The War Party: Membership and Philosophy

[centrifuge]

Okay guys, stop the nonsense!!! You're starting to push me toward the darkside...


If we don't go to war soon, and I don't start reading some different posts and/or sober up , I may just start up a woodstock thread.

[centrifuge]

OG, I'm gonna regret that in the morning

[Maquiladora]

May i remind all War Party members to vote for Comrade Turambar in the MoD elections, this is a very important position for us. Its 7-9 against at the moment...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75651&pagenumber=2

[Turambar]

Thanks for the support Maq!

Lets keep the peacemongers out of power!!!!

[ískallin]

kill the hippies

[Immortal Wombat]

All love-loving peaceniks vote for me.

[child of Thor]

Sorry IW, i think your wombat nature is getting the better of you in this time of crisis.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

well, at the moment, i would advise the warlovers as well to vote for IW. at least those, that only like wars when the win them.

[child of Thor]

Don't get me(or all the members of the war party) wrong Zaphod B.I'm not a war-monger, infact i will, in most situations rather live a peaceful CTP2 life.

Still i feel, as do the members of the war-party, that our current situation is not good. So much so that going to war against a stronger civ is possibly a better option for long term survival. We all know that the AI is at a huge disavantage when going to war against a human opponant. We can be 'wiley' in ways the AI can only dream about. We can lure enemy armies into traps, we can scout attack(use a unit as sacrifice to see the defences before going to attack) etc etc.
So even when at a disadvantage the human player can fight tactical to even out the balance of power.

Also the AI is very bad at keeping to it's diplomatic agreements. You can spend all the gold you like and be as nice as you can, but at a momments notice you will be attacked without provication. When surrounded by stronger and bigger AI civs this can lead to disaster.At the momment we have two larger civs on our doorstep, each within striking distance and each capable of fielding bigger armies than us.
This make me nervous as we already had diplomatic probs with the austrians and the germans won't be happy that we are so close.

Even if we expand south and invest the production into settlers and science, we will not catch up with either austria or germany for along time, time enough for them to decide they don't actually love us anymore and instead want to kill us - completely. We still won't be strong enough to defend ourselfs.

Atleast if we attack early and really fight a good tactical and focusd campaign, we will expand our empire quickly enough so that we can get decent defences in place and weaken one potential 'super' enemy for later on in the game.

There is a risk in attacking a stronger enemy, and it could all go horribly wrong if we don't do it well enough, with the right focus at the right times.

There is also a risk in being stuck between two very powerful, unpredictable and untrustworthy AI civs.

Which is worse? We feel the later in this camp.

[Maquiladora]

Bumped this thread cause i couldnt find another relavant one.

Who is the WP going to concentrate their votes on in MoD election, Pedrunn or Turambar? We cant split the votes between them or neither will win, we need to make a decision.

Ive already voted for Turambar because even though Pedrunn is going to start more discussions an stuff i still dont see that as a reason to kick out a perfectly good MoD. Anyone can start discussions on tactics, even Pedrunn can if he wants to when Turambar gets elected, but its hardly a reason to elect someone out.

Thoughts?

[Pedrunn]

What i have to say is what it is in my speech.

I will remain impartial! Wont be campaigning here

[HuangShang]

maq is right, we must have only one WP candidate to take all the votes