Machiavelli Institute: Trade Cherbourg away? [Unofficial]

adaMada · September 14, 2002, 22:16

This is my last action as Acting Foreign Minister, since Togas is back. I want to thank everyone for their input and discussion while Togas was away; without an active public, I'd never have been able to last through it

.

This is unofficial, but it may help dictate Foreign Policy.

Should we give Cherbourg away? Poll will last three days, as that's about how long we have before the next turnchat.

As some of you may have noticed, the Romans have approached Cherbourg with several troops. As we have no desire to start a war with the Romans, and as Cherbourg is basically worthless, it seems to be the best option to give it away, and let the Romans declare war on someone else if they want to

.

Once a Diplomatic Issue entry has been added in the Foreign Affairs office, I'll add a link.

-- adaMada

Poll choices are:
* Give to Russia. Right next to Rome, would be a nasty war for both. I think Russia might be destroyed by it though.
* Give to Greece. Best option, I think. Would hurt both Rome and Greece, who are the other two most powerful nations right now.
* Give to Germany. Would mean that both would be less likely to declare war on us, and would tie two of the most dangerous civs up for the time being. May also improve relations, as Germany is furious with us.
* Give to England. If Rome does take the city and declare war, little will happen due to the distance involved. If they don't take the city, it'll be worthless anyway due to distance.
* Give to Other. Please post who.
* Don't give away. Might send us to war, but we cannot appear weak.

Aggie · September 14, 2002, 23:00

We are on the verge of having it get to size 2, then we can simply disband and send the settler home, it would be a shame to waste a potentil free settler. We could give rome some gold and make them happy, yes it was free city,but i'd rather turn it into a good free city. Its been bypassed many times in the last few turns, it will probably be by passed again. If it was further away from going to size 2 i'd say get rid of it, but why give away a city that could give us another settler. In short i am categorically opposed to giving this city away when we are SOOOOO cllose to be able to move it.
Ps. Adamada, you have done a wonderful job.
Aggie

Aro · September 14, 2002, 23:09

Rome and Russia could make good use of Cheerbourg. It's a good reason to DON'T do that. Anyway, I can't see why Rome would want attack us just now. We made a good deal (for them) with the dyes! They are cautious toward us, it's true, but is this enough for a sneak attack? And lose the trade benefits?
IMHO, the answer is NO, keep Cherbourg and maybe we can produce a settler, disband the city and go to another place. It’s Aggie’s idea, IIRC.

Aro · September 14, 2002, 23:18

Ouch! Aggie, I'm sorry by practically "copy and paste" your idea... I just saw your post after the one above.

Aggie · September 14, 2002, 23:21

Thats quite ok aro, the more people that mention it the better.
Aggie

adaMada · September 14, 2002, 23:39

I'm a tad bit worried about Rome right now, to be honest.

We give them a great deal, and they become polite to us. Their troops continue to make a beline for Cherbourg, and they're suddenly cautious again. I don't think it's a good sign overall.

Though I'd like to have the settler, if others have the same worry that I do, then it may be impractical. I value staying at peace with Rome far more than I value a single settler, no matter how useful it would be (and remembering that it'll be a nightmare to get back to the mainland, especially if the AI decides to kick it out of it's terratory).

-- adaMada

EDIT: Thanks to Aro for pointing out that they're only cautious, not hostile.

Aro · September 15, 2002, 00:07

Well... They are cautious, not exactly hostile. We probably have some turns to see what happens.

adaMada · September 15, 2002, 00:39

Aro,
Good Point. I fixed it in my earlier post.

My main reason is that I've been told that another war is the only thing that can deter us from defeating Persia -- wouldn't it be lousy if we got that other war, all because we weren't willing to give up two pop points/a settler? Obviously, the Map trading issue was similar, and I took the opposite side then, but I'm inclined to be more cautious this time, as much less is at stake. I'm also open to others thoughts, since I haven't clearly decided either way.

-- adaMada

notyoueither · September 15, 2002, 01:45

I agree. Give Cherbourg to the nation we would most like to see scrapping with the Romans.

It will do us no good for a very long time if we keep it, and it could do us considerable harm.

Aro · September 15, 2002, 03:25

Quote:

Originally posted by adaMada
Aro,
Good Point. I fixed it in my earlier post.

My main reason is that I've been told that another war is the only thing that can deter us from defeating Persia -- wouldn't it be lousy if we got that other war, all because we weren't willing to give up two pop points/a settler? Obviously, the Map trading issue was similar, and I took the opposite side then, but I'm inclined to be more cautious this time, as much less is at stake. I'm also open to others thoughts, since I haven't clearly decided either way.

-- adaMada

I can understand your concerns, AdaMada. We can't have luck all the time, and there is a probability to get into a war with Rome for nothing. The AI is sometimes very stupid. I doubt that a human player (in a multiplayer game) would take Cheerbourg, but we don't have humans playing against us. The closest thing is the Firaxis team, of course.

I'm still supporting the Aggie's idea, but if we need to give Cheerbourg, IMHO, we can't reinforce our competitors. Give the city to Germans, or Aztecs. This will be a problem for them, not a prize.

notyoueither · September 15, 2002, 04:57

I was thinking it might be good to get the Romans to jump the Greeks. Keep Alex occupied for a time. I voted other.

Shiber · September 15, 2002, 07:27

Umm... guys...
We don't get a worker or a settler or anything of that kind for abandoning a size 2 town. Not on 1.21 anyway.
I ran an experiment so I'm 100% sure.

Currently Cherbourg is worth 3gpt to us (1gpt produced in the town tile and 2 free support which save us 2gpt) and that's it.
Frankly, I don't know if the Romans are going to attack or not and I haven't made my mind about the fate of the town yet (though I tend to lean towards giving it away), but if we choose to give it away then I say we give it to Germany for all the reasons mentioned by Ghengis (the post below).

GhengisFarb™ · September 15, 2002, 08:25

The fact that they shifted to cautious so quickly is an excellent indication their programming has decided to fight us. That's typically the result of quick mood shifts, the only way I've ever been able to avoid conflict with the AI in these cases has been to set up someone else as a more likely target and I think that someone should be Germany.

Giving them the city should bring them down from furious and a Roma-German war wouldn't exactly be in our worse interests.

We're already on good terms with the Greeks so giving them the city would be a waste as I think Rome would simply annex them.

(Just for the Record: I suggested giving the city to the Germans BEFORE the peace treaty with France was signed as I figured we'd end up in this position)

Saving it for a settler leaves us an undefended settler quite a ways out from our borders and I feel uneasy giving the Romans such a prize target to go to war over.

"Look, Ceasar! Free Apolytonian Slaves!"

Aggie · September 15, 2002, 10:44

Shiber I wouldn't abandon the city, I wanted to build a settler when it was size 2 and that would disband it. But though I hate giving up the city, I do agree that a useless war with rome isn't in our best interest. After reading Ghengis's post it does seem that they are in the mood for war. If this is the case we do need to ensure peace, I mean look at the trade off Cherbourg vs persia. But before I decide to convert to giving it away I ask this question. Is there any way we can appease them long enough to get a settler and return him home safely. If not we have no choice, can we get anything good for this city. I would say give it to germany,if we give it up, a german invasion could really be a problem for us too(though i think we could devestate them since our army is pretty darn close). I still remember the horde of swords, The are both an easier target and harder target than persia. I would prefer fighting persia, so lets keep the peace with germany.
Aggie

adaMada · September 15, 2002, 11:24

I still really like the idea of giving it to Greece, since I see Greece and Rome as the longest term threats to us once they get into a few wars. I don't think that either Greece or Rome could destroy each other, but I think they could chip away and stop each other from advancing while we move ahead, letting us solidfy our lead over them.

Having said that, giving to to Germany wouldn't be bad either -- they're another nation we don't want to go to war with. I'm not sure, however, that a war between these nations would weaken either much -- they're too far apart, and would probably have declared peace before either side's troops would reach the others. If anything, that'd probably lead to a few nations signing alliances on one side or the other, and who knows what affects that would have...

-- adaMada

roadcage · September 15, 2002, 11:27

Cherborg will never produce a setteler except as possibly a starvation enduced city release. And that would take in excess of 30 turns. Simply put, there are no 2 food squares in the influence level 1 zone. There is a wheat on plains in the influence level 2 zone, but that would require some culture building which is not warranted.

Currently, Cherborg is 1 turn away from size 2 and 2 turns away from the spearman. There is no hope of getting a lux in so most likely it will go unhappy.

I suggest that IMMEDIATELY for 1 turn make the pop a taxman. After that turn, the city will be 1 turn away from both size 2 and the spearman. Put the pop back to plains for next turn and the growth happens. With 2 pop, have both work plains and produce a worker in ten turns. Worker completes road to nw and maybe we can connect.

If we don't do this I fear the city will go into disorder, and we will have to make a specialist of some type and cause starvation to resolve the disorder.

Plan A net loss 1 food

Plan B net loss 20 food

On second thought, give the puppy away!

GhengisFarb™ · September 15, 2002, 11:47

REASONS I PREFER GIVING IT TO GERMANY:

1) It is so far away from their capital it will give them no benefit.
2) Their furious with us and anytime you give the AI a city it is a huge positive on their attitude toward you, thus making it less likely for Germany to involve themselves against us while we annex Persia.
3)I'd rather see Germany at war with the Romans than Greece. Any Roman conquest of Germany would most likely be Hamburg and its so far away it wouldn't do the Romans much good so we should be able to take it easily in the future.
4)A German war would suck Roman troops out of their homeland giving the little guys a chance to revolt (Russia, Iroquois, and Babylon).
5)Its close enough to Greece that they might get some use out of it if we gave it to them and it really gives us no attitude benefit as they seem to like us already.

BigFurryMonster · September 15, 2002, 12:25

Give Cherbourg to Babylon - this Civ will invest most in Culture, causing its borders to expand the fastest. This, in turn, will obstruct the Romans and Russians.

But only if you feel we can't keep it. It's generating gold right now (3 pt: 1 from commerce, 2 from increased support) and may have a taxman in the future, generating another gold/pt.

GePap · September 15, 2002, 15:02

I like the notion of giving it to some civ that is far away, like the germans, simply to create problems, and imporve relations (since you can only give cities away most of the time).

I had another idea: would it be possible to offer Cherbourg to the Persians as part of a peace deal in which we get several techs also? In short, trading Cherbourg for Theology and whatnot in a peace treaty with Xerxes? (just a flight of fancy)

Shiber · September 15, 2002, 15:15

Sorry, that's impossible. You'll notice that if you offer a deal where there's a city on one side of the bargain and any commodities (gold, tech etc') on the other side the AI will not accept it. In other words you can't pay for something other than a peace treaty with cities no matter what kind of deal you're trying to work out.

Aro · September 15, 2002, 15:36

Cherbourg:

adaMada · September 15, 2002, 16:11

Wow Aro. That map's scary

.

-- adaMada

Shiber · September 15, 2002, 16:18

I didn't know Rome fought someone in the ancient age. They must have, otherwise they couldn't have had an elite warrior.
I only noticed that the warrior is elite now. This is rather interesting...
Does anybody know when Rome fought another civ and which civ this was?

Aro · September 15, 2002, 16:19

Quote:

Originally posted by adaMada
Wow Aro. That map's scary

.

-- adaMada

Yep. Everybody is there... except for us. There's a party or something happens in Cherbourg... and we weren't invited!

Aro · September 15, 2002, 16:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
I didn't know Rome fought someone in the ancient age. They must have, otherwise they couldn't have had an elite warrior.
I only noticed that the warrior is elite now. This is rather interesting...
Does anybody know when Rome fought another civ and which civ this was?

Barbarians, maybe? I can't see any city taken by the Romans, or the inverse.

DAVOUT · September 15, 2002, 16:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
I didn't know Rome fought someone in the ancient age. They must have, otherwise they couldn't have had an elite warrior.
I only noticed that the warrior is elite now. This is rather interesting...
Does anybody know when Rome fought another civ and which civ this was?

Could be old, against the barbarians (the elite level).
What is new is Krasnoiark. The russians seems to be more active these days.
I would not favor a war between Rome and Germany : they are too far from each other, and either we would be the battlefield with the risk of being drawn in the war, or nothing would happens, as in the Helleno-British war. War wearyness would also play a major role, considering that the Germans have been at war for a long time already.
But if the Russians are building a horse army, why not them. Another solution is to consolidate the French.

adaMada · September 15, 2002, 16:38

If we had a war between Russia/Rome, then we'd risk Rome kicking Russia's butt, and becoming a super power. I'd rather set Rome up against someone like Greece, and then let Greece/Rome buy allies, which will either A) eventually wipe out one civilization, but split it between three or so others so it's not so unbalanced, or B) just impede all the nations for a bit, but not actually have any dramatic changes.

-- adaMada

DAVOUT · September 15, 2002, 16:52

We must only be afraid of the first great civ which will have knights. Any bet ?

Shiber · September 15, 2002, 18:30

Looking at the results so far, I think we should conduct a second poll and pit giving Cherbourg to Germany against not giving it away at all.

Robber Baron · September 15, 2002, 20:24

ada: :b :b Bold strategy! Worthy of Mac-Daddy-velli himself!
GhengisFarb makes a good case for Germany.
A question to consider, though, is whether Germany would be able to give Rome much of a fight. I doubt it. Legionaires are formidable opponents, even in the early Middle Ages.
I would favor the Greeks. Rome would really chew itself up, attacking hoplites, and a war could seriously drain these two powers. In fact, if we timed things right, we could set up a major move against Greece just as a Greco-Roman war was winding down -- if we had knights by that point.
In any event, I'd lean towards gifting this to the Greeks. I think they'd fight harder to hold onto it, depleting both rivals in the process.