Machiavelli institute : analysis of the Greek Wars

[Togas]

I am grateful to the Institute for already starting this discussion. We are now witnessing the first foreign war in our history and how we react will have long lasting effects on our nation.

In my games I often enjoy pulling other nations into a conflict to balance it out, or to wipe out a major foe. There are two drawbacks to this: First, you have to be in the war yourself. Second: Over time (if you do this enough) everyone's reputation plummets. However, the joy of seeing your main rival picked apart by weaker neighbors is delightfully satisfying.

After seeing this war break out, I explored the possibilities but, sad to say, I find little we can sucessfully exploit from this conflict. We have our own war to start. It would be foolish to get involved in two wars at once.

I would like to know what the opinion of the institute is on, perhaps, agreeing to a RoP with the nations involved in this war.

I would also like to know under what changed conditions we should reconsider getting involved in this war. Our war with France may be brief. The old plan was to use our remaining forces against America, but if we finish off France in a matter of turns (like our first American war), should we then consider attacking the Hopilites?

--Togas

[Reddawg]

Togas do you really feel that the war with France will be brief? I believe we'll be triumphant but I'm not confident in our ability to quickly end the situation. At one point does the Foreign Ministry intend to sue them for peace?
And what does the Military say about all this? It's going to become the next big issue already I can tell.

[Togas]

I feel the war with France may be brief. Our previous war was much shorter than any of us anticipated. My wish is that we consider what our plans ought to be if our war turns out to be a brief one.

I need to consult with the SMC and President to determine what our exact military goals are in France. My understanding from reading the SMC's French war thread is that our goal is to take Orleans, Paris, Rouen, Reims, and Marsailles. We would sue for peace before all these cities were taken and try to have them give us the remaining cities (and other goodies) in the peace settlement.

If we lose our swordsmen stacks, we may consider sueing for peace before total victory is acheived. We'll discuss that possibility if it occurs.

--Togas

[Spiffor]

Togas : I don't think we can afford to fisih off France, or even to prune it insanely (what we've done with America). What we can is take Paris and Orleans in one turn, and maybe go for one or two other cities to conquer them, before our strike force becomes too weak. The obvious edge of this plan is that we could get Marseilles, that the French won't give away for peace (bc wines in its radius)

However, continuing the conquest after taking Paris and Orleans is pretty risky : we risk a counterattack on Paris (esp. if we move our swordsmen to another city), and we give more time to the French to sign an alliance against us.

Also, we shouldn't forget how useful the American war will be : Americans are'nt powerful at all, and the remnants of our conquest army could easily conquer them. Plus, the Yanks don't have much money, and no tech, to bribe an AI to go against us.
Lastly, compeltely conquering the Yanks will give us fragant valley, i.e more incense for our population and for future trades.
I think securing the wines near Paris (and securing the cities between Apolyton and Paris) will be enough for the French campaign. No need for more.

[Donal Graeme]

I can't talk for long, but three questions need to be answered.

1. Will Germany get into the fight, and on whose side? If I were Bismark I would go with the Greeks, as I will weaken two closer rivals.

2. Will Persia get into the fight, and on whose side? Again, I say they go with the Greeks.

3. Will this affect our war with France any? I say yes, as it means that other nations will be les likely to join with France, as they have other things on their mind. Feel free to chip in.

[Togas]

I agree that we cannot finish off France. The plan is just to conquer the section of France that is east of the mountains, at least as far as I can tell from reading the threads.

I don't make military decisions, I make diplomatic ones. We've already decided to declare war. I'd like to see us end the war after we've taken as many cities as is possible OR we've reached our objective of taking all the cities on this side of the mountain. At that point, once the war with France is over, we'll have to decide what next.

If we have the forces I agree that a second war with America is in our best interest. I don't believe that war with Greece is in our best interest, but I am curious to hear if anyone at the Institute believes so.

--Togas

[Reddawg]

I can't imagine who would want to go to war with Greece at this point; they'd screw us over.

My only worry for the french war is that they will refuse our envoys and in the meantime either bring someone else in the war against us, or pull up reinforcements, forcing us to consolidate our gains.

It could be disaster if the French/Apolyton war gets absorbed into this Greek/English/Aztec war. We could have most every nation on the continent at war.

[Togas]

Originally posted by Donal Graeme
1. Will Germany get into the fight, and on whose side? If I were Bismark I would go with the Greeks, as I will weaken two closer rivals.

This is the million dollar question. The question I am most intregued by. I don't know if Bismark wants to fight two enemies. I think it comes down to if Greece can afford to bribe Germany into the war. In my experience most of these wars tend to be very one sided, as the side with more allies has more money to bribe in more allies. Greece didn't pay off Germany in the first couple turns of the war. Might not ever bring him in.

But it is entirely possible that Germany will take advantage of a weak neighbor (as a result of the war) and jump in later.

Could anyone check to see how much money Greece has right now? That would surely help resolve this question.

Originally posted by Donal Graeme
2. Will Persia get into the fight, and on whose side? Again, I say they go with the Greeks.

Also depends on if someone pays them off. They have a RoP with us that allows them access to Greece and they have their eye on land near Greece. Who knows which side they'd join. I just wonder if their military is developed or if they're still in Rex phase. They still don't have immortals. My guess is that they wouldn't join voluntarily, they'd need a lot of gold to get in.

--Togas

[GePap]

Originally posted by Donal Graeme
I can't talk for long, but three questions need to be answered.

1. Will Germany get into the fight, and on whose side? If I were Bismark I would go with the Greeks, as I will weaken two closer rivals.

I doubt the Germans will get too involved, but looking at what has happened, the Germans are morelikely to go agaisnt the greeks- they are the transgressors, and spreading like wildfire. Besides, the greeks have no money to pay out, Monty does/will

2. Will Persia get into the fight, and on whose side? Again, I say they go with the Greeks.

I am very skeptical about Persia joining the wars on either side.

3. Will this affect our war with France any? I say yes, as it means that other nations will be les likely to join with France, as they have other things on their mind. Feel free to chip in.

With our military, I don't think anyone was going to joijn Joan vs. us, any more than anyone helped Abe.

[GePap]

Like Reddawg, I think we should currently keep out of this conflict, until our war with France ends, which should be very soon. After we get what we want from France, the situation changes greatly.

First, we will need to accelerate the camapaign vs. America, simply to put those crucial land under our control and out of any other hands, including Abes.

How we hande this war, IF it is still ragging in a few turns, becomes a much more difficult question.
I am not afraid of the Greeks. in just 4 turns we jumped 2 spots on the histograph: our true power is finally showing. The greeks have finally reurn to some sort of military equity with us, though they lack iron. NBow, war with them means upgrading those 5 warriors we have to swordmen, replacing them with spearmen, and getting horsemen (to upgrade to knights later also) to give us moblity. If we get involved then it must be against the greeks. They are obviously the transgressors in this war, and if we want to gain browny points, then becomeing the leaders of a grand coolition against the greeks, not only allying with Elizabth and Monty, but also Bismarck and Xerxes, would give us a great diplomatic cover for territorial expansion. The Greeks by their actions have shown themselves aggressive and transgressors against world peace (so have we, but we are only human!) and obviously we must work to stop them.

[Shiber]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I think securing the wines near Paris (and securing the cities between Apolyton and Paris) will be enough for the French campaign. No need for more.

Problem - when we conquer Paris it will have zero culture. Since the French will probably sell the Colosseum they're about to complete before we take Paris and since there are no other cultural buildigs there we'll have to build a temple if we want to reach the wines.
However if things turn out bad for us and we lose too many of our swordsmen then I'll support building a spearman unit first.

EDIT: Oops, sorry, it's OT.

[jdjdjd]

This is interesting....

After war with France, if we are to gear up for another war, should it be America or Greece?

You indicate your preference for America. I assume because its already weak or because there is not much left of it. Also, there are four incense, one iron, one horse, and potentially very big populations in Boston and Washington. Are there any downsides....? I have trouble thinking of any, so why not then?

Attacking Greece, assuming a plan for Eastern Greece, i.e Sparta and Herakleia and East. (five cities all together), provides only horses and lots of jungle (blech).

So why am I going to propose Greece over America?

Because America is already weak and has no room to grow (there is some land north of them, but to get that they have to vie with the Greeks, Germans and the Aztecs. So, the Americans will be weak in the future too.....but the Greeks, they are a power. Right now, the Aztecs and the Brits are at war with them, which hopefully will wear down their defense and army somewhat, and as mentioned trigger their GA, getting it out of our way.

The question then would be do we want to form an alliance with England and the Aztecs now or wait until after war with France, when such an alliance will probably not be possible? I say wait until after war with France. I think we need time to further build our forces and plan the invasion, and so the Greeks do not have any extra time to prepare for us.

I would say we continue as planned in France with plans to continue our victorious armies north past Marseilles & Rheims, consolidating them, and then send them into Sparta, then Herakleia...cutting off the other three eastern Greek cities, fortify and prepare for a counter attack on Sparta. Meanwhile, we will have to Form a second army in North Apolyton, and send it west into Mycenae, Argos & Delphi. The problem is how much time do we need to form this second Army, and get it to Greece. I would suggest 15-20 to build more reinforcements, finish off the French... too many turns may mean time for the Greeks to rebuild their own forces

Specifics would be a matter for the War Academy experts, of course. But, that would be my thoughts on choosing the Greeks instead of the US.

[Captain]

all I really have to offer is that since they're starting wars with each other, the ai is moved out of REX phase (despite a few more settler stacks) and into military buildup. Seeing the large distance involved, the ais might not "use up" all their units in these wars, but instead will have a lot left sitting around when peace is declared - whoever the "winner" is.

That means, as much I 'd like to build up, we can't afford to let our military go slack. And we need not only defense, but a high number of mobile offensive troops - which will be an even better defense since we can cut them down before they hit our cities, and we can take the fight to them.

A strong military will ensure we can keep diplomatic options open. These AIs in their war phase will soon catch up to our present military unit advantage, and then watch as our "friends" start making "requests" of us.

Eventually the basin must be ours if we want hegemony, so whatever advantage we can gain against the greeks we should take. A pile-on Greece with other allies would not be as bad as feared. Even if our allies captured cities, they'd be so corrupt and the cultural reset would make them easy targets for us in the future.

If we used to Americans as allies agains thte Greeks, the GReeks might take some American cities for us, and we could then "liberate" those. Only thing is, America is close enough and weak enough that they might get wiped out.

Are we assuming possession of knights by the time ourwar with Greece comes?

[Col. Emil Furst]

I am of the opinion we should stay out of these foreign wars at all costs. After the French war, and perhaps the destruction of America, we will still be in dire need of an internal build up. Having to fight in this war will only delay our badly needed building phase.

Devoting ourselves to war too often is folly.

[Aggie]

Any war we wage after france will be waged with other units, because including loses and occupation forces(to prevent culture flip), I think little will be left to send.
Just some food for thought.
Aggie