Strategy

[Arnelos]

Ah, this reminds me of the "Golden Rule of Diplomacy" (the boardgame):

"Do unto others what they would do unto you, just do it first."

Alternate version:

"Do unto others what they would do unto you, just do it better."

[DAVOUT]

Gathering Storm is in the process of recruiting Arrian ...
Not exactly a good news.

[GodKing]

Who, or what, is Arrian?

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Arnelos
As such, GodKings suggestion that we play differently just to trip people up has merit, though I personally don't feel it would work as well

Why don't convince them that we are going to play different but then play the same?

And what if they think that we think that they think we are going to play different?

Er... Too much work I'm afraid

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by GodKing
Who, or what, is Arrian?

Arrian is a legend who is known to find the game too easy at deity level.

[GodKing]

Sick puppy.

[ruby_maser]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Arrian is a legend who is known to find the game too easy at deity level.

I would like to know how he got the title of "legend". I'm not aware of his qualifications for this or how anyone could achieve such status in, what has until now, been a single player game.

Did the AI start whining or what?

[Crousto]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Arrian is a legend who is known to find the game too easy at deity level.

Anyway, this might be some kind of disadvantage if he's still used to tactics specific to that silly cheating deity AI. Multiplayer will be completely new and different.

[DAVOUT]

Let say that I may overestimate Arrian who has given in the strategy forum many examples of impressive games, but dont forget that it is dangerous to underestimate an opponent.

[mrmitchell]

Originally posted by Arnelos
I do not wish to steal another's idea as my own... it was mrmitchell's idea.

Hmm...first, Spain=Spam, second, "Carthage that produces Carnage", third, this idea!

I must have found a brain!

Like that two-armed dude said, the essence of human vs human diplomacy is tricking them. We need to do a lot of trickery.

[Togas]

Originally posted by Arnelos
Ninot's idea of assaulting the home area of a team which ATTACKS ANOTHER TEAM is workable... because then we can spin this to teams such as Legoland or another that they have nothing to fear from us as long as they don't attack anyone. That we felt compelled to attack Gathering Storm (Trash Trip's Ass) because their conquest of Team Lux Invicta would have made them too powerful and we couldn't accept that.

What we shouldn't do is just go stomping on people without providing clear expectations afterwards on what people can do to avoid being stomped on.

One thing I'm sure of is that we will create a very believeable REASON for whatever war we undertake. Not only because we're shrewd Machiavellian sorts of people, also because we're roleplayers who wouldn't march out our forces without a good reason.

Examples of "good reasons":

The victims are being senselessly slaughtered, babies being killed in the streets, and so forth and we had a MORAL DUTY to do something right and try to stop the barbarism. We would publically state that OUR ONLY GOAL is to force the agressor to stop and cede back cities to the victim (but all the while we'd reck havoc on their cities, infrastructure, etc. Probably even keep a few in the end "as a punishment for their evil ways.")

The Gods spoke to us and told us to help the followers of our religion who were being attacked by the infidels.

We had a treaty with the victims and we ALWAYS follow through with our promises.

We need to save the world from the spread of (fascism/communism/evil religion/bad culture).

We have a royal marriage with victim civ, they are family (vassels?) and we have sworn an oath to protect them.

... I'm sure we can come up with countless others.

--Togas

[Ninot]

Well, making reasons isnt hard if we arent making the first strike


for example

the C3DG "reasons" for attacking France, America, and America again were all crap.

the reasons we would have for attack the glory of war after they declare war on the Builders can be golden. We just need them to declare war first.

But once again, I must state im in disfavor of being the obvious First Strikers.

If we can show other civs that we wont attack first, but will attack viciously in response to any wrongful attackers, we will gain respect, trust (cuz we arent sudden, unprovoked attackers), and we will have some control over when we are in war.

Atleast in the early game, we have to set up a reputation, not a label. One civ may be SUPRISED by a large First Strike, but there will be plenty more civs later... and they wont be so suprised if we should try that later on. As soon as we make our first unreasonable declaration of war, we will lose trust for a long time.

If we can lay low untill someone else starts the wars, ultimately,we should come out ahead.

[Ninot]

I love Machiavellianism... and plotting

what job is that exactly? Is there an evil, non social planning section to our government yet?

[GeneralTacticus]

Regarding first strikes... are we talking about doing this to humans or AIs? If we do it to the AIs before we encounter any humans, we can just say they sneak attacked us and we're retaliating, even if we started it.

[Ninot]

Those AI's are quite the curveball arent they?

I propose we try to rally an aliance of Us, the Builders, and one of the warmongeres, to get as much AI land as possible.... to exclude two warmongers from this.


and to do this ASAP.