I was wondering about that actually. Most of the ethical debates have labored under the assumption that it’s blood or nothing.
Hey! This is my first time commenting anything here (literally made this account to ask questions in this thread,), first wanted to share that like probably most people here I appreciate the awesome world that you’ve been building and really admire your dedication to keeping up with questions fans of your work have for you.
So now on to said Question a Fan of Your Work Has for You.
I’m curious about the ramifications of the final battle strategy choice in game one, specifically the ‘Evasion’ route. I’ve seen discussion here about how a straight battle victory shakes the rim and the rest of Shayard more (likely increasing anarchy), and provides a bigger embarrassment to the Archon. And elsewhere in the thread I’ve seen some answers from you that hint that the ‘Disperse’ route provides important connections to a broader helot base, can help begin to plant seeds of whatever you’re doing with religion to a broader populace, etc.
So, if you’re ok answering this, what are the effects of taking the ‘Evasion’ route? Both on people’s general perception of the rebellion in comparison to the other strategies, and it’s broader effects? Is there any distinct “benefit” that comes from this strategem, like the other two? Or in short, what differentiates it in terms of broader implications compared to ‘Battle’ and ‘Disperse’ routes?
(Also, as a side question, does the number of solders/theurges you end up killing have any effects down the road in game 2 (or beyond) in the evasion route?)
From a guerrilla war sense, evasion is the most practical. You preserve the maximum number of your troops, fight no pitched battle which is unfavorable to you, force the enemy army to retreat in political disgrace, and it keeps your band together as a fighting force rather than splitting it up amongst the camps.
If you are truly min-maxing and can wipe out the army with relatively little effort, then taking the battle is superior, but otherwise from a purely military standpoint Evasion is the best strategy.
To clarify - operationally, evasion is the best strategy.
Winning the battle, however, is more useful for achieving your strategic goals.
@apple Can you send the Discord link once again?
It has expired.
Like my accompanying milk.
That should be a permanent link, for anyone who wants it.
ADAT we kicked off one of the first discussions of nonviolent paths in XoR: Choice of Rebels Part 1 WIP thread - #2502 by Havenstone
The state of your army at the end of Uprising decides what you accomplish in Stormwright, not the state of a 500-1000 Hegemonic soldiers out of the tens of thousands that will be attempting to crush the Rim Commotion. If anything, it will make the Hegemony concentrate forces on your HEAVILY DEPLETED army instead of garrisons or other rebel groups, since you humiliated it in battle. Consider the chance of defeating 7000 well-prepared Phalangites fighting your 100 original experienced rebels + 2500 new recruits compared to 3000 badly prepared phalangites vs 300 original experienced rebels +1000 new recruits
The Battle isnt just about killing Phalangites; its also about decisively removing a substantial Hegemonic force from the Rim so that our rebellion can operate more freely and with less discretion in the future. We cant do that with several hundred Phalangites and Theurges still at large in the region and ready for a second go at any time.
Whatever force the Hegemony sends to crush our rebels next, they wont be able to muster it up in a day. Its gonna take time for an army of any size to be organized and transported to the Rim, by which time we’d have had plenty of opportunities to shore up our position and even the odds through less militant means
And even more in Metropolis. The question of how the Archon will split her forces between military responses to the Rim, Sojourn, and the Cabelites will be one you have a chance to affect–but the outcome of the Uprising battle will be a key factor.
The battle will also affect whether the Outer Rim is dominated by Pelematou or Keriatou, and whether the Mourinatou of Rimmersford are granted special powers and a Phalangite garrison.
That army has already returned to the garrison, and again, if you defeat it, then the next army they send will be significantly bigger, not smaller, than otherwise. If your goal is to inflict as much pain on the Hegemony as possible, then go ahead. If you are actually trying to keep your rebels strong and alive for the power vacuum of Omphalos and even Metropolis and Stormwright, then the single best thing you can do is to NOT defeat the enemy. Even in Stormwright, defeating the Archon’s army greatly increases Irduin’s unity, so you will have a much harder time causing a rebellion there without exposing yourself
Retreat works for a charismatic mc, who can keep up recruitment even without a win. It has never really worked for mine however and the only other option is keeping Breden alive but that leads to the dumbest strategy of them all, going back to the helot camps, which is admitting you’re cattle and deserve to be there as well as ceding way too much control to Breden. So winning that battle is the best strategy my mc has, it puts his rebellion on the map and seems to be a better driver for recruitment than a failed retreat or going back to the helot camps where you will be at the complete mercy of the nobles, theurges and the harrowers again.
Being able to defeat the Hegemony forces might also help with gaining allies later on. I guess we can see the effects of the various strategies better when the author has finished the rebellion management sections in the second game.
Look, my MC just needs to become famous so that the One True King/Queen wants to recruit them.
Everybody already know who you are. Even before the battle, you are blamed for murdering the Archon’s cousin (except when you really do kill him, but hide his body), and the Archon has personally ordered that hundreds of soldiers march into the Rim to destroy your army. The One True King would try to recruit you even if you lost.
Edit: Oh yeah, and you also caused a rebellion in a DISTRICT’S CAPITAL
Going back to the camps is likely the smartest strategy, at least at the end of book 1 with the info at hand. Militarily, the MC’s army cannot inflict meaningful damage on the Hegemony in Shayard at the end of book 1. Its only positive effect is undermining Hegemonic legitimacy and causing it to expend political capital. Having a single main army group also centralizes the rebellion. The increased recruitment you would get from winning does not change the strategic balance of military power. If the hegemony got serious and sent enough mages to scour the forest and burn your army out - the rebellion is over.
On the other hand, creating rebel cells throughout the land can increase the recruitment base, ensure the survival of the rebellion through decentralization. The MC can liberate Shayard in 2 ways, by my reckoning. 1. Win such a staggering military victory that local elites, with their armies and money, switch sides 2. Cause such widespread helot (and potentially yeoman, religious, or merchant) consciousness and resistance to the current order (through class, nationalistic, or religious impulses) that Shayard’s powerbrokers do not have enough resources to effectively restore economic and political order.
#2 is much more feasible than #1. #1 is only considerable because this is a game and we got a miracle stroke of luck that Cerlota learned to create storms - which wasn’t known at the conclusion of game 1. #2 is best served by going back to the camps, and thus #2 was the smartest choice at time of game 1’s conclusion
As I’ve mentioned, though, the strategic rather than military implications of a rebel victory favor #1 because it is putting the Archon in political trouble.
If the Hegemony’s beaten, then Calea (who is a potential ally if you’re not @idonotlikeusernames) can pass the blame and the Keriatou retain power. The Cabelites and Laconniers are inspired and start more shit in their sectors of Shayard. The rebellion turns into a messy fiasco even in Grand Shayard, where the political system is already seizing up because the blood economy has strangled actual economic management. Even the Leilatou start wondering which side they’re on.
It’s entirely realistic that a military success against the invincible Hegemony will set the dominoes moving for a greater victory later.
The least important district out there. Which is why it’s useful for the Archon to send more forces there if you win. Having to send soldiers to the Outer Rim reduces strength levels in more important places.
I’m obviously referring to notoriety level. The higher it is, the more influence the MC is likely to have with other rebel groups and the better the position within other organizations they are likely to be offered.
The main problem with this analysis, is that we aren’t THE rebellion. We’re one of many that are popping up all over the place right now because the Hegemony is in terminal decline. Aekos isn’t going to fall in a few years because of the MC. That would have happened with or without them. What the MC will influence is how that happens and what the aftermath looks like.
Frankly, neither of these options are feasible based on what the MC knows at the end of game 1. In terms of balance of forces, the purely military effect is minimal between being destroying the Tagma, being destroyed by the Tagma, escaping the Tagma and dispersing to the Helot camps.
The propaganda effect of the different options is significant, with a victory being the best in this department.
This may be true, but the fact that there are other rebellions doesn’t change the calculus on what is the best choice for the MC’s rebellion.
This may be true, but the MC has no way of knowing all this at the time of decision. If you’re playing with omniscience, then the battle’s strategic value increases. But if you’re playing as the MC with the information at hand (as a provincial helot or unimportant noble youth) I still contend the camps is the best choice.
I think this perspective is similar to that of a general who is only concerned about what’s operationally best for his own army and is ignoring the grand scheme of things.
