Presidential Campaign Thread

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:14

In accompaniment of the Foreign Advisor Campaign Thread started by Ninot, I thought I might begin my run at the spot.

In addition, it opens up the ability for my opposition to make their statements heard, as well as for others to ask questions.

If you don't already know, I'm the founder of the Imperialist Party. In case that title doesn't knock you on the head, I advocate expansion and acqusition of wealth for our empire. Where things lay open for the taking without warfare, I will take a peaceful, yet firm stance. If something must be done through war (if a valuable resource or area of land is at stake), (or the time is right

), then I will support war. I will always listen to the public's demands, though I will support an imperialist view, and make that fact known.

Shout outs to my fellow party members in their bid for office:
Space05us running for VP

civman2000 · June 10, 2002, 00:17

hmmm...i would agree except that i would put science ahead of money.

Maybe the Imperialists and the AAACC3 could form an alliance, if not merge (do you oppose a constituion?)

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:22

I was the one that made the constitution thread remember?

Of course I don't support a constitution... it would clutter the game up and make it slower than it already will be. I proposed a merge of our two parties, but someone

disagreed! :doitnow:

And yes, I would put science ahead of money, but if you acquire more wealth in general, it allows your science to grow as well.

civman2000 · June 10, 2002, 00:29

Did I disagree?? Oops...I don't remember that...maybe it was space05us, and we can convince him to change his mind if it was...

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:32

It was MWIA I believe.
But I'm still fine for a merger, if the AAACC3 is willing to accept my offer.

Ninot · June 10, 2002, 00:44

The Foreign Advisor Candidate has a question for the Imperial Party Leader:

You state you advocate expansion of land and wealth. My question to you is, at what costs? And, exactly how neccesary do you find this expansion? Would you sacrifice polite international talks to expand? Would you expand because you can, or because you must?

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 00:50

It, as always, depends in the situation.
The goal is always the expansion and increasing wealth and power of our empire. That is the goal of our civilization throughout time... to be remembered as a powerful empire, both economically, territorially, and militarily. Expansion is demanded as new needs arise. If a weak and uncooperative neighbor finds itself in a war abroad, and it's fertile valleys lay open to our toops, then I would support action to expand against the weaklings, and bring their struggling and starving people under our protective arm. Of course, we would never outstrip out boundaries... there is nothing worse than having to concede territory due to a lost war. However, if the potential gains are worth the risks, then I would support expansion in many cases.

Space05us · June 10, 2002, 01:20

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
Did I disagree?? Oops...I don't remember that...maybe it was space05us, and we can convince him to change his mind if it was...

*puts hand in jacket* "Civman are you accusing me of crimes against the party?......because if so I want your autograph you're a brave man!!" *pulls out notepad*

Nubclear · June 10, 2002, 01:34

Trip, I am concerned that you might expand at all costs.

Science, in my opinion, is very important in Civilization. Science can be traded for anything. It can be traded for alliances, money, happiness, resources, geography, and even more technology. It also allows you to produce great wonders of the world, and it allows complete military dominiation. It gives you an edge over other civiliations. As you can see, science is very important.

Expansion is also very important. If placed correctly, cities can produce huge amounts of commerce which directly affects the science buget. Also, cities can produce quite a few beakers as well, which also directly affects science.

Commerce too is important. Commerce can buy allies, supports units, rushes units, and is overall a good thing to have. If a civilization becomes annoyed, gold if often a very good gift to give to increase their status towards us.

Expansion at the wrong time, and/or in the wrong place could have dire consequences. Corruption could set our treasury into a downward spiral which then would force us to cut back on science if we wanted to maintain a good treasury.

During the end of the game, we've decided that the only way to win is a space race. Well, we need aluminum to complete our spaceship endeavour. However, the only bit of aluminum THAT WE KNOW OF is at the center of the Indian empire. Right now, the Indians are gracious with us. They have a mutual protection pact with nearly everyone else. Now, were on two seperate islands which are very far away. Were approaching 2050AD, and we are not leading when it comes to points.

The Indians aren't quite that advanced and don't know they have aluminum. What would you do in this situation? Would you conquer every city and make a clear path to where the aluminum is? I'm very curious to know.

Tassadar

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 02:00

Ahhh, very appropriate concern Tassadar. A minister who buckles under the pressure of his office and makes the wrong decision at the wrong time can be disaterous for our empire. In the latter case, charging in by military means would be foolish. Starting a world war would be an incredible blunder, especially with no allies. The course of action I would most likely take would be to trade with the Indians to give them Rocketry (the tech needed to see/use aluminum), then quickly secure their trade for the resource. If that plan fails, then other alternative means to acquiring the resource would be necassary. As I've said, I may favor military and expansion, but not foolhardedly.

In response to your concern about my lack of focus upon science, I reply in this manner. I agree; techs are a very vital aspect to our empire's success and power. To allow our enemies to gain a technological advantage on us would be crippling, especially if a war should break out.

Currency can be acquired by a variety of means. It seems as though the barbarian level will be quite high, allowing for numerous camps to be captured and added to our coffers. Even 8 barbarian camps would provide us with 200 gold, which is quite a sum in early times. Good for bargaining for techs early on, as well as keeping a good 'buffer treasury', since when I invest in science I usually have the slider at around -5 or so gold per turn, allowing a significant 10% increase in science, as well as a firm gold reserve, gained from trading maps/techs/enemy camps and other sources.

In retrospect, yes, I agree, technology should be a very important part of our strategy, and I plan on focusing on that area quite a lot should I be elected. The greatest means of enhancing our research capabilities is to build up a firm economy that allows us to do what we wish with the wealth we acquire.
After all, you can't build Swordsmen without Iron Working.

Space05us · June 10, 2002, 02:10

I support Trip 100%

Jethro83 · June 10, 2002, 08:39

As do I. Hard to argue with any of those policies.

Adagio · June 10, 2002, 09:00

Trip! You've got my support...for now...

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 09:04

Everyone's support is greatly appreciated.

Should I get elected, I shall be the tool of the people, more than anything else. I will support and make my views known, to educate and inform the public as a leader should, but perfom on the manner that pleases the public best. I promise that if I'm elected as the first ever Civ 3 Demo Game President, then you can count on a powerful, wealthy and successful empire for as long as I remain in power.

Good luck to all other who are running as well!

Captain · June 10, 2002, 13:25

Candidate Trip:

What about corruption?

We know that corruption on fringe lands increases rapidly as distance from our capital does. How do your expansionist policies plan to deal with this?

How does expansion into fertile (yet worthless due to high corruption) lands fit into your policies?

I am concerned with using the taxpayers money from prosperous core cities to shore up failing colonies at the expense of building our core infrastructure. What is your response as Presidential candidate?

Furthermore, do you have a stance on overseas holdings? In particular, it seems that corruption is notoriously high when oceanic barriers are in place. Would your platform on "Manifest Destiny" include lands beyond continental integrity?

Timeline · June 10, 2002, 13:31

LOL this election is gonna be a shoe-in

Quote:

Good luck to all other who are running as well!

Hey that reminds me, where are the other candidates

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 13:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
Candidate Trip:

What about corruption?

We know that corruption on fringe lands increases rapidly as distance from our capital does. How do your expansionist policies plan to deal with this?

How does expansion into fertile (yet worthless due to high corruption) lands fit into your policies?

I am concerned with using the taxpayers money from prosperous core cities to shore up failing colonies at the expense of building our core infrastructure. What is your response as Presidential candidate?

Furthermore, do you have a stance on overseas holdings? In particular, it seems that corruption is notoriously high when oceanic barriers are in place. Would your platform on "Manifest Destiny" include lands beyond continental integrity?

As always, I appreciate the questions of the public. Even the best canidate is not doing his best unless constantly tested by the circumstances of his environment.

Continental expansion is always the most pivotal. My main aim will to become a dominant power on our inital continent, if it's large, then the Forbidden Palace will be built on the other side, on the far coast. Should our continent be smaller, then expansion on another continent, and the building of the FP there would be more efficient. Clearly however, building cities to secure distant resources and geographical junctions (i.e. Panama) are also important. Large, major cities outside of these things will not be a priority, due to their decreased efficiency and inability to assist us in our goal. Our priority will always be the strengthening of the homeland; stronger infrastructure and larger cities will provide us more power in the long run than a series of far-flung, disconjonited cities.

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 13:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
LOL this election is gonna be a shoe-in

You never know, strange things can happen.

I must continue to make my views known, and try to please the wishes of the public.

Quote:

Hey that reminds me, where are the other candidates

I was wishing luck to all canidates in all elections. As far as canidates for the Presidential election, I have no clue.

Captain · June 10, 2002, 13:55

An excellent response to the issue of intrinsic (game mechanics) corruption, Candidate Trip.

Now, a new issue has come to our attention. We understand that your position on the Access to Information Act (open save file for all) is against. How do you propose to keep the public informed and the government honest? Will an independent watchdog committee be created with official sanction?

Jon Shafer · June 10, 2002, 13:59

As I stated in the other thread, I support the creation of a 'Reporter' position, who would have access to the save file. It would be his job to provide us with as much information as possible outside the bounds of the responsibilities of the other ministers. It would add a certain 'feeling' to the whole game as if we're spectators in some grand, important event, rather than playing another simple game of Civ 3.

Timeline · June 10, 2002, 14:11

Quote:

Clearly however, building cities to secure distant resources and geographical junctions (i.e. Panama) are also important. Large, major cities outside of these things will not be a priority, due to their decreased efficiency and inability to assist us in our goal. Our priority will always be the strengthening of the homeland; stronger infrastructure and larger cities will provide us more power in the long run than a series of far-flung, disconjonited cities.

I would just like to say that as a candidate for Imperial Expansion/City Planner Minister I agree with Trips statements on this subject

Adagio · June 10, 2002, 14:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
Hey that reminds me, where are the other candidates

Has somebody actually seen Adc post anything, except for signing up for the post?

Unless he's not going to fight for his post, I guess it will be easy to make a decision