War Acacemy: Tactic for the upcoming war

[History Guy]

My honorable friend Mr. Unorthodox is correct, and indeed, orthodox in his judgements. It is imperative that we capture the enemy capital first. Eight Archers will work, I believe. Perhaps nine should be taken along, to be safe, but no more. Spearmen must accompany this army of archers, and as soon as the capital falls, they must fortify against a possible enemy counterattack. I trust that the plans will work.

As I have said, we can not at this time create detailed plans unless we are given a map or some idea about the terrain around Washington.

[OPD]

Capital should always be the first target IMO.

After the capital I find it is a good tactic to attack cities in such a way that their new capital becomes isolated and the remaining cities are too far away from their capital to be of any use.

Once we take the capital attack the cities nearest the new capital.

Unless of course they only have about five cities.

[Robber Baron]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx

Ideally, our attack will occur right as a settler/spear team leaves (they rarely turn back), thus preventing pop rush and reducing defenders.

Maybe we can time the attack accordingly. Keep our attack force posted nearby, but out of American territory, and time the declaration of war for completion of a settler party in DC. (If we got writing and set up an embassy as our plans neared readiness -- a big if, I guess -- we would get a window into Washington production.)

[UnOrthOdOx]

As I have said, we can not at this time create detailed plans unless we are given a map or some idea about the terrain around Washington.

Very true.

"One who does not know the mountains and forests, gorges and defiles, swamps and wetlands cannot advance the army. "
--Sun Tzu 'The Art of War'

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Robber Baron



Maybe we can time the attack accordingly. Keep our attack force posted nearby, but out of American territory, and time the declaration of war for completion of a settler party in DC. (If we got writing and set up an embassy as our plans neared readiness -- a big if, I guess -- we would get a window into Washington production.)

It would not likely be worth the cost incurred to a) set up the embassy b) pay to investigate the city c) delay the attack any further

Our cash would be better served in purchasing us some better tech, upgrading units, or just plain research at this point.

Those of us who use early rushes already see that things are likely a bit slower than we would normally like.

[Kuciwalker]

Please, please, don't discuss strategy. Look at the maps and discuss tactics. We already know enough of strategy.

[jdd2007]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
I have yet to see a capital with more than three units this early in the game. At least when it is my first target. If we target another city first, you can bet they will reinforce the capital quickly. As it is, they will have at least two turns to reinforce before our attack, why give them more?

We must strike the Capital because it is the most productive city, it will not auto-raze, and therefore the most damaging, and most profitable blow we can deliver. With any luch our second target will either be the 'new' capital, or have an improvement, therefore preventing auto-raze.

Also, we do not want to cross boarders untill after we declare war. No need to tarnish our reputation in that way especially so early in the game.

We need more info before deciding which square to go to. Should wait till just before the attack, 10 or so turns before.

i regularly find early capitals with 4+ spearmen and warriors. and about the razing, my point was not to raze cities, but just to attack one or two cities before we start on the capital. it doesnt matter if we raze or capture them. it would draw units from washington, or paris. hopefully, we would have one or two elites from it as well.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by jdd2007


i regularly find early capitals with 4+ spearmen and warriors. and about the razing, my point was not to raze cities, but just to attack one or two cities before we start on the capital. it doesnt matter if we raze or capture them. it would draw units from washington, or paris. hopefully, we would have one or two elites from it as well.

Do you normally target the capital first? It has been my experience that it is not fortified that heavily till you declare war, then it is built up more. Yes, you may find 4 units, but rarely all spears, thus of less threat to our archers.

I would contend that, IMO, attacking a city on the way to the capital is not worth the risk of losing an archer in the process. If an elite spawned, we would indeed have a possibility to get a GL, and that would be excellent. If, however, we lose an archer, we may lose the ability to take the capital. I see it as being a gamble.

I would, rather, suggest taking the Capital, assessing our losses, then, if possible, taking the next city, but leaving New York (with the dyes) alone and suing for it while negotiating peace.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by skywalker
Please, please, don't discuss strategy. Look at the maps and discuss tactics. We already know enough of strategy.

I do not think we have enough info to discuss this, yet.

For now all I can say is that we do NOT want to attack Washington from across that river, cross the river first.

France may have a river there too, can't tell just yet.

[Robber Baron]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx


It would not likely be worth the cost incurred to a) set up the embassy b) pay to investigate the city c) delay the attack any further

True.
Still, if we had scouts lurking on the outskirts of DC territory, we might be able to catch the settler party on the way out.
Query: how close can one plant a stack near AI territory before your soon-to-be enemy-civ detects it and starts fortifying its defenses?

[notyoueither]

The SMC asked for 6 archers and 2 spearmen.

He is well versed in early warfare, so I trust his appraisal. For what it's worth, my experience agrees with his. I would guess that we will find 2 spear and 1 archer in Washington or Paris (all regular). Fortified on grassland in the case of Washington. We will likely lose 1 archer, maybe 2.

[Will 5001]

Washington should really be our first target and we should hit them so hard that they will NEVER come back and become a threat, I call for a complete anihilation of the Americans, then the French...

[Robber Baron]

The Americans deserve annhilation.
The French, however, might serve as effective vassals -- for tech trading and alliance possibilities. After, of course, they have been whittled down to size and stripped of their techs and gold.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Your lust for blood can serve you well, have you looked at the Hawk Party?

However, there is much to be gained by letting America live. They have techs which we lack, cities we can take, and could produce more units for us to, um, train on, thereby making Great Leaders. There death may still come, but now is not the time. Besides, why kill them when we can make them the laughing stock of the world?

[Robber Baron]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Your lust for blood can serve you well, have you looked at the Hawk Party?

I think I'm more of an Imperialist in temperament. A strong supporter of the UFC, though.

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
However, there is much to be gained by letting America live. They have techs which we lack, cities we can take, and could produce more units for us to, um, train on, thereby making Great Leaders. There death may still come, but now is not the time. Besides, why kill them when we can make them the laughing stock of the world?

I'm assuming, given the constrained nature of the territory/lack of wide open spaces, that we won't be able to afford to keep two vassal states so close to home. And I'd rather clip the wings of the Expansionist Americans. I'd say Vichy France might make a comfy neighbor.
(With apologies to the true sons and daughters of DeGaulle.)