Ascension Hall decision (some spoilers)

[Deep Space Explorer]

After the battle at the Ascension Hall (end of Act I) you get a choice to break the alliance with Chorus/Disfavored.
Do i have to do it now, if i want to go for Chaotic Victory achievement or join rebels?
Or i will get more opportunities to break alliance in the future?

 

[[KPD]Fidel]

You get more but most of them are absolutely stupid. There has to be an earlier point than Ascension Hall... I have no idea when but there just has to be.

 

[TorquemadaStark]

You can break alliance in numerous points in the game. I'm not sure about joining the V Guard though, seeing as you basically kill them all. But honestly - don't go solo. The ending is dissapointing, as there's literally NO way of staying true to Kyros. Next playthrough, I'm sticking with Disfavored and letting Graven Ashe rule. Even though, everyone, EVERYONE seems to be dissapointed and sad about their servitute to Kyros at some point. Except me, of course, I'd gladly stick with him/Tunon/court, but the game won't let me, damnit.

 

[Deep Space Explorer]

Thanks for the replies. I don't see any reason to break my alliance with Disfavored at the moment, but didn't wanted to lock myself with them for the rest of the game.

 

[[KPD]Fidel]

Keep letting their asses go at the Village and their men being targeted by the Chorus later. After you enable them all to run away with their lives their leader will send you a missive with a desire for a meeting. It also helps if you chose during the conquest negotiating the terms of surrender of the Apex. You simply gotta get V Guard favor up.

You can break alliance in numerous points in the game. I'm not sure about joining the V Guard though, seeing as you basically kill them all. But honestly - don't go solo. The ending is dissapointing, as there's literally NO way of staying true to Kyros. Next playthrough, I'm sticking with Disfavored and letting Graven Ashe rule. Even though, everyone, EVERYONE seems to be dissapointed and sad about their servitute to Kyros at some point. Except me, of course, I'd gladly stick with him/Tunon/court, but the game won't let me, damnit.

So why not go solo then? Graven Ashe is a massive douche. He is a pompous xenophobe who prefers destroying the land to actually ruling it. Since he has so little disregard for anyone besides his idiots he is also massively short sighted and would fail to rule. None of the Archons is fit in any way. Graven Ashe is a xenophobe, racist, brutal war monger, the voices is a psychopath, sociopath, torturer and not interested in administration meaning the land would be left to fend for itself with the strongest taking everything and enslaving everybody. There would be no law whatsoever and no culture either. Tunon is a good judge but would be absolutely unfit to rule since he has no personal ambition or agenda besides administering justice. That is a good thing but since he has no idea of the military nor of spying nor of proper state craft besides the letter of the law he would have no chance to hold onto the land. Furthermore he is far too limited in his interpretation of the law. I don't think we need to speak about Bleden Mark.

So who does that leave to administer the land? Also either the Chorus or the Disfavoured will be destroyed either way. The Chorus is far too unwielding and unreliable to actually defend what you have and advance it and the Disfavoured are far too xenophobic and set in their ways. So it makes sense to form a new army that incorporated the strength of both. You have the Beastmen with their savage nature that only respect strength but are far less chaotic and much more organized since they are proper packs and not some gang that just happens to come together, you have Stallwart who basically are the same as the Disfavoured except they aren't Xenophobes and have not commited crimes of war yet, instead of the Earth Shakers you would have the Forge Bound to equip your whole army and the wisdom of the Sages and their magic. So tbh whether you do it through fear or love, this army composition is far more superior, given that they also all hail from the Tiers it is more diverse but also more united and you as a player are not as inept and set in your ways as the Archons.

 

[TorquemadaStark]

[...]Graven Ashe is a xenophobe, racist, brutal war monger, the voices is a psychopath, sociopath, torturer and not interested in administration meaning the land would be left to fend for itself with the strongest taking everything and enslaving everybody.[...]
[...] Disfavoured are far too xenophobic and set in their ways. [...] they aren't Xenophobes and have not commited crimes of war yet[...] that they also all hail from the Tiers it is more diverse but also more united [...]

I sense a pattern here. Well, young one, in other games where everything is shiny and nice, I'd do as you told me, because being good (even though, strictly speaking, it's a very narrow and very american interpretation of good, in my parts, the main character from Stalker or Geralt from witcher, or renegade Shepard would be example good) is kinda nice, but in Tyranny, imho, the fun haves from killing babies, executing prisoners by dropping them from spires, being as merciless, brutal, vile and depraved as humanly possible. And once, just ONCE not being punished for that. Heck, being a cannibal in the fallout games wasn't this fun. Evil feels...good in this game. So, you know, all these "goody two shoes" options seem weird and...wrong to me in this game.

In conclusion, I miss the days of Fallout 2, where I planted armed dynamites on thieving children, smacked other children with sledgehammer in the groin, sold and owned slaves, including my own wife, ate corpses and could wantonly murder anyone and everyone that pleased me. Heck, that was a challenge run even - beating that game, by not talking with anyone, just mercilessly murdering EVERYTHING outside Arroyo. Highly recommended.

 

[[KPD]Fidel]

I sense a pattern here. Well, young one, in other games where everything is shiny and nice, I'd do as you told me, because being good (even though, strictly speaking, it's a very narrow and very american interpretation of good, in my parts, the main character from Stalker or Geralt from witcher, or renegade Shepard would be example good) is kinda nice, but in Tyranny, imho, the fun haves from killing babies, executing prisoners by dropping them from spires, being as merciless, brutal, vile and depraved as humanly possible. And once, just ONCE not being punished for that. Heck, being a cannibal in the fallout games wasn't this fun. Evil feels...good in this game. So, you know, all these "goody two shoes" options seem weird and...wrong to me in this game.

In conclusion, I miss the days of Fallout 2, where I planted armed dynamites on thieving children, smacked other children with sledgehammer in the groin, sold and owned slaves, including my own wife, ate corpses and could wantonly murder anyone and everyone that pleased me. Heck, that was a challenge run even - beating that game, by not talking with anyone, just mercilessly murdering EVERYTHING outside Arroyo. Highly recommended.

Don't call me young please. You have no idea about my age and I played Fallout 2 and 1 too. Anyway I don't see any sense in evil for evil's sake. I'm not a Psychopath or a Sociopath. I don't want to be nice. I want to be feared but not because people don't know what hit them but because I'm brutal when opposed. However why would I poison one sixth of my realm? Why would I waste perfectly good military recruits because of xenophobia? Why would I let some horde destroy my economy because they think that that is how war is done? It's just stupid at that point. Even William the Conquerer only went so far and I refuse to be a parody. They accept me as their overlord? Fine. Work for me. They don't? I'll wipe them out to set an example and I mean wipe them out. Mercy goes a long way as an example as well. If countries know that if they bow their knee they can escape harsh punishment, they will most certainly do that.

Thanks for the replies. I don't see any reason to break my alliance with Disfavored at the moment, but didn't wanted to lock myself with them for the rest of the game.

I do tbh. They are just a bunch of absolute idiots and Graven Ashe is the worst. He is just an absolute idiot.

 

[Emperor Marcus]

Fidel you do realize you can get Graven Ashe or any other Archon to bend the knee if you have enough favor with them and their faction in Act 3. So Graven Ashe doesnt have to rule you can with him as your enforcer. Its what i did in my first playthrough.

 

[[KPD]Fidel]

So? I get him after I agree with his stupid plan to blight a whole damn part of the country and slaughter an army and people that withstood and edit thereby proving their valour.

 

[Foxador]

I don't understand why you can't accuse Gaven of war crimes for blighting the entire land in his petty vendetta.

 

[Togukawa]

Regarding staying true to Kyros:

Spoiler

It's impossible, the ending is the same on all paths. She invades, you throw an edict in her face.

 

[Foxador]

Fidel you do realize you can get Graven Ashe or any other Archon to bend the knee if you have enough favor with them and their faction in Act 3. So Graven Ashe doesnt have to rule you can with him as your enforcer. Its what i did in my first playthrough.

I couldn't get him to bend the knee since the path I took had all the evidence point to Graven being the worst of the two. I know that I missed evidence because of the path that I took but I had only 5 things against the voices and like 12 things against Graven so I made him accept his fate and die