Plan Eagle

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by LordImpact
Sounds like a lovely blitz finishing off with a pincer attack on Boston. I hope it works well, but if something goes wrong what will our city defenses look like?

The defeat of the front-line armies is highly unlikely. The AI rarely makes many offensive units until a war begins (which is one reason why I want to take out 2 cities quick instead of just 1), and with the Spearmen allocated with both armies, we should be able to hold off any potential counter-offensive. However, the chances of that happening are slim, since I would estimate the likelyhood of us capturing both cities within 3 turns to be 85% or more. In the case that, say, France attacks us, then pray to the Banana God to save us.

But really, the jungle will give us time to try and obtain peace with one nation or another (once the first step of Operation Eagle is successful, we'll be able to strip America of anything it has within 3 turns, guaranteed), then refocus our armies on the other enemy.

[Aggie]

I have a few questions.
1) How long will it take to build this force and how does this compare with earlier(single stack ) strategy.
1b) If the time is similar why was the earlier timetable off?, Did we underestimate our resources?
2) Will we destroy or vassalize the americans?
Now some comments.
If this plan will only take a few more turns (<5) Then i say it will be worth it imho.
But one reason i want the deal on IW to be completed soon is so we can see where iron is. If a miracle happened and it was on our mountain, I would say produce a few swordsman instead. However if we see that America doesn't have iron perhaps war with france would be more profitable if they do.
I also could see the possiblities of eliminating America instead of vassalizing them, especially if we have settlers ready to take some of the good land and we vassalize france later.
But generally I do like the concept and hopefully we have time to carry it out.
Aggie

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Aggie
I have a few questions.

That's what I'm here for.

1) How long will it take to build this force and how does this compare with earlier(single stack ) strategy.
1b) If the time is similar why was the earlier timetable off?, Did we underestimate our resources?

I was not involved with the initial creation of Case Blue, so I cannot comment on why things ended up off-track. I can however state that a thoroughly sufficient force can be mustered within 25 turns for this plan to be fully successful.

2) Will we destroy or vassalize the americans?

The plan does not specify, but I would like to destroy them outright. This would (as you stated), allow us space to move into. The plains and floodplains in their area will be very helpful in our expansion.

Now some comments.
If this plan will only take a few more turns (<5) Then i say it will be worth it imho.
But one reason i want the deal on IW to be completed soon is so we can see where iron is. If a miracle happened and it was on our mountain, I would say produce a few swordsman instead. However if we see that America doesn't have iron perhaps war with france would be more profitable if they do.
I also could see the possiblities of eliminating America instead of vassalizing them, especially if we have settlers ready to take some of the good land and we vassalize france later.
But generally I do like the concept and hopefully we have time to carry it out.
Aggie

Certainly the presence of iron will be important. I think that there will be iron near the new French city, and we won't be able to see any more. Mabye another source in the Great Rift, but I doubt it. Of course I could be wrong, but I don't plan on it.

I think that eventually we will gain our own source of iron though, so picking France as a target for that reason would be pointless as of now. France has no where to expand to except the jungle. That means as time goes on, it will get weaker, while after our successful war with the Americans, we in turn will get stronger. They will be easy prey for vassalization once the time comes.

[Aggie]

Good job Trip, so I give it the thumbs up , and hope others will too
Aggie

[jdd2007]

i like the plan. dont worry about france attacking though...

[Will 5001]

Great plan, but it all depends on how quickly these armies can be raised, but the 25 turns figure you quoted above seems to be reasonable!

[Panag]

hi ,

good plan , ....

, a road towards the front line might be intresting , ...

have a nice day

[jdd2007]

a road, interesting....

[Duddha]

the more armies you make, the more troops you will need for them. i demand at least 1 spearman and 5 archers per stack, and even that is cutting it close.

your plan requires mroe time to get up and running.

i would honestly rather have a single stack of 2 spearmen and 8 archers sack washington and then raze NY, but i'm open to suggestions.

I'm with Uber on this one.

[jdd2007]

i agree with trip. we have two stacks, take washington and NY, then combine them...

[jdd2007]

i have a short, quick, embaressing question that i should now the answer to:

how do you make the options in a poll?

[Jon Shafer]

Start a new thread, and check the checkbox at the bottom that says to post a poll.

[GePap]

On to Boston

ince we don't yet know where the Americans will make a new city, would it not be as good to make a plan in whihc we go for those cities we know exist while keeping a lookout for where their new city is? In this case, the two collumns would merge in boston and then as on move on any remaining American cities, so Army 1-DC- Boston while Army 2-NY-Boston, with the Grand Army from Boston to Philadelphia afterwards. That way, our Grand Army begin swingin our way (back home) at the end of the campaign.

[wervdon]

About iron, after looking at the world map on trips site, I'd be surprised if there isn't more iron in the mountain chain between our american province and the persian empire. We won't know for a bit yet, but I wouldn't let that influence who we attack first.

I'm all for burning a few yankee cities


As for how to do it, I think Ill side with Uber. Both plans should result in victory. Trips will probally result in a faster victory, but a more costly victory, he said himself he expects 50% or more casualties in the first assault. Uber's I dont think would cost us as much of our own blood. When faced with a choice of quicker assimilation of america vs less of our fine soldiers dead by an american arrow or spear, id go with the latter.

[Jon Shafer]

Casualties are always high. Archers VS Spearmen is a 1 to 1 ratio whether you go with my plan or his. Another important point I bring up is that if we don't eliminate American production centers as quickly as possible, then they will be able to build more units. I predict at least 1 extra unit being produced from New York if we bypass it initially, maybe more. That will lead to more casualties, the invasion taking longer, and so on. My plan will be costly, yes, but any invasion is. My plan addresses both the speed issue and the cost. Do you not agree?