Machiavelli institute : analysis of the Greek Wars

[Spiffor]

As you know it, Greece is now at war with England and Aztecs. This thread is dedicated to analyse the sitation, look for the possible outcome, and imagine what profit we could get from it.

1st, this war is likely not to change the maps drastically : Except England, nobody has iron connected. In England, this will lead to archers/horsemen vs. spearmen battles. In Greece, this will probably lead to English swordsmen vs Hoplites.
Overall, the odds are balanced enough for cities not to change hands too quickly. So far, the only change was Newcastle being conquered by the Greeks.

2nd, these coutries are far away from each other. Greece has a RoP with America and Germany, and thus can use their rods to get there more quickly. England has a RoP with Aztecs, but their road network is poor.
Hence, it's more likely the battlefield will take place in England.

Greeks will very probably use this war to trigger their golden age. If it's a good or bad is worth considering : if they trigger their GA now, they'll be a more attackable target in the future (we wouldn't have to fear triggering it).
OTOH, they could use it to strike England and Aztecs with unbearable force, and get much bigger. Worse, they could attack us, while we're completely unprepared : we have only 1 spearman in 8 cities out of 12 (and soon 9 cities out of 13), and all our offensive potential is next to France. They could conquer most of our non-core cities in a breeze with their swarms of 16-shields archers, protected by swarms of 16-shields spearmen.

In the immediate future (a few turns), we shouldn't fear a Greek attack, because they're in anarchy (like England and Russia). But once they're out of anarchy, their reduced corruption/waste from Republic, combined with their GA will make them able to produce units like hell.


How can we profit from the situation ? The profits aren't many. Mostly, we could get cheaper techs, gold and goodwill if we ally. We can't make any gold with a RoP.
For example, we could get Monotheism for 374 Lytons and 1 Lpt if we ally with the Greeks against the English. It's even cheaper (372 Lytons) if we ally against the Aztecs instead. If we ally with Greece against both England and Aztecs, monotheism will be sold 158 Lytons.

But I don't think we should choose between the 2 camps right now : if we side with Greece, Napoleton and Geofront are threatened by troops from England (6 squares NE of Napoleton)
If we side against Greece, well, we could say bye bye to our former American land. Plus, the available techs for trade (monotheism and republic) aren't immediately useful to us, and we could wait a few more turns before buying them, so that they devaluate.

So far, I don't see any advantage to the situation, but I mostly see risks from the Greek golden age. What is your analysis on this ?

[Harovan]

Re: Machiavelli institute : analysis of the Greek Wars

Originally posted by Spiffor
If we side against Greece, well, we could say bye bye to our former American land.

I don't see this. Would you care to back this statement with some facts? How should the Greeks be so strong to be able to fight against 3 enemies and conquer half of them?

In the immediate future (a few turns), we shouldn't fear a Greek attack, because they're in anarchy (like England and Russia). But once they're out of anarchy, their reduced corruption/waste from Republic, combined with their GA will make them able to produce units like hell.

Two words. War weariness. They should go for Monarchy but, oh well, it's an AI.

So far, I don't see any advantage to the situation, but I mostly see risks from the Greek golden age. What is your analysis on this ?

That is wonderful news. So one of the arguments of the whiners against a later war vs. the Greeks is already poof.

[DAVOUT]

Some AI moves, I understand : Troy, Amiens, Dijon, Brundisium, we could have done the same. But others seems strange : Leeds is at 8 tiles from Tenochtitlan and 16 from London !
Also, what is the purpose of the Greeks declaring war to England, so far away ? Only because it is the second power on the graph ?
BTW, do we know the Greeks forces sent to take Newcastle ?
Another thing : the Greeks declare war in 390, and two turns later Newcastle is taken : from Ephesus to the border of Newcastle, through Cologne, Konigsberg, Nuremberg, it takes 19 turns for infantry, and 16 for cavalry ; the AI takes care very early of the rivals ! Anyway, it would be interesting to know if they are still sending reinforcements.

[Harovan]

That means the Greeks sneak attacked the English. Or possibly, they approached with forces and bullied the English then, and the English declined. Typical AI behavior.

[DAVOUT]

We could also say that they do exactly as we do : go to the border, declare war, cross the border and attack the following turn ! Do they learn from us ? Were they also imitating the archers rush ?

Would they be able to win a limited war against the Brits and the Aztechs, will they stay indifferent to our rise among the major powers ? Whatever the answer, they will have to rebuild there forces before launching a new campaign.

As they made the decision before 800 BC, when we where fighting the Americans, there is another point bothering me : what were the Germans doing during all this period of time, during which they produced only 2 settlers (may be 3) ? It is certainly from this side that the threat can appear first.

[Shiber]

It's wonderful news that the AI is switching to Republic. Now that they depend on money to rush projects we can use our superior human intelligence and come up with more projects such as the recent mapwhoring project and increase the size of our wallet on the expense of the AI civs. In addition to that, if we can bind the AIs into gpt deals we can cripple their scientific research as well and gain an advantage in that arena. I suggest that we look into new ways of selling to the AIs stuff they don't really need, perhaps under a joint M.I/A.S.F thread.
As for offering our alliance to any of the sides, I wouldn't ally with or against Greece before Persia decides which side it wants to join. If they declare war on England or the Aztecs then we should join Greece's side since we'll be relatively safe in comparison to the other civs (Greece will partially block off the Aztecs and Persia will somewhat delay the English).
However, if Persia chooses to side with England we should think twice about allying with Greece or we might find ourselves in an unwelcome war in the totally unprepared eastern front.

One thing is certain: we should put as many civs into this war as possible and try to balance it out so this becomes a trench war. This will be a favorable condition for us since the AIs will spend a lot of resources holding its lines while neglecting their infrastructure. Also, their Republic citizens will begin demanding a settlement until the AIs are forced to turn money into entertainment and turn workers into entertainers, thus decreasing their production potential.
Also, I expect that techs will start changing hands in a few turnthreads. When more civs will hold techs such as Monotheism and Feudalism the price will drop significantly.

[Shiber]

We have a road to Mycenae. Once Greece connects it to its capital (they need to dig two tiles) we could start trading dyes with them.
Another point in favor of allying with Greece if we decide to enter the war.

[Reddawg]

I don't think it's advisable to become involved in this war in any way, not at this point. Simply refusing RoPs with any of the parties involved is enough. We have to face it, Apolyton is weaker than the nations. We could perhaps rival the Aztecs but the stats show they're making moves to come up in the world.

The French War is going to take all of our concentration and focus as it is, and plus projects like reaching Uber Isle and the cessless public works... entering into a multi-party war at this point is folly. Our borders are too insecure and as someone pointed out this conflict could spread. It's just too volatile!

[Aro]

I’m not a member, but I would like to say something about. I agree with Reddawg: we have our own WoN right now to fight. By other hand, I think we must reinforce our borders, especially because we don’t know what the Germans are planning. They are extremely aggressive, and very close to the conflict. Could they want a piece of this? And what side they would choose?
Btw, Greeks, Aztecs, British and Germans are ALL annoyed with us (as a matter of fact, everybody are annoyed with us, except Iroquois, Persians and… France! And the French will be furious with us in seven or eight turns…) . Scaring…

Edit: The first line in Reddawg's sign says all... (and the second too, in french... )

[DAVOUT]

A nice casus belli is building : the German access to Munich will probably be shut by our cultural border before the flip happens.

[Aro]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
A nice casus belli is building : the German access to Munich will probably be shut by our cultural border before the flip happens.

Aha! I'm not so paranoid at all!!!

[DAVOUT]

Never heard of the Dantzig corridor ?

[Aro]

Hmmm…Sounds familiar... Please, refresh my memory!

[Spiffor]

Shiber :
A very interesting analysis. You're right when you say we could profit from others republic by getting more money from our whorings.
Also, I completely overlooked the future stance of Persia in my approach, which will be a very important element.

You're perfectly right when you say we should put as many civs in this war as possible, while keeping the Balance of Power. Doing so is pretty difficult in Civ3, in which we can't simply send a mercenary state (unlikeCiv2). However, I think there is a possible, non treacherous (but dangerous) way :
It's possible the AIs are on the same side, but don't ally with each other : for example, Brits and Aztecs are both against Greece and are RoPed, but they aren't allies.
If such a thing happens in the side we choose (if we choose one), we won't have to be trustworthy to all our "allies" ; because they won't technically be allies, but simply people who fight a separate war against a common foe.
Imagine England now allying with Rome against the Aztecs, while Liz and Monte are still fighting against Greece. That's what we could do.
Of course, this idea is requires to be extremely cautious. By doing this, we'd get as many temporary friends as long-lasting enemies.

The other, less risky method, will not depend entirely on us : we get into the war when it becomes unbalanced, and we drag oter Civs as soon as the other side gets stronger than us (not earlier).

These 2 methods will sadly need money. Much of it. Could we trade with other countries, our dyes could help buying allies. But we won't trade with any other than the Greeks for a long time, it seems.
With our treasury and our military being focused on other things, I suggest we wait before getting dragged in this war. If it lasts, choosing the right side might prove helpful for an easy (but limited) territory expansion and trade-bargains.

Sidenote : whatever the outcome, I think we should sue the French for peace the very same turn we take Paris and Orleans. If we don't, they might ally with one of our neighbours, and make the war last much longer than expected.

[Shiber]

There's a good chance that they will not even agree to see our envoy! I'm afraid this war will go on much longer than we hope.

One important note: we probably shouldn't enter the war before we're done with the French. Otherwise the French will give us lesser conditions when we sue for peace since our stance will be worse (we'll still be at war with other enemies and the French will abuse this).