Unofficial: How should we prepare for war with France?

[Harovan]

nye: 2 productive cities can win an ancient war on Emperor. That's not so hard. The AI builds, as always, 2 regular spearmen as defenders. Go with 6-7 vet units (archers/spears or swords) and take their capital. If you can, raze 1 more city. After 10 turns or if their counterattack arrives (given they already found you), make peace. They are willing after 8-10 turns of war, guaranteed. You'll get another city and 2-3 techs for peace, I bet.

[notyoueither]

Yes, but we've already wasted the second city, and delayed the third (to build workers to rescue the second).

[beno]

I know it will prove a struggle, but a road network will prove essential with a war on France. We can't afford to be as hampered by the jungle as our enemies will be. As soon as we can get archers to the border en masse, we should treat Paris like a pin cushion. non?

[Flip McWho]

think it is premature to decide on war now. We must prepare as if it were to happen, but we must know more about them first.

Considering the AI start advantages at this level, I don't think we can win it, not yet anyway.

i agree with these to statements fully. i'm going for peace for a while neway.

[kring]

By the time we could build and transport our army to Paris, France will have had plenty of time to make more troops. Unless they stuck in the same jungle morass or similar terrain, it would be unlikely to be a successful campaign.

[GePap]

terrble terrain

an opinion from a subject:

With our cities stuck in jungle and movement slow and production not as high as could be hoped, starting a war now is probably, as some say, unwise. perhaps being at peace with France we could win the ability to cross near their terrain and create better cities in more productive areas elsewere, which can then be used to create the army to destrot france.

[Vlad Antlerkov]

1 and 3, with a "maybe" for 2.

We could use a road network anyway.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yes, but we've already wasted the second city, and delayed the third (to build workers to rescue the second).

Alas, how could I forget this...

Vlad Antlerkov: I do not exactly get how we should prepare for war without building units?

[kring]

We do need military units for one major reason now. The AI views civs with little military as easy pickings, not to be confused with Slim Pickens.

This is even more true at the higher levels. Building military units, whether or not the attack on France is done is just sound Civ 3 strategy.

[Kuciwalker]

War is essential. If we don't take the French lands now, we will be forever bottled in.

[kring]

How do you propose we do it, then?

Consider how many units France started the game with, add the amount they have built since, factor in our current forces, the time to build more, the time to move them to the front, the amount France will have built by then.

[Harovan]

The French are expanding like mad now and do not stockpile units. When we attack now (well, at least begin to prepare), they are weak. When we lose time, they will be strong.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
The French are expanding like mad now and do not stockpile units. When we attack now (well, at least begin to prepare), they are weak. When we lose time, they will be strong.

i concur.

[kring]

I have no problem expanding our military, as noted by my earlier comments.

I just want to make sure if we go to war, then we are capable of achieving whatever objectives we set.

We do need to know if France has the ability to make Military Alliances before we attack.

[Trevman]

We cannot match the French production. We need to explore to see whether we are in fact bottled in or there is productive land available. If the latter is true, then we must act quickly to seize it. Otherwise we cannot match France and defeat will be likely. Yes, if we are confined to Notylopa by the French, then we will have to make due but lets find out more about our position.