Bao-Dur, 7 Consulars, 8 Padawans (48 Diplomacy)
Hutt Space might be on fire, and you might to a greater or lesser extent be funneling the fuel to it, but the rest of the Galaxy still exists and it still has its problems. Sith Rebels and mercenaries are still causing trouble; the Exchange still glares menacingly at you, the Hutts and the Republic alike; and the Yuuzhan Vong are making mouth noises about Border Tensions near the Core (Not that you are overly worried they are going to throw themselves into a war with you, it's nice not to have to worry that a major power is trying to wage war on you unlike most). No end of problems for the Jedi, with or without the growing war in Hutt Space-- and it is growing: Boggra the Hutt's estate is currently under siege as the rebels he backs cause trouble on Nar Shaddaa, with his Warmech tearing bloody chunks out of Cartel forces, aided by adventurers from all across the Republic.
Yes, things are...tense, right now. If you adroitly move, you might free countless innocents from slavery; if you falter, uncounted billions if not trillions will die.
[] The Core: To be honest, this is likely the safest part of the Galaxy. You'd be surprised if anything more threatening than a few gangsters show up here anytime soon, and not very threatening ones either. Still, whatever does happen here, the entire galaxy knows about it, so if you just want to fly the flag, so to speak, this would be a good place for it.
([] Assign Jedi to patrol, needs 4 Vigilance)
[] The Inner Rim: What should, by rights, be a milk run is instead a thriving cesspool of Sith sympathizers and saboteurs, and plenty of them want to reignite the Dark Wars. We need anybody and everybody: Consulars to try and talk them down, Sentinels to investigate, and Guardians to show some muscle if things get hairy.
(Assign Jedi to Patrol, Needs 10 Vigilance)
[] The Mid-Rim: Wealthier than the Outer Rim, but without the commiserate military force, a surprising amount of Jedi patrols have always been focused here, being pirate bait and all. This is likely where combat, if it takes place, will take place. Sending some real muscle out here would be a wise plan.
([] Assign Jedi to patrol, needs 6 Vigilance)
[] The Outer Rim: A sparsely populated collection of agri worlds, you don't see too much trouble coming here, if it weren't for the Mandalorians. On the other hand, this is likely to be where the majority of your apprentices come from for the time being, so perhaps those more in tune with the Force would be a wise plan.
([] Assign Jedi to patrol, needs 1 Vigilance)
[] The Colonies: A wealthy, industrialized part of the Mid-Rim, they are a usually safe area, not often requiring much work. Though the current war may change that...
([] Assign Jedi to Patrol, needs 1 Vigilance)
[] The Expansion Region: Part of the Galaxy brutally exploited by corporate interests, pushed to the brink by war, and left to die once it was no longer lucrative enough. Chaos rains as Sith-Imposed regimes fall apart. In many cases, the Jedi dispatched here will be the first, last, and only order on world. (Needs 6 Vigilance)
--
Vote will open in Dec 27, 2021 at 10:00 AM
I mean we had multiple vote options that threw Jedi at Hutt space that deliberately left plenty for our own territory, so I'm not sure what you want short of just not getting involved in the Hutt thing at all.
I feel largely ambivalent on this one - patrol routes are pretty dry. @Strunkriidiisk got a name for your plan? You've put enough work into it I'm happy to acceppt it as the default.
I mean we had multiple vote options that threw Jedi at Hutt space that deliberately left plenty for our own territory, so I'm not sure what you want short of just not getting involved in the Hutt thing at all.
We did? I only saw two plans and one of them involved throwing almost everything we had at the hutts and left far too little for everything else in my tastes. That's why I voted for the one that won.
But then again I did leave the thread after I voted and I literally didn't come back until this update so I missed any new plan being made.
I guess that's one way to miss everything. The first alt plan went through several iterations since it was pretty extreme, I threw together my own median compromise, and there was also another slightly revised version of the winning plan.
I guess that's one way to miss everything. The first alt plan went through several iterations since it was pretty extreme, I threw together my own median compromise, and there was also another slightly revised version of the winning plan.
