poison

[ramses II.]

Do you poison the water of an AI city?
I do this often. If the city is big and expensive (I don't want to spend 5,000 gold or more) and it has a strategical meaning or a WoW in it, I take some spies and poison the water several times, so the population shrinks. At least I can afford bribing this city.

[Scouse Gits]

Yes - but I reserve it for an AI capital ...

SG[1]

[Ecowiz Returns]

Never thought of using that tactic before.

Ramses idea seems interesting.

SG: What is the reason behind poisoning the capital's waters?
Isn't it better to try to destroy the City Walls and go for the conquer as soon as possible?

[rah]

Example.
Assume AI cap size 7. It currently has 7 defenders.
Trash the city wall, Poison it down to size 2. Now all you have to do is kill two defenders and the city is destroyed. Now bribe the rest of the the AI's cities during the turmoil. Easier than killing all 7 defenders.

RAH
I 'm sure there are other possible strategic reasons, but this one is my favorite.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

rah explains the main strategic benefit - a tiny city can no longer support its defenders.

I've done this with size 15+ cities, as well. Poison them to size 1, bribe them for pocket change, then sell all the improvements for 1000+ gold. Not a good plan if you are concerned with score, but rather enjoyable if you just like mopping the floor with the AI.

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by Ecowiz Returns
SG: What is the reason behind poisoning the capital's waters?
Isn't it better to try to destroy the City Walls and go for the conquer as soon as possible?

As soon as possible is this turn - there is no reason you can't send 20 spies in to poison the water supply on the same turn (and if you are not in commie half of them come back vet) and reduce a proud 21 city to a small hut that is destroyed on the move ...
This is exactly the mqnoeuvre I performed to reduce the HRE's northern capital in the Crusades succession ...

SG[1]

[Scouse Gits]

Poisoning is very effective - but if you destroy the city completely - you can never reap its benefits. I prefer to seek other alternatives first as I always look for a return on an investment. If on the coast the navy will bombard - if inland a siege can be effective by placing troops on mines and shield producing tiles. Gradually the city will have to disband the garrison at which point you strike!

----------------

SG(2)

[rah]

Sometimes you don't want to reap the benefits. The AI is so bad placing it's cities. And you may not be able to defend the city from either counter attack or (more importantly) spys that will steal the last few techs needed to build the space ship. If I take out a cluster of AI cities, I'll probably only keep one or two. The rest I will destroy or disband (rushing settlers).

RAH

[La Fayette]

RAH
May I state that your new crown makes you look like the well-known Frenchman wearing a beret?

[rah]

In case you're wondering the reason for the new one and haven't seen the thread, check War4ever's post in

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1406&pagenumber=3

we're just having a bit of fun.

Rich
well-know Frenchman wearing a beret

[La Fayette]

Now Big Blue Eagle, I salute you.
(BTW you seem to have fun on that MP forum, which I wouldn't have expected with people like Eyes, Markus and Ecthelion )

[rah]

As he takes a bow

Even Kermit the Merciless has joined the fun.

Gotta do something while we're waiting for CivIII MP and then for them to fix it so it works.

Rich