Criptfield, I have only one overall thing to sya to that.
Why are you being such a pathetic jerkass?
Why must you even argue with my fluff, say that I must be a terribly ruler, and constantly denouce me even though it will not effect your victory at all?
1. Fluff is fun, fluff is entertaining, fluff separates this from just being a dry strategy game. But fluff is just decoration to cold, hard crunch. Fluff can always be interpreted as being propaganda or wishful thinking, only the crunch is undeniable. He argues with your fluff because it appears to contradict your crunch. My advice here is to base your fluff on the crunch, and always keep in mind that the crunch is what matters.
2. Your crunch reveals you as a poor ruler for three good reasons, all related to your failure to protect your people.
i. Your failure of diplomacy attracted the ire of other players from a very early stage whilst robbing you of sympathetic allies. My advice here is to learn how to avoid boasting, how to hold your tongue when what you say might undermine your position, and what sort of things will undermine your position when you say them.
ii. Your failure of observation meant that you were unable to consider the most likely, real threats (Taricus and Cript) and anticipate how quickly they would be able to assault your territories and with what force. My advice here is to pay attention to the actions of others. Turn results are, after all, publicly displayed.
iii. Your failure of preparation; even having been strongly hinted that an attack was likely to come and that you should shore up your defences, you neglected preparations in favour of other expenditures. With even one more spearman in each of your territories you would have forced Cript to delay his attack for perhaps two more turns, buying you additional time to prepare and manoeuvre. My advice here is that for the territory/territories remaining in your possession, you cease raging at your conqueror and accept your losses, then work on rebuilding them and defending that position. Rebuild your palace and purchase some resource-independent industry techs (on credit) and Infrastructure II from anyone willing to sell them. This will give you two infrastructure slots to exploit, and with the high basic income derived from your palace (a base of at least £500/turn) the multiplicative bonuses to income of two separate manufacturing industries should give you generous enough returns to invest in serious defensive structures (especially now that Keeps are public domain thanks to Pillow Killer) and even contemplate horizontal or vertical expansion in future
Worked example to the above: If your palace is the only source of basic income, you have a basic income of £500/turn. With a Glassmaker's Kiln and an Artist's Studio, you gain a bonus of 84% on top of that (also producing two trade goods for the global marketplace). You will thus have a not unreasonable income of £920/turn, considering you will only have one territory sourcing your income. Since both those buildings can be improved to a third tier, research would allow you to improve your holdings further. The total cost of starting up in this way would be £2400; £1000 for the palace, £700 for the glassmaker's kiln and £700 for the artist's studio. You would recoup your losses in 3 turns with a profit of £360.
Even if you have no money to start with, someone could loan you £2400 at 13.5% per turn and you'd be able to repay them within 4 turns. To make it worth their while versus just spending the money building farms, though, they would want a return of 22% per turn, to be repaid over 7 turns and leaving you with a balance of £504 at the end.3. You are too easily riled up. Cript is following Sun Tzu's excellent advice that if your enemy is of choleric temper, provoke him and bait him into making poor decisions. By constantly denouncing and provoking you, you are kept off balance.My strongest advice to you here is to learn a little humility, or at least the golden value of silence. Constantly broadcasting your plans and intentions only gives your enemies more information with which to make plans against you. If what you say will not advance your strategic aims, say nothing at all.
Why are you constantly saying that I wasted my chance, and that my downfall was nothing but bad leadership, and had nothing to do with outside influence, mistaken info, and simple bad luck?
4. Again, a lack of observation, preparation and restraint have been the core of your downfall. Nevertheless it is not the case that it had nothing to do with outside influence. The raiders on your caravans were not my direct idea; normally I grant a sort of quiet reprieve to a player's first caravans. I had however previously confirmed to several players in earlier turns (via PM) that it was possible for them to incite raiders and bandits against other players. I have now passed this responsibility over to CyberGenesis' raider faction, and will make it a feature of technology to raise NPC raiders.
Why do you insist on aruging even when I am not seeking any kind of fight or conflict?
5. Your belligerent general behaviour has set plenty of precedent. But again, mostly it is because you are easily riled and keeping you that way gives Cript a strategic advantage. See my above advice on learning humility and restraint.
Why do you keep yelling that everything I say is a fallcy and bad?
In short, why are you being such a pathetic jerkass?
You are repeating yourself. See above.
In other news, back to working on the turn post. Should have it up tonight, unless I decide to do any major mechs changes or development. We're likely to see the penalty Loyalty cost for invasions go in, but I'm probably going to make it income dependent for the territory (the higher the income, the more vested interests you're disturbing with the invasion, so the higher the rate of unrest). This won't be a problem for diplomatic takeovers.
I may also adjust the loyalty math to allow negation to loyalty penalties* for having large numbers of troops (maybe 1 point per 3 or 4 troops in a region?) in the region that can subdue the more riotous members of the populace.
*Rather than loyalty bonuses - this just stops unrest happening.
Edit: Oh. Ohhhhh. Phantom, I have made a terrible mistake. East Cauldron should have had an income of £120/turn. I'll debit a bonus of £300 to your treasury at the start of next turn to make up for it. You may also wish to reconsider your trading of the region if that's a factor.
Edit 2: I can't believe that took me three quarters of an hour to write, considering how much it may prove to be a waste.
Author
Topic: Fiefdoms @ War: Fluff Thread (Read 76150 times)