Our imperium 1180AD--> 1400AD

[Sparrowhawk]

Further, the Crusaders would be very vulnerable to attack by the Americans, unless we have them travel with a defensive unit, such as Muskateers. However, having them travel with Muskateers obviously reduces their advantage of having 2 movement points.

Regardless, I don't think we are capable of even planing an attack on the Americans at this point, they are way too far from us, and we need to work out what to do next, but I think building an attack force would be a mistake. Perhaps when we get tactics, we can build Calvary to attack the Americans with?

[atawa]

Cavalry would work against Musks but by that time they would have Riflemen at least.

We can take some small American outposts by bribing but once we anter the riverdelta we'll need units.
Also when Americans are in demo we have to be very carefull about taking city's as they can bribe them back at half cost.

[Ben Kenobi]

I should have used 'easily' rather than 'quickly'. The STYOM got my meaning exactly.

[MrWhereItsAt]

So would someone explain to me how EXACTLY we would set up this fortress next to Washington? Having the exisitng one two tiles away is a great help. I suppose we would stack a defender or two in that fortress (having at least two travel together to get there first up so as to avoid bribery). Then we would get a settler(s) there and more units. Then how would we do this - as soon as we move the settlers next to Washington they are vulnerable to attack, and even more, if we move other units with them we risk losing the whole lot to an attack whilst the fortress is being built.

This seems rather tricky, even putting aside the issue of how many attackers to use. Can anyone explain this?
I have rarely seen the AI put units in those fortresses next to their cities, but what if we find a Musket there?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
So would someone explain to me how EXACTLY we would set up this fortress next to Washington? Having the exisitng one two tiles away is a great help. I suppose we would stack a defender or two in that fortress (having at least two travel together to get there first up so as to avoid bribery). Then we would get a settler(s) there and more units. Then how would we do this - as soon as we move the settlers next to Washington they are vulnerable to attack, and even more, if we move other units with them we risk losing the whole lot to an attack whilst the fortress is being built.

This seems rather tricky, even putting aside the issue of how many attackers to use. Can anyone explain this?
I have rarely seen the AI put units in those fortresses next to their cities, but what if we find a Musket there?

We'd set up the fortress by using preworked Settler(s). Basically, the trick is to start a Settler doing something (like irrigating) and stop him from finishing 1 turn before he's done. The work that he's already completed is stored 'inside' that Settler. If, for example, you moved him to a grassland tile and chose 'irrigate' again, he'd finish in 1 turn, rather than the usual 5. Any other tasks would get a similar head start.

So, we prework a Settler or 2, move them along to Washington, and bang, instant fort in 1 turn (luckily, there's a river there, so we can still choose the build fortification option before running out of movement points).

If we find a Musketeer in one of the forts, I'd suggest putting a Musketeer on good defensive terrain next to him - perhaps the AI defender will attack and die? Otherwise, build our own fort nearby with the preworked Settler, and then 'charge' the Settler again by selecting irrigate or something...

[Zedd]

I think STYOM's idea is a good one and worth including in our plan of attack. Sparrowhawk however is right; attacking at this point will not get us far. We need to first improve our hold on that area with more cities and more improvements for those that are already established. The River delta is mostly deserted in its northern half and even if we have some cross over would make an excellent spot for three or even four cities that would grow quickly. They would not need to support troops, we have other cities to do that, just house them until the apolyton expeditionary force is completely assembled. As far as the worry about our city being bribed with a lot of units inside, we can take care of that by having the units patrol the surrounding area. No use letting them sit idol while there are Americans begging to be killed.

[atawa]

We dont even need the city's for our expedition force.

Just make a string of forts from the edge of the riverdelta to Washington. While in the fort our units are safe from bribing and other American attacks.

The river actualy works in our advantage.

[cavebear]

Is the idea to build a fortress on an adjacent tile to Washington? We might be able to get the city defenders to attack that, in which case, the odds would be in *our* favor. And at least our 1-move units (canons or catapaults) would be attacking at full strenghth.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by cavebear
Is the idea to build a fortress on an adjacent tile to Washington? We might be able to get the city defenders to attack that, in which case, the odds would be in *our* favor. And at least our 1-move units (canons or catapaults) would be attacking at full strenghth.

That's the idea. We can fill up the fortress with units, and attack with cannons at full strength. Survivors can even attack on subsequent turns if need be. And if we build a city within 3 squares nearby - even a size 1 in disorder - our units will heal faster in the fortress.

[atawa]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man


That's the idea. We can fill up the fortress with units, and attack with cannons at full strength. Survivors can even attack on subsequent turns if need be. And if we build a city within 3 squares nearby - even a size 1 in disorder - our units will heal faster in the fortress.

Why build a city for this? We can just rushbuild a baracks in the first city we take, we wont have any wounded units before that time anyway.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man


We'd set up the fortress by using preworked Settler(s). Basically, the trick is to start a Settler doing something (like irrigating) and stop him from finishing 1 turn before he's done. The work that he's already completed is stored 'inside' that Settler. If, for example, you moved him to a grassland tile and chose 'irrigate' again, he'd finish in 1 turn, rather than the usual 5. Any other tasks would get a similar head start.

Incredible! I have seen this before, but thought that it only applied if you used it on the same turn as you activated the settler. Are you saying that if I stopped an irrigating settler, moved it two spaces (non-roaded) and then commenced irrigating again it would finish in one turn?

[atawa]

Yes, one of the bugs in civ, there is also another bug in MP:

On the first round the settler gets 2 charges, when you start him on say irigation and stop him on the same turn you can use 2 charges on the next turn too