Choice of Rebels Part 1 WIP thread

Hosted Games Works In Progress
4714

As requested, I am including playtesting numbers for Chapter 2 and I hope this will not be used to make Chapter 2 harder. In Chapter 3, I did notice that Linos was a much more interesting conversationalist as a hostage than as a guest. As a guest, Linos just spouts religious drivel, but as a hostage discusses Sarcifer and knowing that Theurgy is neither a gift of Angels nor Xaos. I think Horion is understandably unwilling to discuss the workings of Theurgy as a hostage but Linos’s reaction is unfortunate. I only noticed these differences when attempting to replay just Chapter 3 and I was not given the option to treat Horion and Linos as anything but hostages. I finally got to meet Suzanne/Simon on my noble MC and that addition to my MC’s band is definitely a better fit for my MC than the alternative so thank you :grin:.

You’re an aristo who chose to steal from the Hegemony.

Your morale is 389.
Your notoriety is 144.
Your anarchy is 19.
You have 324 followers, 1621 drachems, and 90 arms.
Your credibility with aristos is 209, helots 236, merchants 250, priests 135, and yeomen 225.
Your followers’ leadership is: Breden 22, Zvad 3, Elery 2, Radmar 2]

You’re a helot who chose to steal from the Hegemony.

Your morale is 379.
Your notoriety is 144.
Your anarchy is 19.
You have 314 followers, 1169 drachems, and 90 arms.
Your credibility with aristos is 120, helots 263, merchants 250, priests 135, and yeomen 220.
Your followers’ leadership is: Breden 22, Zvad 3, Elery 2, Radmar 2]

2 Likes
4715

Pffffffft seeing your numbers is seriously discouraging! I was sitting here proudly with my 66 morale, and you just steamrolled all over me with 5 times the morale. All the more reason to be relieved delegating is now a thing.

Interesting that your snob-cred is so high. I don’t really know what effects that stat, other than decreasing it by targeting the nobility in general. Also, I’m glad to see I’m not the only one dumping so much stuff on Breden.

4 Likes
4716

I was under the impression that charisma was vital for getting more food when begging, so Breden led begging for food every week unless needed for something else while my MC personally led the important raids.

I can’t figure out why the amount of wealth the two playthroughs had is so different since I would have sworn they had done essentially the same raids.

It seems neither of us can compete with Zvad, but he may have been less picky than my MCs.

I think it would be helpful whenever talking to the abler about the number of mules assigned to the sick if the abler provided an estimate of the current number of mules needed. Thus far, I think the abler only provides that estimate when Theurges fly over.

I personally would prefer a slight change of wording when allocating rations. Rather than it saying:

I don’t want to make any changes to these rations.

I would prefer the word need instead of want.

1 Like
4717

Please, Havie @Havenstone. Leave this in as a special secret. If you choose a certain choice, or a path, or a last name or something, and you have Zvad co-leading, it gives you like, 9999 money.

Come on. Remember the good old days of cheat codes?

@Herrington I really gotta admit that your love of guns might rival my love of bows! Good show! :slight_smile: I defer to your love of guns… for now!

Oh, I mean that a bow required less maintenance and could also be made, as well as arrows, quivers, etc, from things lying about or caught in traps in the wild. A gun cannot say the same!

2 Likes
4718

See

and

for thoughts on why gunpowder weapons aren’t a thing, and here

for where I said I liked the idea of air rifles in the world.

5 Likes
4719

@Bagelthief

I really gotta admit that your love of guns might rival my love of bows! Good show! :slight_smile: I defer to your love of guns… for now!

Heh. At least you didn’t talk shit about artillery (even though they aren’t that effective in the battlefield until they got lighter, more mobile, and fire canister shot). :stuck_out_tongue:

Oh, I mean that a bow required less maintenance and could also be made, as well as arrows, quivers, etc, from things lying about or caught in traps in the wild. A gun cannot say the same!

Oh I see. Maintenance isn’t really an issue for firearms. Ammunition can be obtained by merely melting lead into molds. Firearms are essentially tubes and aren’t that difficult to make, however you would need a blacksmith and a forge to make one and the metals to make the barrel and lock aren’t found everywhere (the stock is made out of wood and flints to be used for igniting the powder are found everywhere). You’re point stands since we don’t have a blacksmith or forge or the metals. Air rifles are even more complicated because of the fine parts used for the pump.

@Havenstone

After some reading, I’ve been convinced that the phalanx is pretty much unbeatable by anything other than another phalanx or European pike and shot formations in a straight up 1 vs 1 fight. The only ways to beat a phalanx without resorting to a grinding spear or pike push or using massed firepower (not like we can use black powder without Theurges blowing it all up) are to disrupt the formation using terrain or flanking it. And your Phalangites are good combined arms formations.

Guys, we need some really good cavalry.

6 Likes
4720

Presumably Theurgy could aid with creating them, given us a potential edge (in metallurgy) that Austria-Hungary never had.
Though we would first need to become a better theurge for that and employ some decent smiths, like you said.
Still having some guns could help our rebellion tremendously given just how little training they require and the air rifles are at least somewhat effective in taking down theurges, should we face them in greater numbers and/or more often. Also if we had a couple we might have been able to shoot down the theurge blowing up our sick and wounded (everything was going so well too with me managing everything up until that damned theurge raid).
Ugh, I had enough mules and skilled commanders to keep everything going from week 2 onwards this time, only I could never spare them for the sick and wounded (Grr.).

We just need better theurgy, I’ve got my fill of animals with those damned mules, besides I’m pretty sure that cavalry carries notions of aristocracy that I do not want in my rebellion. Also just like with the longbow men I’ll probably never have enough time and money to train and equip enough of them to make any appreciable difference.

If we do need a better army then lets just hope pike and shot can be done with air rifles as well.

3 Likes
4721

I agree with @idonotlikeusernames regarding the cavalry perhaps in the later game it would come up but for now, if we follow the situation, resources are pooled mostly into survival and necessities, how do we hide a whole bunch of horses without proper stables to avoid them from getting sick etc

I do like the choice we were given at the later end of the demo where we choose to share what we know of theurgy (in my game wisardry) having another theurge in a rebellion would be a tremendous help, we were able to set the naos ablaze, fling alastor clubs out, sharpen weapons , levitate people ( with strenous effort) a second theurge would make this ALOT easier against the phalanx , one could fling their weapons and shields out of their hands while the other sharpens our own soldiers weapons etc etc from a slightly more protected or hidden spot

cavalry at this point feels…idk straining to our already critical situation, mules alone would have been a bother to upkeep, unless we have a permanent and proper stronghold i dont see the use of cavalry so soon unless we turn more into like guerilla attackers hit and run sort of thing but its VERY unorganized, have little camps here and there

1 Like
4722

Just a point of clarification - why is it impossible to keep horses but not mules? I’m keeping my opinion on viability to myself for the moment but the argument that you won’t have the ability to keep horses just does not match with the ability to keep mules and other livestock.

1 Like
4723

Ah dang I see your point! my one track mind was going with the logic chain of like necessity, since if memory serves, horses are meant for nobles, meaning we need to raid other nobles or higher classed citizens which are likely more protected, compared to mules which are probably alot more common,

Also i also went with the assumption based on the current conditions of our people, basically living in a wet cold hovel, the presence of mules and its upkeep to shelter, feed and care are already a strain on the group but is considered a necessity so they bare with it. Having the addition of horses purely for cavalry use while struggling with hunger and manpower just doesnt seem to be sensible to me.

Regardless thank you for pointing out my flawed logix x-x

4724

Horses are much more finicky than mules, especially warhorses (unless you want you fierce cavalry riding plow horses. For one thing you have to replace their horseshoes every 2 months or so which requires a forge, secondly you have all of their harness and tack (which isn’t a problem with mules) which require maintenance.

2 Likes
4725

Yes and that’s what makes my mc so possibly nervous about fielding our own “cavalry”, though I agree it likely won’t come up until somewhere near the end of the second game. But I don’t want a bunch of soldiers thinking they’re better than the rest of us and wanting higher pay and fancier uniforms just because they park their ass on an animal while they fight.

@tom Cavalry is likely not an immediate concern but it will, inevitably become one in the future.
Of course my mc is likely to heavily favour guerrilla tactics and irregular warfare in general so he likely won’t need too much “cavalry”.

4726

I’ve grown up among horses and I’m telling you, you don’t need horseshoes off of the concrete. Ever. Thoroughbreds are the finicky ones too, Exmoors and Dartmoors, for example, give no shits.

You don’t need harness and tack either if you want to really get down to it (though warhorses will require armour, obvs). I’ve ridden bareback, bitless and bridleless for years and if I can ride without that I can sure as well use them to carry.

Donkeys are the most stubborn, hard-to-work-with animals. They’re good natured, but not much else. Horses come in many different shapes and sizes. Medieval knights used the same horses for war as farmers did for ploughs until late, where they were crossbred with Andalusians for the high gait and arched neck, which looked better.

Mules are a cross between both horses and donkeys, and being so, they can eat almost anything, overheat less and are less easily spooked than a horse. Hardy, more resistant with more stamina but less stubborn. The best of both worlds, relatively cheap and good for work.

You can, in fact, tack mules, it is possible.

6 Likes
4727

Fascinating! if we imagine the current wilderness our mules will have to live in with our people;wilderness, i hear crack branches from falling off trees, or stepped upon, not to mention whatever local wild life that may contribute.i suppose it would also make them less of a trouble of chasing them back after they galloped off.

They eat almost anything? wow honestly i know very little about these creatures so it kinda amazes me, i suppose in that kind of environment in the game it definitely is alot easier handling a mule for now,

also, pardon my lacking vocab, whats does Tack mean?

4728

This may have been addressed, but if not…on several playthroughs, at a couple different times, I was stopped on storymode with the following error/bug:

bandits line 4376: Invalid expression at char 11, expected no more tokens, found: Close_Parenthesis [)]

4729

@idonotlikeusernames

I don’t see air rifles being produced in massed quantities even then. Austria (it wasn’t Austria-Hungary yet) tried to equip all its soldiers with the Girardoni but quickly found that to be unfeasible. They ended up giving it to sharpshooters instead which is probably how we should do it. Give to those who know how to shoot or specialized anti-theurge units.

Air rifle are still guns so they should still work in pike and shot formations. The problem is that we will not be producing much of the guns. Swiss style pike keils, landsknecht, or early tercios without musketeers could still work.

We just need better theurgy

I was assuming inferiority when it came to theurgy at least in numbers. The ideal in that situation is to have enough anti-theurgy capabilities (whatever they are) to make them a virtual non-factor. The way to decisively defeat Phalangites (with theurgy out of the picture and no real firepower advantage) would be to use cavalry. I just don’t know whether we could afford grinding pike pushes, but as you said training cavalry is expensive.

cavalry carries notions of aristocracy

Not necessarily, landed aristocrats just have an easier time acquiring the horses (by virtue of actually raising them). Alexander’s companion cavalry also included non-nobles, after all. The cavalry I was imagining was more like light cavalry, admittingly. My aristo MC doesn’t have such concerns that your helot MC has in any case :stuck_out_tongue: (he’s more of a FOR SCIENCE! type of guy).

There is something to be said about the notion that you could win a war just by winning sieges and not necessarily winning pitched battles, however.

@Xhandas_Antonidas

Well, actively seeking to engage Phalangites on equal terms and defeat them in decisive battle was always a long-term thing. I never suggested we get cavalry at this point of time, just that we need them.

1 Like
4730

Yes, I know, but mainly due to limits in metallurgy and industrial production capabilities and techniques, plus the cheaper and more competitive alternative of gunpowder weapons.
We don’t know the exact industrial capabilities of the game world yet, seeing as how we live in one of the most backwards and backwoods part of it, so it’s possibly the gameworld tech (techne) and industry have found ways to overcome many of the Issues the Austrians had, or it might not, we’ll just have to wait and see.
But if they can more reliably mass produce it than old Austria I see no reason, given your recent post, why we shouldn’t try for pike and shot.
While sniper units would still be a tremendous help on their own the true power of the gun would lie in its mass adoption and usage due to the fact that they’re decent weapons that are very easy to learn how to use effectively.
In fact it’s so easy even children or my com 0 mc could probably become a semi-decent shot. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

That’s why my mc heavily favours guerrilla warfare, basically we need to avoid being drawn into a “fair fight” at all costs, but given the choice, particularly for a post-rebellion army my mc wouldn’t favour cavalry if there is any other alternative available.

True, but if not for the wealthy citizens (my mc will formally abolish the aristocracy should he prevail) we would need to set up expensive state horse-breeding programmes and ranches with money and space that might be better used for something else.

The operative word here being “included”, cavalry was still dominated by nobles (or at least “noble” officers).

So going for the Dragoons, eh? @Cataphrak will be pleased. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Very true, but like I said, the last thing my mc needs is a bunch of soldiers with an undeserved superiority complex running around.

My mc really is too, he likes science and technology, but unless and until it is at the stage where we can produce (equivalents to) tanks, fighter jets and helicopters, he’ll just have to keep the usage of cavalry to a bare minimum post-rebellion.

But as the the initial point that got this round of discussion started I see no reason why my mc couldn’t adopt an air rifle, or even air pistol, as his backup weapons, instead of a sword or a bow, particularly since he might actually be able to use the gun(s), whereas he’d be woefully incompetent with those other weapons.

Screw sieges, simply control the countryside and use infiltration and starvation to “conquer” the cities, since a siege would mean the need to mass our followers out in the open and camp them in front of a city where they’d be vulnerable to all kinds of shenanigans by theurges and professional soldiers.

2 Likes
4731

@Havenstone

This is probably a stupid question, but do you think you will do a small discussion with Suzanne/Simon de Firiac, or Kala/Kalt like you did with Breden in Ch. 4? Obviously, the subject matter would be different…but I think allowing something could be appropriate.

4 Likes
4732

Totally agree on this.

3 Likes
4733

@idonotlikeusernames

We don’t know the exact industrial capabilities of the game world yet, seeing as how we live in one of the most backwards and backwoods part of it, so it’s possibly the gameworld tech (techne) and industry have found ways to overcome many of the Issues the Austrians had, or it might not, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Agreed.

In fact it’s so easy even children or my com 0 mc could probably become a semi-decent shot.

I think you’d be a danger to both enemy and ally with Com 0, but I get the point. :stuck_out_tongue:

That’s why my mc heavily favours guerrilla warfare, basically we need to avoid being drawn into a “fair fight” at all costs, but given the choice, particularly for a post-rebellion army my mc wouldn’t favour cavalry if there is any other alternative available.

My MC favours initial asymmetric warfare to wear down the enemy while building up his own army. That being said, if he can acquire a state and breathing room without having to faced pitched battle (or ideally any battle) he would take that chance if it isn’t too risky.

I do think there really isn’t any substitute for cavalry (or mounted soldiery of any kind really) until we get tanks and aircraft. They are useful in scouting, skirmishing, hit and run attacks, and shock and delaying actions. You’d be missing out in many tactical or even non-battle related opportunities if you don’t ever use cavalry.

True, but if not for the wealthy citizens (my mc will formally abolish the aristocracy should he prevail) we would need to set up expensive state horse-breeding programmes and ranches with money and space that might be better used for something else.

I do think it’s worth the price. If nothing else it’ll help with logistics, farming, and making nitre beds.

So going for the Dragoons, eh? @Cataphrak will be pleased. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I was thinking more hussars and light lancers, but dragoons are cool too. The only thing better than anti-theurge snipers are mounted anti-theurge snipers. :stuck_out_tongue:

Very true, but like I said, the last thing my mc needs is a bunch of soldiers with an undeserved superiority complex running around.

I think that it is within the realm of practical possibility that you could create a cavalry arm without such a complex or one not dominated by nobles. The Mongolian tribes’ soldiers were formed by anyone who had a horse which was most of the population and they operated in a meritocracy while Roman cavalry was dominated by aristocrats because they actually had the horses (Roman cavalry often played the second fiddle compared to the legionnaires and didn’t seem all that prestigious but were still important).

he’ll just have to keep the usage of cavalry to a bare minimum post-rebellion

Bare minimum may still mean a lot.

But as the the initial point that got this round of discussion started I see no reason why my mc couldn’t adopt an air rifle, or even air pistol, as his backup weapons, instead of a sword or a bow, particularly since he might actually be able to use the gun(s), whereas he’d be woefully incompetent with those other weapons.

Agreed.

Screw sieges, simply control the countryside and use infiltration and starvation to “conquer” the cities

Well, you could say that’s still “sieging”, since it practically does what a siege does just with no bombardments or assaults. My point there was that you could still win a war without winning majority of your battles if you successfully control territory or achieve your war goals.

2 Likes