Our objectives- a proposal for a poll

[Lancer]

What are we up to? I don't know, do you? I propose a poll to figure out a strategy for our future. That way we can have a plan that will help determine our communications with other civs. If we are going to attack a civ in 30 turns we don't want to make a 100 turn peace treaty with them. We have met one civ that suggests we build nothing but warriors. Well they don't get a vote, do they? However they have a plan for us, do we? They say on the other side of their civ is team Banana. Some here describe them as suckers of renown. That's our world, what are we going to do with or to it?

So, how about a poll, should we do a poll or polls to determine our strategy?

[UnOrthOdOx]

KIIIIIILLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!

[RobWorham]

I'd say lets post what our preferred short, medium, and long term objectives are, and then work it out from there.

I don't think a poll is sophisticated enough to provide answers for such a complex scenario. This is Civ after all............

[Lancer]

Rob, in that case you want to vote no.

[Zoid]

[LS] This poll is invalid [/LS]

[Lancer]

Good job filling in while he's gone.

[Nugog]

I think the very first decision we need to make is:

a) We expand to PAL's border then work things out from there

b) We trust PAL and want to work with them for the short to mid term

c) We want to exterminate PAL

I tend to agree with Rob that mid to long range plans have no real use - due to the inherent complications of the game, mixed with the unexpected nature of any game played against human opponents.

PAL is IMO the decision we need to make now.

If what they tell us is true and is the other civ on tis landmass - well this will have a huge impact on my view of what to do with PAL. If is there - then destroy PAL gets my vote.

will not pose a threat IMO - PAL will. Team Banana is not about conquest (or winning really) - they are in this for fun and roleplaying - PAL wants to win.

We need to also consider that there is a "new world" out there as well.

So I will vote "yes" - but only for a short range goal/plan.

[RobWorham]

Originally posted by Nugog
I think the very first decision we need to make is:

a) We expand to PAL's border then work things out from there

b) We trust PAL and want to work with them for the short to mid term

c) We want to exterminate PAL

I tend to agree with Rob that mid to long range plans have no real use - due to the inherent complications of the game, mixed with the unexpected nature of any game played against human opponents.

PAL is IMO the decision we need to make now.

If what they tell us is true and is the other civ on tis landmass - well this will have a huge impact on my view of what to do with PAL. If is there - then destroy PAL gets my vote.

will not pose a threat IMO - PAL will. Team Banana is not about conquest (or winning really) - they are in this for fun and roleplaying - PAL wants to win.

We need to also consider that there is a "new world" out there as well.

So I will vote "yes" - but only for a short range goal/plan.

Expand as much as possible, squeezing PAL in a Banana / Rabbit sandwich, then, when the time is ripe bounce all over them.......

[UnOrthOdOx]

Destroy PAL gets my vote no matter WHO is on the other side.

Just simple economics. To remain competetive in a game of civ, you need to militarily take from your neighbors. We only have one neighbor.

That banana is on the other side is just gravy.

[Kiwallabok]

ok sounds good to me lets own PAL we should try do it soon i think, not Too soon we must be prepared but sooner then they anticipate war

[fed1943]

When and how are IMO the big questions.
Short term I would vote in survival (i.e. defense) and fill the free
room with good cities.
Best regards,

[UnOrthOdOx]

I agree that our short term should be BREEDING and filling in the space aggressively.

Choking should be considered in the mid term, since I'm not at all confident in gaining meaningfull assistance from Banana, and should be done with an eye towards eventual conquering in the long term.

[Lancer]

I agree with hitting them before they expect it. So, do we wait for our UU or try to take a city or two with axmen? Keep in mind that if we wait until they have alph they can undo any stack. So we're either hitting pre alph with axmen or waiting on the UU, is that even close to correct? What do you think? We could try tearing off a piece with axmen and finish the job with our UU later.

If its axmen I'd term that 'short term'. With the UU that's mid term, after that, long term.

What term do you guys want?

Geo mentioned 20 turns to axmen, (ie connecting up the copper) is that a real estimate?

As it is the poll would look like this:

1) Hit em short term with axmen

2) Hit em mid term with our UU

3) Hit em long term with whatever

4) The UnOrthOdOx approach, pillage etc (See his post in 'Our Objectives' thread.

5) Expand like crazy, think about hitting them again after 50+ turns.

6) War is bad for electrons and other living things, don't hit em.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Lancer
I agree with hitting them before they expect it. So, do we wait for our UU

Hell no. Happens far too late.

or try to take a city or two with axmen?

Hell no, too clumsy and predictable.

Keep in mind that if we wait until they have alph they can undo any stack.

I need an explaination of this, please. (no BTS here)

Geo mentioned 20 turns to axmen, (ie connecting up the copper) is that a real estimate?

Sounds close.



Mentioning, AGAIN, what I would do:
Capitol: Focus on buildings, workers, and Settlers, whipping the latter whenever possible.

BREED!!!!


2nd city: Build it's own worker, build barracks, build 3 axeman, 1 spear, then continue to pump out units and whip buildings/workers/settlers when it hits it's happy.

This becomes the harrassment stack from hell. It's job is to force PAL to guard it's workers, guard it's improvements, cities, and settlers. AND NOT TO ATTACK THE CITIES!!! Only taking targets of opportunity. (pillaging a copper, for instance)

This forces PAL into one of 3 courses: Attempt to kill our stack, attempt to ignore our stack, launch a counter strike.

An attempt to kill our stack after it has been loosed only slows down PAL's expansion, and, we should keep to defensible terrain to ensure PAL uses more hammers to destroy our stack than it was worth.

Attempting to ignore our stack forces PAL to focus on defending it's settlers and cities while utilizing their road network to keep units from us. A proper zone defense can make pillaging difficult. In this case, our stack should focus on forcing them to expand westward, thus freeing our expansion right to their doorstep.

Launching a counter attack attempts to make us withdraw our troops. We should be prepared with proper scouting to see such an attack coming a long way off, and utilize the thus weakened PAL defenses to our stack's full pillaging potential.

All of this is meant to be a prelude to a full blown attack with catapults. (which is why I wanted the top half, but we can obtain from Banana, hopefully)

THAT is how I would play the situation. We've already gone astray from it's perfect implimentation on several points, but that does not mean it is no longer a valid strategy either.

IF we do attack "with axes", we should not neccessarily attack with axes...but rather a force comprised of axes and horse archers, which make for a most deadly pre-catapult invasion force in the right hands.

I would be against a philosophy of lining up 10 axemen to hopefully kill their 4 fortified archers, however. Pyrrhic victories are not good in CIV.

[Chuckman]

Originally posted by RobWorham


Expand as much as possible, squeezing PAL in a Banana / Rabbit sandwich, then, when the time is ripe bounce all over them.......

I would favor this general approach. My thoughts on short to mid term goal is to expand to their border.