Voting is open
Not to mention that if we start importing food with the proceeds of trade with Victoria, I expect it to reduce our AP for the duration
I was under the impression that that was what we were already doing? Importing food for cheap, selling high to Victoria, then buying more for cheap.

And for the farming I don't think anyone is planning on putting less than 1 AP into it. I'd take a 30% chance of failure compared to 9% for Farming if it means being able to potentially 1 turn Census (and even if it doesn't it dramatically increases the chances of at least one success.
 
Considering that we're a Social Democracy we desperately *need* to do diplomacy to begin setting up our empire.

Social Democracy requires a periphery for the imperial core to exploit and imperialize, or else it makes Number Sad and the business class stsrts stripping out the copper wiring for their next hit ala neoliberalism's market totalization.

So, if we want our babby social democracy to thrive we need an empire. And since we've decided (thank god) not to base that empire on main force, our future prosperity as a Social Democracy requires the use of soft power to build our empire as soon as possible.

A lot of things can wait until we've secured markets to exploit.

Nail down as many allies as possible, as soon as possible. And make sure they arent shooting at each other until we hit the other end of the Social Democratic lifespan where we need to clear up dead capital via a devastating crisis or massive war.

Do this right and we can buy a few generations of prosperity on the backs of our neocolonies. (Revivialists need not worry either, internal colonies are totally A Thing. Witness the US's relation with Appalachia, for instance)
 
Last edited:
There are already paying us 2 AP each turn and now with the food 1 AP more, and the lose of Augusta and everthing there, that is gonna be a lose of a few AP per turn
Point of order:
Nope. We get 2 Development AP from Victoria due to War Reparations.
Added to our current base 12 AP, that brings us to 14.

That we are trading food to Victoria is fluff. It has no mechanical effects currently that are identified.
Our economy IS growing though; back in Turn 4, our base AP was 10.
I was under the impression that that was what we were already doing? Importing food for cheap, selling high to Victoria, then buying more for cheap.

And for the farming I don't think anyone is planning on putting less than 1 AP into it. I'd take a 30% chance of failure compared to 9% for Farming if it means being able to potentially 1 turn Census (and even if it doesn't it dramatically increases the chances of at least one success.
1)No. We are importing food low and selling high to Victoria ONLY.
We are currently producing enough food domestically to feed our people. We are expanding Farming because our population is expanding, so we dont have to import food as a necessity.

2)30% chance of Farming failing is entirely too high for something that can have both economic and political consequences.
What do you do if it fails just as winter is closing in and the Welland Canal is closing for the year? The Mississippi is not currently an alternativ, and we lack an Atlantic port.

Like I pointed out earlier, last time we ran short of food, we spent an AP to buy food and still lost economic AP for the duration.
Food disruptions are not good for a growing economy.
 
Last edited:
I propose:

[ ][SCHEDULE] Seven years. Moderate military, foreign arms with domestic ammo and parts production. Stretch goal of some domestic weapons production. Pessimistic timeline, or else assumes declaring early to hit the Vicks with a stronger force before they're ready.

though I can be convinced to vote for:
[ ][SCHEDULE] Ten years. Large military, Plurality domestic arms with full domestic ammo and parts production. Stretch goal of majority domestic arms. Maximizes capabilities at the cost of giving the Vicks more time.

[ ][MEET] No. You will not make yourself the First Nation to test Nikolai's wrath.
-[ ][MEET] You will attend, though.

[] Plan Serve the People
-[ ] More Gunboats (1 Defense AP)
-[ ] Michigan Mediation (1 State AP)
-[ ] Intervention In Minnesota (1 Free AP)
-[ ] Census Office (2 Free AP)
-[ ] Refugee Crisis (2 Free AP)
-[ ] Economic Legislation (1 Domestic AP)
-[ ] Midwest Economic Summit (1 Free AP)
-[ ] Green Energy (1 Development AP)
-[ ] Farming Equipment, Part 2 (2 Development AP)
-[ ] Long Tail (1 Security AP)
-[ ] Organize the Libraries (1 Technology AP)
 
What do you do if it fails just as winter is closing in and the Welland Canal is closing for the year? The Mississippi is not currently an alternativ, and we lack an Atlantic port.

You keep going on about this point like it's a certainty, but while climate climate has been stopped in this world, it still got worse than OTL. So that might just not happen anymore.
 
You keep going on about this point like it's a certainty, but while climate climate has been stopped in this world, it still got worse than OTL. So that might just not happen anymore.
1)It didnt get worse than OTL. WoG is that its stalled at roughly the same point as in RL
2)We saw the Welland Canal close last year with the onset of winter while we were in Buffalo.
3)The Lakes freezing was explicitly a plot point during the buildup before the Detroit War, when we had to rush to ship troops and arms stockpiles to Detroit before winter hit and the Lake froze.

I mean, winter snow fucking up the Vics was explicitly a plot point of the end of Operation Foil.
This is quite literally stuff we've seen onscreen in this quest.
 
Last edited:
And "We need to fix our farms before the winter hits and we can't rely on imports" ISNT an explicit plot point anymore. If this was something we needed to worry about, the options *would have told us*. Our bureaucrats can plan for the effect of a winter, given they live in Chicago. Instead, we're not being warned "imports are a short term solution but we need to be sustainable by the winter" we're being told "imports can cover a shortage, but it costs us the ability to reship to Victoria if we need to do it". You're thinking outside of the level of abstraction this quest works on (for plan votes at least).
 
Last edited:
Considering that we're a Social Democracy we desperately *need* to do diplomacy to begin setting up our empire.

Social Democracy requires a periphery for the imperial core to exploit and imperialize, or else it makes Number Sad and the business class stsrts stripping out the copper wiring for their next hit ala neoliberalism's market totalization.

So, if we want our babby social democracy to thrive we need an empire. And since we've decided (thank god) not to base that empire on main force, our future prosperity as a Social Democracy requires the use of soft power to build our empire as soon as possible.

A lot of things can wait until we've secured markets to exploit.

Nail down as many allies as possible, as soon as possible. And make sure they arent shooting at each other until we hit the other end of the Social Democratic lifespan where we need to clear up dead capital via a devastating crisis or massive war.

Do this right and we can buy a few generations of prosperity on the backs of our neocolonies. (Revivialists need not worry either, internal colonies are totally A Thing. Witness the US's relation with Appalachia, for instance)

Yet another reason to abolish the state as soon as possible.
 
And "We need to fix our farms before the winter hits and we can't rely on imports" ISNT an explicit plot point anymore. If this was something we needed to worry about, the options *would have told us*. Our bureaucrats can plan for the effect of a winter, given they live in Chicago. Instead, we're not being warned "imports are a short term solution but we need to be sustainable by the winter" we're being told "imports can cover a shortage, but it costs us the ability to reship to Victoria if we need to do it". You're thinking outside of the level of abstraction this quest works on (for plan votes at least).
1)We routinely plan for the effects of winter; we live in the Midwest after all, and Midwest winters have a reputation.
We grow food during the growing seasons and draw on them during winter.What we do not routinely plan for is our population growing faster than natural expansion rates due to political factors.

Thats what this represents:
Famine, no. Domestic food shortfalls, yes. Basically, very soon you will not be producing enough food to feed everybody in your territory. The good news is that the Seaway opening up means cheap foreign food exporters who don't feel like charging highway robbery prices like your neighbors (or, indeed, you) did are now available. So, you can buy food, and you can pay for it with the rest of the trade you're now conducting with Victoria. You'd still feel more comfortable strengthening your farming sector, mind; you'd rather be producing enough food that you can make it an asset rather than something you can financially cover. But no, you are no longer at imminent risk of famine.
Its not people eating more, its the population growing from immigrants and refugees. They dont exactly give notice when they are showing up.
And possibly others leaving the farm to find work in the cities, reducing the absolute agricultural work force.
Hence the need to bump our agricultural productivity in order to future proof shit,

Note that said cheap prices are allegedly based on the goodwill of those foreign importers.
Goodwill can be fleeting.

2) We're not being told it would cost us the ability to reship to Victoria.
We're being told it would cost us the economic gain we are getting by trading food to Victoria. That is not quantified
Nor are any second-order economic effects.
 
Thats like, spend 1 AP to improve food production at a 1 in 3 chance of failure.
If you fail, based on previous history, spend 1AP or more to import food per turn and 1AP+ to repeat improving food production.

As compared to, spend 2AP to improve food production at a 1 in 8 chance of failure.
If you fail, based on previous history, spend 1AP or more to import food and 1AP or more to repeat improving food production.

The math seems pretty clear to me.
The consequences of failure are very real. Real enough that gambling at this point seems.....cavalier.

EDIT
Not to mention that the appearance of having your shit together matters very much to both domestic and foreign investors and prospective allies.
We want to look like the right horse to back.
Getting the basics right helps.
 
Last edited:
[] Plan Serve the People
-[ ] More Gunboats (1 Defense AP)
-[ ] Michigan Mediation (1 State AP)
-[ ] Intervention In Minnesota (1 Free AP)
-[ ] Census Office (2 Free AP)
-[ ] Refugee Crisis (2 Free AP)
-[ ] Economic Legislation (1 Domestic AP)
-[ ] Midwest Economic Summit (1 Free AP)
-[ ] Green Energy (1 Development AP)
-[ ] Farming Equipment, Part 2 (2 Development AP)
-[ ] Long Tail (1 Security AP)
-[ ] Organize the Libraries (1 Technology AP)

I really like this plan, and would be happy to vote for it. My first choice would be 1 farming 2 gunboats instead of 2 farming 1 gunboats, but I don't disagree strongly enough to be put off.

I do have one question, though: Why Long Tail instead of Into Victoria? Into Victoria is a really easy roll that can complete this turn, inform our future decisions, and is worded in a way suggesting it'll get harder to do once Victoria is no longer as distracted with their civil war as they are. I say we check that off our list now.
 
I do have one question, though: Why Long Tail instead of Into Victoria? Into Victoria is a really easy roll that can complete this turn, inform our future decisions, and is worded in a way suggesting it'll get harder to do once Victoria is no longer as distracted with their civil war as they are. I say we check that off our list now.
I don't think it likely that their civil war will end this turn, so the option should still be there next turn. I'd rather make our intel agency more efficient ASAP.
 
I don't think it likely that their civil war will end this turn, so the option should still be there next turn. I'd rather make our intel agency more efficient ASAP.

See, I'd rather start getting information on our direct enemies as soon as possible just in case something comes up. (Like, say, the new Tsar sending support to Victoria.) Then once we have a foothold we can start to expand.
 
WoG:


When a mortal enemy is sitting on your main arterial to the international market?
A basic essential like food is something you dont want to give them the means to disrupt as political leverage, or just to assuage their pride. Or even just a fuckup. Thats one thing I'm fairly sure both Johnson and Blackwell are in agreement on.

And that doesnt even consider the fact that the Welland Canal and the Seaway closes during winter because the Lakes freeze.

You would have a point about using imports as a backstop if we controlled a port on the Atlantic, or if the Mississippi was already secured.
Neither is currently true.

EDIT
Not to mention that if we start importing food with the proceeds of trade with Victoria, I expect it to reduce our AP for the duration
Boy, you got real pessimistic about how long the peace treaty with Victoria would last all of a sudden - what happened to the Vicks needing at least five years to recover instead of *checks notes* being totally willing to violate the core of the peace treaty and kick off the war again inside of six months?


I mean, come on - obvious fearmongering is obvious.
 
I'm interested in going all out on green energy now because my interpretation is that we don't know if it's going to stay as an auto-win in subsequent turns - I could see the new Czar messing with CAF or something like that. So if we say, do one green dice now, but then the DC goes up to 30 next turn, that essentially means we have outright lost 0.6 of a dice.
The new Czar has already withdrawn his support for the project; it's highly unlikely that he'll mess with it more. Not impossible, but unlikely. It seems as though he did that specifically as a "fuck you" gesture to us, not because of a general desire to "fuck everyone" disrupt the CAF (and enrage the global community and invite immediate negative comparisons to his father).

Furthermore, note that this is done to green our power grid; only by spending 3 AP do we even begin to get actual expansions. Worst case, we can just continue with coal-fired power plants until we find a new sugar daddy willing to help us.

If my interpretation is wrong, I'd be happy to edit it. Frankly, I'd be willing to put two die into gunboats now just to get it over with. Gunboats will be useful not just in the Great Lakes, but in securing control of the Mississippi. As I touched on earlier, there are surely tribes and such living in Arkansas, Northern Louisiana, and such. We could use our gunboats to get a better idea of what's over there and I'm much more interested in making diplomatic contacts over there as opposed to Minnesota.
"Tribes" is an... interesting choice of words. I oppose the doubling on gunboats simply because we have so much else going on; it would be better to invest in diplomacy to resolve crises and establish our regional hegemony.

well, when I really think about it it makes us look less competent than we'd like I think.
Yeah, but we've been pretty big overachievers on some other fronts (Illinois Woman Claws Victorian Air Force Out of Heavens, Makes Entire Victorian Army Group Fall, Begging For Mercy, Heard By Their Brethren Who Are Powerless To Save Them).

I think we can take a little hemming and hawing about a local conference mediation without suffering too much damage to our reputation. Furthermore, overachieving on the agricultural front lets us export agricultural products instead of importing (good for our AP budget).

Remember that reputation matters, but so do physical goods.

...what I was saying... ah, yes: putting 1 ap on farming basically means taking a bet of "30% chance you'll have to buy food for one semester" in exchange for "get 1 extra ap to put somewhere else".
No, because overachieving on agricultural equipment has impact. That's what happened last time- our action overachieved by enough that we bought a considerable grace period of not having to worry about food security, despite our imports being totally cut off during the Detroit War.

The point is, doubling down on that action is done not just to avoid crisis, but to court the beneficial consequences of overachieving, because that will in turn translate into more mechanized agricultural productivity that is in turn the underpinnings of our nation's economic development.

See also @huhYeahGoodPoint 's posts on the subject.

I'd also double down on Gunboats, at the expense of Expand the Department if necessary. It needs 2 successes to come online fully.
Sudden access to the products of international trade flooding down the arterials of the Midwest for the first time in decades is bound to draw plenty of pirates and warlords who will attempt to claim jurisdiction over the waterways.

We're gonna need gunboats for deterrence. Yesterday. Or they will choke the river trade and our economic payoff.
Ehh.

That's a respectable point and I'm going to think about it, but I'm not entirely sure I agree about the urgency- especially since More Gunboats is the kind of action where half-succeeding is relatively likely to mean "you get half your boats," which means we're at least trending upwards as the turn rolls on rather than sitting still.

I mean yeah, that's all true. Hell it could even result in a hidden power bonus like we've gotten in terminus quest for completing projects that sync well all at the same time... but on the other hand, if farming equipment fails we'll still be able to feed our population.. And if census gets completed in one turn that opens up a lot of 'stewardship' options for us, or maybe it just vastly lowers our DCs.
Opening up a ton of projects only helps us so much if we don't have more AP to do anything about them with. My own plan, as I recall, has double AP on Census Office, but I'm still prepared to accept it taking two turns- note that there IS a roughly 50% chance of it taking two turns anyway if we spend two AP on it, because there's only about a 49% chance of both dice succeeding.

And that doesnt even consider the fact that the Welland Canal and the Seaway closes during winter because the Lakes freeze.
Oh yeah that's important. It bears remembering that nothing can get to us from "far foreign" or even over much of the Lakes at all from, like... roughly November/December through March/April.

Considering that we're a Social Democracy we desperately *need* to do diplomacy to begin setting up our empire.

Social Democracy requires a periphery for the imperial core to exploit and imperialize, or else it makes Number Sad and the business class stsrts stripping out the copper wiring for their next hit ala neoliberalism's market totalization.

So, if we want our babby social democracy to thrive we need an empire. And since we've decided (thank god) not to base that empire on main force, our future prosperity as a Social Democracy requires the use of soft power to build our empire as soon as possible.

A lot of things can wait until we've secured markets to exploit.
I think you're misapplying your salt.

First of all, the Commonwealth's current population is about as socialism-positive as you are ever likely to see without forcing everyone to smile and wave red flags at gunpoint. A large minority that bids fair to become a plurality of the electorate is a member of an overtly socialist party. The "left-progressive-but-not-actually-socialist" parties that occupy the center position are forced into compromises with them just to form a government. If there was ever a way out of that particular trap, we're close to it. Neoliberalism is a discredited extremist right-wing fringe position in our political ecosystem, which is precisely the kind of condition where democracy is unfriendly to neoliberalism.

Second of all, the Commonwealth is in such a condition of poverty that there's nowhere to go but up; economic development that is not exploitative can nevertheless improve the standard of living. Who, exactly, is being exploited when we refound the school system and distribute farming machinery to the forcibly re-peasant-ized rural population of our territory?

2)30% chance of Farming failing is entirely too high for something that can have both economic and political consequences.
What do you do if it fails just as winter is closing in and the Welland Canal is closing for the year? The Mississippi is not currently an alternativ, and we lack an Atlantic port.
To be fair, it is reasonable to suppose that our government and food-shipping apparatus will be counting and will be able to import food as a precaution. It will become apparent that the harvest isn't coming in before the point at which it becomes impossible to import food via the St. Lawrence Seaway.

With that said, my own preferred plan spends two points on farming equipment because I consider agriculture to be an important priority for our nation in general.

This is not an area where we should be striving to do the minimum necessary to avoid starvation. We should consider agriculture as an opportunity to secure our state, develop viable export industries to bring in more foreign exchange and import capital goods, and to make our neighbors dependent on us rather than the other way around.
 
Last edited:
The new Czar has already withdrawn his support for the project; it's highly unlikely that he'll mess with it more. Not impossible, but unlikely. It seems as though he did that specifically as a "fuck you" gesture to us, not because of a general desire to "fuck everyone" disrupt the CAF (and enrage the global community and invite immediate negative comparisons to his father).

Furthermore, note that this is done to green our power grid; only by spending 3 AP do we even begin to get actual expansions. Worst case, we can just continue with coal-fired power plants until we find a new sugar daddy willing to help us.

"Tribes" is an... interesting choice of words. I oppose the doubling on gunboats simply because we have so much else going on; it would be better to invest in diplomacy to resolve crises and establish our regional hegemony.

Yeah, but we've been pretty big overachievers on some other fronts (Illinois Woman Claws Victorian Air Force Out of Heavens, Makes Entire Victorian Army Group Fall, Begging For Mercy, Heard By Their Brethren Who Are Powerless To Save Them).

I think we can take a little hemming and hawing about a local conference mediation without suffering too much damage to our reputation. Furthermore, overachieving on the agricultural front lets us export agricultural products instead of importing (good for our AP budget).

Remember that reputation matters, but so do physical goods.

No, because overachieving on agricultural equipment has impact. That's what happened last time- our action overachieved by enough that we bought a considerable grace period of not having to worry about food security, despite our imports being totally cut off during the Detroit War.

The point is, doubling down on that action is done not just to avoid crisis, but to court the beneficial consequences of overachieving, because that will in turn translate into more mechanized agricultural productivity that is in turn the underpinnings of our nation's economic development.

See also @huhYeahGoodPoint 's posts on the subject.

Ehh.

That's a respectable point and I'm going to think about it, but I'm not entirely sure I agree about the urgency- especially since More Gunboats is the kind of action where half-succeeding is relatively likely to mean "you get half your boats," which means we're at least trending upwards as the turn rolls on rather than sitting still.

Opening up a ton of projects only helps us so much if we don't have more AP to do anything about them with. My own plan, as I recall, has double AP on Census Office, but I'm still prepared to accept it taking two turns- note that there IS a roughly 50% chance of it taking two turns anyway if we spend two AP on it, because there's only about a 49% chance of both dice succeeding.

Oh yeah that's important. It bears remembering that nothing can get to us from "far foreign" or even over much of the Lakes at all from, like... roughly November/December through March/April.

I think you're misapplying your salt.

First of all, the Commonwealth's current population is about as socialism-positive as you are ever likely to see without forcing everyone to smile and wave red flags at gunpoint. A large minority that bids fair to become a plurality of the electorate is a member of an overtly socialist party. The "left-progressive-but-not-actually-socialist" parties that occupy the center position are forced into compromises with them just to form a government. If there was ever a way out of that particular trap, we're close to it. Neoliberalism is a discredited extremist right-wing fringe position in our political ecosystem, which is precisely the kind of condition where democracy is unfriendly to neoliberalism.

Second of all, the Commonwealth is in such a condition of poverty that there's nowhere to go but up; economic development that is not exploitative can nevertheless improve the standard of living. Who, exactly, is being exploited when we refound the school system and distribute farming machinery to the forcibly re-peasant-ized rural population of our territory?

No, I'm not actually salty. I unironically believe this is how Social Democracies have to work, and I've resigned myself to the government we control. And I gave advice that is no shit what would be Chicago's best bet for prosperity.

If we try to half ass Social Democracy our national bourgeoisie will start looking to the far right to restore their profits, or international capital will end up owning our asses in an unwilling transition to a Comprador regime.

If you build your Republic on a heirarchy of haves and have nots, *someone has to be the have not* and it's best for your Republic to externalize the have nots (the other favored option is racializing the internal have nots, which is bad)

This is a long term structural issue that has an easy short term answer that costs us less than nothing, and in fact also benefits Chicago in the short term. It's only on the generational scale that the bill comes due (witness Boomers vs Millenials)
 
Last edited:
Boy, you got real pessimistic about how long the peace treaty with Victoria would last all of a sudden - what happened to the Vicks needing at least five years to recover instead of *checks notes* being totally willing to violate the core of the peace treaty and kick off the war again inside of six months?
I mean, come on - obvious fearmongering is obvious.
Little Nicky happened. And his, and I quote: "We will re-commit to our allies abroad."

We are definitely not going to restart the war even if Blackwell breaks the peace treaty if there's a brigade of VDV sitting in Augusta or Boston for a couple years, the way there are currently 4300 Russian troops in Syria backing Assad. We cant afford that sort of escalation.
Our options will be limited to grumbling and imposing economic sanctions of our own and covert ops.

I still expect the Vics to be flatout incapable of offensive military operations for a hard minimum of five years even if the war ends tomorrow. Too much damage, especially after what the Crusaders are documented to have pulled. But hostile economic measures are significantly more survivable for them if they have fullthroated Russian economic support.

Which is what I think is being foreshadowed.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not actually salty. I unironically believe this is how Social Democracies have to work, and I've resigned myself to the government we control. And I gave advice that is no shit what would be Chicago's best bet for prosperity.
Your defeatism is extremely harmful to the proletarian struggle, comrade AKuz. This is not the politically approved party line!
 
Little Nicky happened. And his, and I quote: "We will re-commit to our allies abroad."
Yeah, no, you don't get to pretend this is a pre/post Russian power struggle change in circumstances.

Five years is the hard minimum I can see it taking assuming everything goes their way and Little Nicky ensures the resources are always available.
It will almost certainly take longer
This is you saying 5 years is the hard minimum.

When a mortal enemy is sitting on your main arterial to the international market?
A basic essential like food is something you dont want to give them the means to disrupt as political leverage, or just to assuage their pride. Or even just a fuckup. Thats one thing I'm fairly sure both Johnson and Blackwell are in agreement on.

And that doesnt even consider the fact that the Welland Canal and the Seaway closes during winter because the Lakes freeze.

You would have a point about using imports as a backstop if we controlled a port on the Atlantic, or if the Mississippi was already secured.
Neither is currently true.
This is you, 12 hours later and not even on a different page, claiming that Victoria closing the Welland Canal this winter was not only plausible but likely. You don't get to talk out of both sides of your mouth and claim that Victoria will be both incapable of taking offensive operations while also saying they'll start a war by closing the Seaway - they are mutually exclusive conditions.
 
[ ] Farming Equipment, Part 2: Burns's initiative to supply the worst-off with the best you can make fed your population once. With a renewed surge of refugees, you should be able to do that again. There's a wide gulf between those you supplied and the best of the best. Take advantage of better industry and a more integrated refugee population since then, and build for them. DC: 30. Successes Required: 2 (1 of 2 complete). AP Limit: 3. Effect: Subsidize the construction and distribution of additional farming equipment for your new least-advantaged rural population, shoring up your food situation and preempting another starvation crisis.
This is not an area where we should be striving to do the minimum necessary to avoid starvation. We should consider agriculture as an opportunity to secure our state, develop viable export industries to bring in more foreign exchange and import capital goods, and to make our neighbors dependent on us rather than the other way around.
We are not at risk of starving if we fail to complete it this turn. We might be at risk if we fail next turn, but it'll say if that ends up being the case, and I'd be willing to invest more to ensure success if so.

But the Census Office is inextricably bound up with the Refugee crisis, and right now that is one of the key issues facing us. 2 AP might not give us a majority chance of 1 turning it, but it does give us a hell of a good chance of getting at least 1 success, and I'm of the opinion we need all the help we can get ensuring the Refugee crisis doesn't get worse.

It's a nice idea to think of overinvesting in Farming to get a boost later on, but we have more immediate issues to deal with, especially since I'd argue against considering completing Part 2 to be the bare minimum.
 
uju32 said:
Five years is the hard minimum I can see it taking assuming everything goes their way and Little Nicky ensures the resources are always available.
It will almost certainly take longer
This is you saying 5 years is the hard minimum.
uju32 said:
When a mortal enemy is sitting on your main arterial to the international market?
A basic essential like food is something you dont want to give them the means to disrupt as political leverage, or just to assuage their pride. Or even just a fuckup. Thats one thing I'm fairly sure both Johnson and Blackwell are in agreement on.

And that doesnt even consider the fact that the Welland Canal and the Seaway closes during winter because the Lakes freeze.

You would have a point about using imports as a backstop if we controlled a port on the Atlantic, or if the Mississippi was already secured.
Neither is currently true.
This is you, 12 hours later and not even on a different page, claiming that Victoria closing the Welland Canal this winter was not only plausible but likely. You don't get to talk out of both sides of your mouth and claim that Victoria will be both incapable of taking offensive operations while also saying they'll start a war by closing the Seaway - they are mutually exclusive conditions.
1)Yes, I stand by that. 5 years still is the minimum for any sort of offensive military action.
That does not mean that they are incapable of homeland defense.

Expeditionary warfare is both difficult and expensive when you have to travel 300km across nonexistent roads to get to your opponents borders.
Induced delays along the Seaway, fuckery with some kinds of cargo but not others? Are all arguably hostile acts, but none of them is a military action.
There is a reason why Mississippi access is a pillar of our foreign policy going forward.


2) Read the post you are quoting. Again. I said, and implied, the risk was unacceptably high.
The state of Victoria is our enemy, regardless of which particular faction is king of the hill. I do not trust them to keep from interfering if we were literally in a position where we are importing food to prevent literal starvation.

Famine has long been a weapon of war, and it would be too tempting a target for the people who thought condemning 70,000 of their own soldiers to a "glorious" death instead of surrender was a reasonable decision.

Blackwell would do it if thought he'd get away with it, or if pressured by the same dipshits that made him throw hundreds of thousands of militia at trenches and artillery in Buffalo. The Crusaders could come out of the Appalachians and do it. A faction of renegade Inquisitors could do it; they are at civil war, with arms sloshing around, and sourcing enough explosives to damage canal locks is easier than it used to be.

Victoria is controlled by Hard Men Doing Hard Things While Hard.
I'm not inclined to trust.


3) The St Lawrence Seaway Closes. Every. Winter. Varying dates, depending on the weather, but this is is a normal occurrence.
The Welland Canal only just opened on March 19 this year. Montreal-Lake Ontario section on March 22.
The Soo Locks on March 25.

A shipping season is historically anything from 220-ish to 290-ish days, translating to 7-10 months.
2-5 months when its closed. Typically 3 months recently IRL; no idea if the Vics can maintain that.

The immediate problem with the plan of using imports as a contingency is that a late surge in refugee intake or immigrant flows cannot be compensated for with emergency food imports when the St Lawrence Seaway is closed. An excess of domestic production on the other hand allows for the maintenance of excess food stocks as a buffer for precisely that reason without additional expenditures.


4)Victoria closing the Welland Canal =/= Victoria starting a war.
They (probably) wont start a war without closing the Welland Canal. But they could close the Welland Canal when they can afford to take the economic hit and sit behind their borders and nothing military happens unless we choose to escalate it.

There is precedent for this in international law.
The Egyptians blocked the Suez Canal between 1967 and 1975, after the Six Day War. Nobody declared war on them for it.
Before that, they closed the canal for almost a year in 1956-1957, when the French-British-Israelis tried to seize it. Nobody said shit then either.

EDIT
Hell, if they wanted to be sneaky, they'd damage it one dark night, "discover" the damage and close it for repairs for several months.
Or a year. Treaty has not been breached by all appearances. Prove its deliberate.
 
Last edited:
Voting is open
Back
Top