I think we sort of assumed that from your previous comment.
We are looking for a voting majority, not unanimity. Contributions need to be done now if we are to pursue the war.
@rho21, what are the current vote totals? Also, please put on hold on the distribution of talents I made above. Consider me as not having answered. Until we are finished negotiating things might change.
I think we just need @Panzeh or @CraigM to agree to have a deal in place.
All commanders returned to Rome, so I believe the numbers on the game state post are correct:
Panzeh: 9
CraigM: 10
Kolbex: 9 (+3 for battle proposals)
scottagibson: 8
Navaronegun: 6
Juan_Raigada: 5
Ah, good point. I’m not opposed to that, but to have the option to contribute you have to lodge your funds with one or more Senators, rather than the faction treasury. Isn’t that right? So you have to decide on a contribution now.
I’m Ok to delay the formal agreement until after the Forum phase, but to be part of it, you have to spread your money accordingly, and you have to refrain from influence attempts during the Forum phase.
And, @Juan_Raigada, I’d need that talent now. Can you send it to Calpurnicus, please?
@rho21, all my funds to Calpurnicus, please. Nothing in faction treasury.
Well then, I won’t be rushed. The treasury is in fine shape thanks to last year’s victories. I see no reason to have the richest faction in Rome turn to the poorest and demand that they contribute funds, while he hoards state money granted to him due to state emergencies. When he is not threatening Rome, that is.
Prudence, caution, and seeing what the fates have in store for Rome seem to be the best course.
I don’t think the treasury is on fine shape. To have a good chance against first Punic we need to spend 90 talents on fleet raising, which would leave treasury in dire straits. If collaboratively we can reach 50 talents of contributions or so (of which 25 would me mine), we would be in a much better position.
Of course I’d like that agreement, too, and I’m willing to join it now. But if others aren’t, we still need the funding to fight the war. Or we have to ignore it for another round.
That’s sensible, but without the slate for next year we can’t guarantee no prosecutions since we don’t know who will be censor, though (and we can’t prosecute if somebody tries persuasion attempts). At least we should make sure we vote for censor one of the signatories.
I would be open to wait for discussing the slate if we guarantee financing. So I agree to your proposal.