Yes, but "downplay things to avoid costly war" is a less fraught lie than blaming someone who didn't do it. Lies by omission are less problematic for a reason.

Basically this.
I was convinced that we are still in a bad enough situation, that we cannot wait with attacking Black Sheep.
At the same time, blaming WW and not acting on it, would possibly lead to a coup and/or increasing the chances of WW attacking.

And so, although I hate this option, I hate it less than the others.
And the narrative were it to come out later is quite different - "we did not accuse the guilty party to prevent a war we could lose at the time" is a hell of a lot better than "we accused innocents because it was politically convenient".

Edit:
Actually we can blame Western Wall. We should have five Influence to work with and even if we lose one, four Influence is enough to put two on the Mass Levy, one on the Black Sheep demand and the fourth on the Western Wall demand. We split the mass levy between Black Sheep and Western Wall while the regular army and the Banner Companies are either held in reserve if the peace talks are successful or they remain in Greenshore if the peace talks are unsuccessful.

Realpolitik is good and all, but I would rather be honest if we can help it so I'm voting to blame Western Wall for the things they actually did.

[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

Hmmm...
Now I am seriously considering it again.
 
Last edited:
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
...eh fuck it.
One of the things I liked about our civ before the Khan happened, was that we were mostly the good guys and were trying to actually be honest.

Let's roll these dice.

[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
We can't affors a two front war and don't need a CB to attack the WW later.
Actually we can. We can afford to keep up the Mass Levy for at least a decade and we got enough manpower to hit both the Black Sheep and Western Wall whilst keeping a significant amount of forces in reserve. The Ymaryn Empire might be weaken, but we have recovered a fair bit and we are still a superpower. We can afford to take on Western Wall and Black Sheep at the same time, even if we only keep the former busy while we take out the later.

This is the benefit of picking the Core at the start and surviving the Collapse. We kept a lot of the power of the Old Ymaryn Empire and now we can bring it to bear because we have spent the last few years preparing to do so.
[X] Blame Nobody, the culprits are a mystery. (Moderate prestige and influence loss.)
We can actually do it right and I personally think we should.
 
Last edited:
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

Voting for this for three reasons. First, I really don't like the idea of Western Wall getting away with this. Second, I don't like the idea of tainting the reborn Ymaryn Empire with political maneuvers of that nature so early on when it's not essential. But thirdly?

Thirdly, I really think that the moment we DoW on the Black Sheep and not Western Wall at the same time, Western Wall is going to realise it's do or die and invade us. After all, they have to know that the Ymaryn Empire is being driven by their populace to reunify the entire Old Empire. And they also have to know that right now, the only two lands that aren't held by the reborn empire are the Black Sheep on the Thunder Plateau... and themselves.

They also have to know exactly how dangerous the Ymaryn Mass Levy is. After all, they've got extensive historical knowledge and can do a lesser version of it themselves. So once the Black Sheep get crushed, which will likely be a serious trial but possible... Well, there's nothing distracting the entire empire from coming for them. They can't stop the entire empire coming for them on the best of days without constant miracles. It's highly unlikely for that to happen.

So if it looks like they do nothing now and get crushed by the full attention of the empire later, or do something now and maybe either conquer the heartlands of the empire or at least significantly weaken them... Which do you think they'd do? Remember, we already know that it'll take at least five years to crush the Black Sheep. That's five years in which the majority of our army is on the other side of the nation from the Western Wall border.
 
Last edited:
I have my concerns, but ah, screw it.

[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

Maximum REEEEEEE!!!!!
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

This is acceptable to me. We can hold ground vs the western wall while we push into BS.

Worst case they decide to invade us while our back is turned anyway, regardless of what we do here.
 
If we're going to war two powers at a time. Which one do we want to send our general first?

Should we spend time mopping up WW as quickly as we could and then turn our attention to the Black Sheep?
 
Though you guys are not seeing the nightmare chain of events.

Stymyr sees us war dec WW and decides to delay their peace seeing as they see things having a turn in their favor. We get caught not in a two front war, but in a three with our banner companies holding Greenshores, 300k troops holding the line with the Western Wall, and the bulk of our troops blitzing the Black Sheep as fast as they can before one of the other fronts gives.

It lies within the relm of theoretically possible to pull off, but anything going wrong would mean we take a serious injury like losing greenshore again or having our core occupied.

And of course when something DOES happen, our rival the Khem attacks.
 
If we're going to war two powers at a time. Which one do we want to send our general first?

Should we spend time mopping up WW as quickly as we could and then turn our attention to the Black Sheep?
Black Sheep. We can afford to take time reclaiming Western Wall because there is no time limit on how soon we have to retake it. Thunder Plateau needs to be retaken as soon as possible.
 
Black Sheep. We can afford to take time reclaiming Western Wall because there is no time limit on how soon we have to retake it. Thunder Plateau needs to be retaken as soon as possible.
Well, eventually the WW will expand too far into Ukraine and taking it will overextend us into a nightmare of rebelious hinterlands, but that's neither here nor there. We can, in theory, simply retake the historic Ymaryn lands and cut the hinterlands into an over agrocultural rump state without an infrastructual capital.
 
Last edited:
Well, eventually the WW will expand too far into Ukraine and taking it will overextend us into a nightmare of rebelious hinterlands, but that's neither here nor there. We can, in theory, simply retake the historic Ymaryn lands and cut the hinterlands into an over agrocultural rump state without an infrastructual capital.
When we retook Tinshore, we were able to split off the Tin Tribes, so we've already got the precedent for just releasing the land the WW conquered.

Plus, even in the "defensive" position, we'll still have 300,000 conscripts on the border. WW devoting troops to expansion means not sending those troops to hold the border themselves.
 
Though you guys are not seeing the nightmare chain of events.

Stymyr sees us war dec WW and decides to delay their peace seeing as they see things having a turn in their favor. We get caught not in a two front war, but in a three with our banner companies holding Greenshores, 300k troops holding the line with the Western Wall, and the bulk of our troops blitzing the Black Sheep as fast as they can before one of the other fronts gives.

It lies within the relm of theoretically possible to pull off, but anything going wrong would mean we take a serious injury like losing greenshore again or having our core occupied.

And of course when something DOES happen, our rival the Khem attacks.

Our banner companies, army, and existing levy are holding Greenshore.
 
Last edited:
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

Well, the devil you know and all that...
 
[X] Blame Western Wall. (Revanchists strengthened. Large prestige and influence loss if casus belli against Western Wall is not pursued.)

Fey mood time?
FEY MOOD TIME!!!
 
Back
Top