|
Hashim posted:The Merchants, if they gain power, are able to declare a war for Moroccan colonies. Not sure if it's the best thing to do in our current situation, though, at least not when the vast majority of the new world is still free for colonisation. A fair point. It might be worth refocusing on South America.
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
 I go with the Merchants! In spite of all reason and sense, it would seem based on our illustrious history that corruption runs rampant when the Taifas are in power as opposed to the people who's foremost concern is to make money. It boggles the mind! Only the Merchants can bring stability and order to this divided land, and refocus our efforts on where true power lies: The New World.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Out of idle curiosity what Trait does our extremely legitimate and most worthy Sultan have?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Hashim posted:Intricate Webweaver... Hahahahaha Hahahahaha
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Mikl posted:
On the other hand, the country is wracked with revolts 24/7, Qadis is in desperate need of repairs, and the New World is slipping out of our fingers due to the baboons in the New Taifas squandering wealth immeasurable. We have no time for a civil war over the Sultan's esteemed mother, and that is no less than the consequences of the path you are suggesting!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Ralepozozaxe posted:
Oh, yes? And what would you have us do? Bend knee to the so called Caliphate? Because they have made their intentions clear! Let us roll out the welcoming carpet for them across all of North Africa!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
catlord posted:gently caress, we're so close to finishing up claiming the rest of Iberia. The last sultan made a right mess of things right at the end, we just need that little bit more. I'm torn, we need the stability, which makes me think Merchants, but I'm thinking that either the Taifas or the Loyalists will finally let us reach our goal of total peninsular control. I feel like at this juncture making that last grab could cost us everything. The boat is drat near coming apart. I feel you though. We're so close 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
Frionnel posted:We really should pick Humanist as our next idea group. We really should with this situation we've got. And that's why the Merchants need to win.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Snipee posted:This is still a less optimal choice especially for the games after EU4 though. It's a bandaid for a situation that requires surgery. Truly, a less optimal choice in this LP???? Did you miss the CK2 segment or what 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Soup du Jour posted:
Here here!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
I am proposing the Stepping Stone Act. Instead of focusing on the continental rivers, let us leapfrog from our islands to the landmass directly beyond them - Central America, and make that our next colonial priority. Captain Oblivious fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Jun 10, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:I'm a little biased but I think this is worth considering re: the river act. Seriously. I admit I made the mistake of being distracted by the rivers as well, but I owned up and proposed the Stepping Stone Act to make up for it. Vote for the Stepping Stone Act! Central America has Gold, God, and Glory!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Soup du Jour posted:Colonizing the rivers is more narratively interesting, creates more future Andalusi successor states, and it's not like the Majlis voting is all about playing optimally anyway. We went a solid century without converting all the land we conquered, after all. On the other hand, Central America in this timeline is full of actual Native empires and South America and North America are comparatively empty. In this case, the optimal play is actually also the more narratively interesting play because it puts us in more direct contact with actual players.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
 Seriously look at this map. See where all the interesting poo poo is? It's in and around Central America! Don't you want to neighbor the great Polynesian Californian state??? Of course you do. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Only thing I'd say Hashim is to delete my vote from the Riverine Colonization Act, since I abandoned that to advocate for Stepping Stone.
Captain Oblivious fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Jun 10, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:I strongly suggest our Merchant compatriots focus on taking all the islands, not the mainland. If the Fxxers act passes along with one of the mainland acts, we can do both.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
Hashim posted:So I started playing the next update... Truly won't someone think of the poor Moroccans, they're such good Muslims! 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Mountaineer posted:"We should attack Morocco and take their poo poo." I mean, they literally allied France first. That was what started this whole thing. They joined forces with the premier Christian power out of nowhere, before any of that. Why there be so many Morocoo apologists in the Majlis? Are you folks truly loyal to the Jizrunids?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:You idiots literally made us turn down an alliance with them. And how useful would an alliance with them have been at that time, precisely? We still had a large amount of Iberia left to reconquer, allying Morocco at that time would have been at best useless (if we opted not to attack the powers in Iberia subordinate to France) by virtue of blunting our ability to act, and at worst actively counter productive when we did it anyway and they chose France over us!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Wouldn't bending knee to the Caliph just sap our income and gain us nothing? At our distance, it's not like they're going to be a useful military ally or meaningfully come to our defense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Oh man, if only someone had foreseen that going to war with the Almoravids would be a bad idea, and result in Al-Andalus being caught in a two front war. Truly a shame. I guess we're Poland now. Supporting We need to focus.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
everydayfalls posted:This is bad and you should feel bad for suggesting it! Seriously Ulema. Listen to this man. Make amends with Morocco by all means but acknowledging the so called Caliph costs us much for no discernible benefit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
Mountaineer posted:I propose we secure an alliance with Mali. They might be willing to help attack Morocco, so I think it's worth pursuing. While they are unlikely to be much help in any of our other wars, it can't hurt to broaden our alliance network.  I support this measure, for Soup Du Jours proposal is redundant with several points of Rodyle's bill and we need every advantage we can get against Morocco. We cannot gently caress this up. This is our last chance to get the power to survive the big blue blob.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Frionnel posted:Nevermind i was wrong then! I support this act! All who dwell in the borders of our glorious Sultanate should think of themselves first and foremost as Andalusians!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Actually, could we get a detailed look at the state of
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Honestly I kind of want New England to do okay for itself. Literal monarchy in exile 13 colonies is hilarious/adorable. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
The League of Merchants The New World is where our eyes must turn.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
Were their Carribean holdings among the colonies that rebelled? Because if so why aren't we obsessing over that The Carribean trade node is out economic backbone. We should be striving to fortify our control over it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:
Supporting this I do not understand this movement to undermine this act in favor of the Bazaar. Because it would make us "like the Taifas"? They're independent colonies ripe for the taking you fools! Why on earth would we not want to solidify our control over the Carribean that has been our lifeblood through the darker times?!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Because every Merchant government that tried to be warmongers has sucked. Do you grasp basic concepts like "circumstances" and "resources". Is it, in fact, conceivable to you that attacking independent undefended colonies might be rather a bit easier than fighting Morocco and France simultaneously?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
B - The Majlis
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Yeah I get that. And I get why the Taifas complained so much about the last change in ruling faction. I mean I've been playing Merchants from the start and I see the other side of this: Merchants get enough members to rule, and then they start doing things they're not well suited to, like wars of conquest. But these new members come from some other factions in order to start wars as merchants. Here it's especially baffling: if you wanted to go to war with Morocco or whoever, why not just stick with the Taifas? That'd have been fine. There's no point in having a ruling majority if you're going to squander it doing poo poo that your new ruling faction isn't suited for and your old ruling faction was. I think people who are laying this at the feet of the Merchants/Merchants advocating for war didn't really read the update. Picking a fight with the Celts was our real problem, war with Morocco was fine and tenable as a prospect. Then when we had plausible outs from the situation, the Sultan did his level best to sabotage.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Celts or Moroccans, whatever, if you want a war, play Taifas. There's a very simple reason to be Merchants while advocating for war. It secures an economic advantage and allows for more extensive colonization as per the rules Hashim has set forth. Being able to colonize as much as possible is ideal in our current situation, and the lack or Taifa military advantages doesn't preclude military action as long as you pick sensible targets. Morocco is not our military peer even with the lack of Taifa bonuses, the Celts are a different story. So yeah that's why Merchants made sense even with an intent to make war.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Hopefully we can eliminate the Ulema entirely since they mostly sided with the Sultan. Their treatment of the Dhimmi mocks the traditions and institutions of Al-Andalus
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Whatever you're doing thread, don't stop. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
AJ_Impy posted:How dare you! The Ulama have been a part of the Majils since the very beginning, and we stand with you now, at your side, even as you try to paint us as the enemy. Your ilk conspired with the mad Sultan to engage in acts illegal and in contravention of the sacred traditions of our nation. Rats fleeing a sinking ship I tell you
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
B That update was exhausting to read. No more. No more. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Snipee posted:Yup. You idiot Merchants deserve this. Don't hurt yourself jumping through all those hoops chief
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
Splitting the Merchants into some kind or Iberian West Indies company focused on colonialism and an internal security/development faction combined with the remnants of the Ulema could work? A populist faction of sorts? I'm not sure.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2017 21:19
|
|