Quote Originally Posted by Privateerkev View Post
I personally find sacking to be reprehensible. I wish it were outlawed. We can find money other ways. Building economic buildings, trimming what isn't being used, raising taxes, and sending out merchants are all fine ways of getting money.

I refuse to set aside my morals and convictions all because they are temporarily inconvenient. We need to stand for something.
Building? Without money? More taxes? For what? To get a few riots which will result in no taxes and having to train an army to reconquer a rebellious settlement?

Merchants? With what money are you going to recruit them?

Morals and convictions?

Don't lecture me about morals and convictions, you butch...

Savvas takes a deep breath, it seems like he wants to say something, but he refrains. He takes another deep breath, sips from his wine and continues.

Think about it on the long term: no sacking of infidel settlements = not enough florins. No florins, no troops, no buildings, no merchants, no priests, nothing...

Rasing taxes? This will result in rebellions. Rebellions mean we'll have to train armies to retake a city that is inhabited by our own citizens.

Your "morals and convictions" will lead us to chaos, will force us to kill our own and will result in armies not meeting opposition, which will result in even more innocent deads.

In the end, we will be forced to sack settlements in order to survive.

So why not sacking them now?

What seems to be an "immoral" choice at first, turns out to be the best solution, even from the "moral" point of view.

Like I said: the Grandmaster lacks the vision and open mind required to run the Empire.