Persia: Peace, Quick War, or Total Conquest?

[adaMada]

Very nice graphics and analysis Ghengis.

Discussion on this topic should continue. After this next turn, I'll post a little update here which will address the way we'll be handling the next week (while Togas is gone and our first assults on Tyre and Sidon should be prepared.)

Keep putting out good plans like this, and if we do decide to continue the war with Persia, we'll be ready.

Aggie, if you're still around, I'd love to know how many military units you think you'd need for each of the phases of Ghengis' plan... Or if anyone else thinks they can take a guess, I'd love to hear it.

-- adaMada

[kring]

People didn't think France had the money to get alliances either.

[adaMada]

Originally posted by kring
People didn't think France had the money to get alliances either.

Persia has much less money than France did -- only about twenty gold right now, if I recall correctly.

France had a bit over a hundred gold or so; We hoped that it would cost more, but the issue was brought up before the war. I think that the danger, at least for now, is less in this case.

-- adaMada

[Panag]

hi ,

GF

we should take tyre and sidon , make peace and then start to focus on our infrastructure and Uber isle , ....

have a nice day

[Donegeal]

I believe I read somewhere that AI's only draw alliances at the begining of a war. Remember, this was started because France brought Persia into the war several turns ago. IMHO, this would not be considered a new war by the Persian AI so they won't try to make alliances.

I cannot coberate this thought that AI's only draw at the beging, but there wasn't any objection to the idea back when it was first proposed.

[Panag]

Originally posted by donegeal
I believe I read somewhere that AI's only draw alliances at the begining of a war. Remember, this was started because France brought Persia into the war several turns ago. IMHO, this would not be considered a new war by the Persian AI so they won't try to make alliances.

I cannot coberate this thought that AI's only draw at the beging, but there wasn't any objection to the idea back when it was first proposed.

hi ,

dont bet your money on it , ...

the AI can get others in , normally at the start , but even after a long war he can certainly get some friends in , ....

at this stage the ai has no money , no so many techs , so we can be happy , but i a thousand years or so , it shall be different , ...

have a nice day

[astrologix]

Alea jacta est !

We are proud of our valiant armies. Don't return without the heads of our enemies ! Banana bless you !

Good luck, generals !

[kring]

I saw a war where Egypt got India involved (through a Military Alliance) in a war that had been on going for a number of turns, this with the 1.29 patch so it may not apply. And Egypt was about as poor as Persia is now. It is not always about money, though.

[Shiber]

I posted this under the Dogs of War thread but I think this belongs here too:

All the people who support the idea of making a grab for the Great Pyramids seem to be neglecting two facts:
1. We are playing on Emperor. The AIs get HUGE production bonuses.
2. Persia has had time to prepare. It's been a while since they declared war on us and they had enough time to create a formidable army of archers. I expect they'll start marching into view in two turns.
Even if we are be able to take out those archers without suffering any serious losses, we won't be able to get any further into Persian territory than Tyre and Sidon (unless we waste all our money on rushing attackers) because the Persians will have more time to generate more forces while we fight their existing ones.

[GodKing]

One thing about t he onion strategy. Instead of in the first layer taking the southeastern city (forgot all the names) take the northeastern city, as that is the one that could get iron in its radious. Cut off their balls first. Then take the choice cities.

[Donegeal]

I would have to agree with GK on this one. Remove the threat of Iron and it should go more smoothly.

[MrWhereItsAt]

It is clear that war, at least as far as Sidon and Tyre, is the preferred option here. Beyond this things are more controversial, and I agree we need a repoll and more discussion once we see the resistance Persia is putting up.

I voted for peace when we get decent terms, but I agree with GodKing that once we take their Iron we can make mincemeat out of them. Let's just hope they don't upgrade all their Warriors to Swordsmen should they connect Iron for a turn or two.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by GodKing
One thing about t he onion strategy. Instead of in the first layer taking the southeastern city (forgot all the names) take the northeastern city, as that is the one that could get iron in its radious. Cut off their balls first. Then take the choice cities.

The Iron is a farther march, and with their luxuries they could always trade for iron. Taking Gordium puts in striking range of their most populous and productive cities (the ones they build wonders in) which is an excellent strategic position for bargaining and any subsequent attack.

[History Guy]

So, it seems as if the preferred option here is really conquest. I think that destroying the whole civilization is overdoing it a bit, but I'd say at least heading to Persepolis to take the Pyramids would be a good idea, and if the Pyramids are taken, then, when we have the Persians where we want them, we can either sue for peace and reap the rewards of peace, or simply dive in for the kill.