The SMC's Total War Thread: 2950 BC

[Kuciwalker]

That sounds like a really good idea.

I proposed, in the turn chat, to attack the settler. I didn't know then that it was on a jungle tile, but I think if we wait until it moves onto grassland, it might be a good idea. Killing the warrior and taking the settler (which would become two workers!) would only have a 50% chance of success and would initiate hostilities early, but it might, MIGHT be a good idea. I'm not really advocating this course; I'm just putting it on the table.

[Kuciwalker]

Uber, if we move our guys N-W instead of NW (i.e. no diagonal), we can get the Archers there in the same amount of time and reveal more terrain.

[Harovan]

To attack a wandering warrior/settler shuttle leads to nothing. First off, our chances are less than 50%, because grassland may have a low defense bonus, but it has one! Actually, our chances are about 45%. Second, we are not prepared to defend in a counterattack. To produce units now, before finishing barracks, would be the death blow for our Case Pink plan. Third, we are short of exploring warriors and would not want to risk one in that silly way. Case Pink will give us free workers. In due time!

Skywalker, I hope, with the hysterical attitude you have shown in the turnchat yesterday, you will never ever get a governmental office. This empire needs calm, thinking and calculating politicians and not suicidal warmongers. Note, this is not a vote for the DIA, but a plea to your own party to nominate another candidate.

[Guardian]

Well, I'm DIA myself, but these days I find myself agreeing with Sir Ralph on many things...

[MrWhereItsAt]

So far so good...

The next turnchat (if anything like the latest one) will have about 6-8 turns of play in it, so we won't need to worry about specifics (eg whether to eliminate the French, capture or raze cities etc) until we actually get there, in a week or more.

Let us stick with it as we have it, build those archers and when we see what the French have we can decide on where to start. It's all over there anyway, it makes little difference to us at the moment.

[OPD]

IMO, attacking the settler should be given more consideration. Despite only a 45% chance of success the gain of two workers makes it an exellent gamble and it would be at least ten turns before the French could reach us. Although taking the settler would mean there would be less French to aid in our expansion.

[Kuciwalker]

While we don't need to take the settler, we DO need to consider as an option. I'm not promoting it - just saying we need to think about everything.

[OPD]

IMO, the way the idea was dismissed in the turn chat was unproductive and out of line.

[Kuciwalker]

IMNSHO, OPD is right.

[civman2000]

well, it's not as if it's too late to get it (they might not make the city yet). skywalker was the only on (or maybe there was one other) supporting it in the chat so it was not out of line to not do something like that.

[Guardian]

Nobody's saying it was out of line not to do it, they've merely stated that "the way the idea was dismissed" was unproductive and out of line, in their opinion. I wasn't there, so I obviously can't say anything about this.

As for my comment yesterday, I wasn't expressing any ill will against anyone, I was merely saying that I agree with Sir Ralph "on many things". That's all my post said and that's all it meant.

In this particular case, I was agreeing to his statement that

This empire needs calm, thinking and calculating politicians and not suicidal warmongers.

I suppose I could have been clearer on this.

[notyoueither]

How it was decided is... another arguement.

If we had triggered war then we would have France building units, not future cities for us.

France at war now could easily match our unit production. Stalemate very likely.

Peace with France means diplomatic contact. At this point Joan may very well contact other civs before we do. Purchasing contact with others may speed our own tech development.

Returning to the chat... In a turn chat I would have dismissed the idea as well. Did Uber say go? Did Ninot say go? Did Trip overrule the only other people with any kind of mandate to start a war without consulting the people? I doubt it.

[Guardian]

Well, just for the record, I totally, utterly and completely agree with the decision not to attack at this time.

[Jon Shafer]

In response to this issue I beg the question: did you elect me to play the game, or play the game while also making important decisions and help run this thing? If it's the former, then you should have elected the Banana, because anyone can listen to a bunch of people telling him what to do and punch buttons. I took the initiative when I felt it necessary. I feel that we simply can't stop every time someone thinks that we should, especially when it would be making a decision that goes against the course of action that we had previously determined. We had an in-chat vote (my system for determining on the fly decisions, for anyone who was wondering), and people chose to continue. If every time we see a French settler move, should we stop the turn chats (1 turn into it even) to make a poll about what to do? I don't think we should, and others agree. If we did that, then there would be no point to turn chats, because we would constantly be forced to make decisions that people would want the entire nation to decide on. I didn't choose to continue because I felt the person was stupid, I did it because I felt that the game needed to keep moving, and because we needed to proceed with the plan already determined by our ministers and populace.

Let me give you an example of a situation where I would have felt it necessary to stop. (Perhaps a few turns in the future) We see a stack of 5 French Archers moving east towards Apolytonia. Okay, there's something major which I'm sure everyone can agree is an important issue to address before things complicate, therefore it would be a wise decision to stop. We had/have a plan to exploit France's weaknesses, but it must come to fruition before we take such a great risk as what some were proposing. Yes, I would say I'm a risk-taking kind of guy. But not that time. Maybe I'm not enough for some people, but I like to use sound judgment at all times, especially when the situation warrants caution, as in the previous situation.

[notyoueither]

In furtherance of what Trip just said.

We elect these guys. We put our faith in them. We must give them some lee-way to play the game. Things are always going to come up. That's why the ministers should be there to help the President reach the right decision for the moment.

At the end of the day though, it will be the President pushing the buttons. May Jupiter grant that person wisdom.