a smile and cash

[smilo]

In certain threads I've encountered the advice to kill of other civs as soon as possible. In my opinion this is exactly what not to do, for several reasons. A very important reason for me, is the fact that other civilizations are creating cities in parts of the world where your own expantion has not yet reached. They are actually building part of your (future) empire for free. All you need to do is to take over their cities, is to take over their capital (if prefer poisining the water supply a couple of turns before the major military force arrives) and bribe their cities. BNext to building cities for you an important benefit of competitors is their research, trade routes and last but not least tributes. So I would tend to let other civs flourish, as long as they keep out of my way, keep peace (3 points per turn) and when the time has come, elegantly add tham to my own civ by the power of money.

A smile can get you far, a smile and a gun can get you farther, but you go the farthest with a smile and cash. -Smilo-

[finbar]

That's a perfectly valid argument. You can leave the AI to their own devices and deal with them later. The only problem arises later in the game - particularly on bigger maps - when they grow to monstrous proportions, they have 2 million units, their cities cost a mint to bribe, they steal your techs, build a SS in one turn and ... bingo.

------------------
Founder, ACS Pedantry Institute
Founder, ACS Gourmet Recipe Exchange
Horse and Hydey Wrangler
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[smilo]

Not really a problem when you play your cards right. Even if they have trillions of cities, against the AI you can always take a lead so huge that you can easily find the cash to bribe their cities. Don't forget to get rid of the capital this will bring down the cost for bribing. Even if it has a big army and super defense, you can kill any capital by poisening the water supply, the city falls back in size, can't maintain its costs ... Destroying improvements also can have a nice effect, send a couple of diplo's at once : the first one will sabotage the current production, the second one will actually destroy something. The more diplos you send at the same time, the more devastating the effect. With spies things are even easier as you can select a specific target.

Its a bit like a serum : use the beast to protect yourself from it.

[Juggler_Bob]

Taking on the AI civs takes two forms in my games...

1. Early conquest

If I discover an AI civ early (when they have only 1-3 cities), I will usually wipe them off the face of the earth to save myself the trouble later. If I have discovered them (or they, me) early, then undoubtedly, they are to close for comfort, and I will assert my *legitimate* need for what the Nazis called 'lebensraum'

2. Late game conquest

There was a recent thread regarding what one's 'call to arms' was in the way of military units, and I responded that I wait for at least marines, if not tanks, to begin serious offensive action against the AI. The reason for this is simple: survivability of individual units. A tank (or marine) can attack the AI, and have a likely chance of surviving a counter-attack on the next turn (unlike dragoons, et al)

3. Mid-game warfare

Whenever I try this, I get bogged down in unit production while the other AI civs beat me to wonder after wonder. Even when I eliminate the AI civ I am warring with, I fall far behind the others. What do you do to prevent this?

-Bob

------------------
Semper ubi sub ubi!

[Smash]

Build Leos

[debeest]

Although the manual or Pedia says you get three points for every turn of world peace, my 2.42 wipes out all accumulated peace points any time anyone goes to war, so that the only way to get world peace points is at the end of the game when I've wiped out all but one enemy civ and don't fight any more at all. Isn't this true for everyone?

[La Fayette]

quote: Originally posted by debeest on 04-02-2001 09:22 the only way to get world peace points is at the end of the game when I've wiped out all but one enemy civ and don't fight any more at all. Isn't this true for everyone?

It's true for me.
And I don't care at all (since I leave high scores to smilo, Ming and other 'nevergetbored' people ).

[La Fayette]

BTW how far do you get with a smilo and a gun ?

[geofelt]

In a recent game, I captured the sioux capitol early on, leaving only a small city on the outskirts of my continent. I bribed it for a song and wiped out the sioux, What a mistake! They were reincarnated as the mongols in some unknown location and grew like crazy.
The lesson is: a single city in a spot you control is not a bad thing. If they are surrounded by your cities, they will not grow and can be dispatched later.

[smilo]

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette on 04-03-2001 09:13 AM BTW how far do you get with a smilo and a gun ?

Nice catch; The gun will get you somewhere, I'm not so sure about the smilo

[smilo]

quote: Originally posted by Juggler_Bob on 03-30-2001 08:23 PM Taking on the AI civs takes two forms in my games... 2. Late game conquest ...The reason for this is simple: survivability of individual units. A tank (or marine) can attack the AI, and have a likely chance of surviving a counter-attack on the next turn (unlike dragoons, et al) 3. Mid-game warfare Whenever I try this, I get bogged down in unit production while the other AI civs beat me to wonder after wonder. Even when I eliminate the AI civ I am warring with, I fall far behind the others. What do you do to prevent this?

Maybe this will help : against the AI I never, ever use militaire force for conquest in mid and late-game ages. Actually I believe it is a waste of resources : you partly destroy what you can actually use. A good strategy for bribing conquest is to have diplo's or spies set-up close to all cities of the targeted civ, when you start bribing , the civ will plead for pease and offer you money. Off course you accept and next turn, you just continue bribing his cities (if you couldn't do it in one single turn). It's good to be in fundi governement as you need the cash and don't want to be bogged by the peoples and senate's call for peace, and you need to keep the newly conquested citizens happy.

Remember that diplo's have a nice movement rate, so speed is also an asset here (not all civ's will have an extensive railway network).

Last but not least is that on avarage you'll need less diplo's or spies than you need military units in total conquest. Be example a city with 5 defending units will take at least 2 mil units (the second might be used womewhere else too so it's not exactly correct), but only one with a diplo. In case the city is defended by one mil unit, it's the reverse. You'll need 1 military unit (taken that you win all the time) and you can use that units left over mov points somewhere else where the diplo is used up (BUT that is taken that you win all the time). Another problem with mil units is freedom of movement, where a diplo is extremely flexible in this aspect.

[Edward]

Juggler_Bob,

So 'lebensraum' like our American "manifest destiny", an excuse to conquer.

[DaveV]

A counterpoint to smilo's arguments in favor of city bribing: I look at the conquest/bribe question as a purely economic one. When I bribe an AI city, I am guaranteed to lose a diplo and may lose a spy; I also lose some cash. In exchange, I gain a city with its defenders and improvements intact. In contrast, the military option is guaranteed to strip the city of all its defenders, may destroy some improvements, and may entail the loss of some attacking units. But the surviving attackers can go on to attack more cities.

Unless you demand tribute and bleed off their treasuries regularly, the AIs tend to develop very health bank accounts and fairly large cities, making their bribe cost awfully high. It's not uncommon to encounter a bribe cost in excess of 1000 gold; you can buy 40 rows of shields for that amount.

It is worthwhile keeping the bribe option for some hard-to-crack cities, but I prefer to use my military to conquer the vast majority of the targets. Eventually, it is possible to amass an irresistibly large army that just chews its way across the map destroying all in its path.

[La Fayette]

quote: Originally posted by Edward on 04-04-2001 01:34 PM Juggler_Bob, So 'lebensraum' like our American "manifest destiny", an excuse to conquer.

'gleichberechtigung' is not bad either, just before firing your machine gun.

Dave
You speak the truth: this is pure economy (and pure economic war might be quite fierce too).
Still, with vet spies and city in disorder (that vet spies are keen on) the price is about1/2*2/3=1/3, and the pure economy says yes to me quite often.

------------------
aux bords mystérieux du monde occidental

[Blaupanzer]

Try playing without Fundamentalism. Gives you a better sense of the real tradeoff between guns (conquest) and butter (luxuries and city bribes). Sid says he's not using Fundy in Civ III. I've said before, it's not a realistic long-term government.