Pax Apolytonia?

Thud · October 18, 2002, 09:21

Do we want to go to war? With whom?

This poll is unofficial and will close in 3 days.

Thud · October 18, 2002, 09:27

My opinion:

In order to fufill our manifest destiny and have an Apoyltonian Nation that stretches from sea to shining sea: I support a war with France this term.

Other than that, I will not condone a course of action that will lead us to war.

Under any circumstances

Ninot · October 18, 2002, 10:11

As a left wing independant, im dissapointed in you Thud

Apolytonia needs peace, not war.

UnOrthOdOx · October 18, 2002, 10:40

I am dissapointed for a different reason

As an elected Minister it is your duty to accept the will of the people. You should accept the outcome, and not take an 'Under no circumstances' position.

My opinion?

War on both.

Preferably one at a time. And hope one of them get Germany involved...I wouldn't mind taking that Capernicus from him...One way to speed our relative Science is to slow the rest of the world down...

Shiber · October 18, 2002, 10:52

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
One way to speed our relative Science is to slow the rest of the world down...

Such a wise sentence, I just had to repeat it.

UnOrthOdOx, are you by any chance into modern physics?

Robber Baron · October 18, 2002, 11:01

After careful consideration, I'm finding myself swayed by those who argue for a brief, limited war with France. Stress brief and limited. Grab a town or two, wrest at least one of those saltpeters from Joan. Late in the war send in a few war chariots to trigger a golden age. Then we need to settle down and do some serious peaceful building. (If the other civs will leave us alone -- a big IF.)

Thud · October 18, 2002, 11:27

Yes, onortho, but until the will of the people is evident that a war is in the interest of the people, I will disagree with that position no matter how much it is argued for.

If they poll and say that war with england or germany is good, and we go to war, I won't do anything about it; unless I feel it so unjust that I abdicate to Duddha.

I really intended that post (circumstances and all) to mean this: If the people want war with France, so be it; HOWEVER, I will support war on France, on the condition that it is the last war of aggresion.

Reddawg · October 18, 2002, 11:32

I too support a BRIEF war with France, if it's at LEAST two turnchats away... if it is prolonged, there will be hell to pay.

~MoE Reddawg

Thud · October 18, 2002, 11:36

Coincidentally, though I would support a final war with France, I voted for Peace. I think that I'd rather send the message (with this poll) that Peace is preferable now, as opposed to it being necessary after France.

UnOrthOdOx · October 18, 2002, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber

Such a wise sentence, I just had to repeat it.

UnOrthOdOx, are you by any chance into modern physics?

I am not entirely sure if that was meant sarcastic or not...

Coincidentally, I do work with Physics every day. That is an intagral part of my job, though computers are slowly replacing most of the work involved...

Shiber · October 18, 2002, 12:06

I was totally serious. It is a wise thing to say.
Most people don't realize that it's not the absolute value of a certain property that matters but its relative value.

GodKing · October 18, 2002, 12:14

I say peace for at least 20 turns. To give us a chance to rebuild and regroup. We are the largest civ by far, yet our military is only 3rd I beleave. And our infrastructure is laging behind seariously. After the regrouping, I say take on greace or germany, as they have the most to offer us now.

ThePlagueRat · October 18, 2002, 12:20

I agree with GodKing. We should expand our borders now,
by culture and build up infrastructure.

Sooner or later some foreign emissary will come with a
nasty treaty and unacceptable demands.
Then the Foreign minister should post it here and
we will see the reaction...

Don't let them step on us,
but don't try to be "World police force" either.

Duddha · October 18, 2002, 19:03

To War!

ruby_maser · October 18, 2002, 19:56

anything but a protracted war with France is fine by me. Controlling the neck of the continent is important (assuming we can defend it) and the saltpeter and iron is a plus.

Britain, IMHO, has no strategic value and seems to be just a land grab based on the assumption that if we don't take it, someone else will and trying to justify it with a measily resource or two and Arbela safe. Perhaps bolstering Arabela's culture might be an alternative to wiping out an entire civ to keep it safe.

Aggie · October 18, 2002, 20:36

There really is NO debate between do we build or go to war. Since we are building wc rather than knights we will not put undo pressure on our production. The attack could assist us because we will have more SP and Iron to trade. The war will be over before war weariness will creep in. Any alliances against us will result in us taking more land and the enemy sueing for peace. The taking of the coastal cites will open up new frontiers for exploration in the western sea. This situation is a win win for both sides in the country, and I call upon all of Apolyton to support the Declaration of War when it comes up for a vote after the next chat.
Aggie

Jonny · October 18, 2002, 22:16

Here's what I think we should do.

First, we go to war with France. Take what we can, but don't get into a protracted war. Be sure to capture cities on the Western Sea and possibly cities that would make Hole In The Wall be connected to the rest of Apolytonia.

Second, have a quick war with Russia. Take Krasnoyarsk to remove Russia from the "neck" of Ababanana. Also possibly take Novgorod to take Russia's incense away. (Rome may end up with it, but they already have some.)

At the end of the Russia war, we would trigger our Golden Age. Then would be the time to vastly build up our infrastructure and our culture.

monkspider · October 19, 2002, 00:27

I feel that peace at this juncture would be entirely prudent.

Ninot · October 19, 2002, 01:14

uhm.. i see advantages to war, of course, just as there are advantages to peace...

but at this juncture... to say war is neccesary is bullplop! Bullplop!!!

just my 2 bits.

Kloreep · October 19, 2002, 02:24

While I support a limited war against France, I'm worried that everyone seems to be assuming a GA is part and parcel of any war.

We are going to hold a GA poll like we did with Persia, right?

Apocalypse · October 19, 2002, 02:26

We are already pretty well underway in preparations to declaire war on France. We shouldn't let the army go to waste.

For England, I'd wait until the Aztecs or Germans declare war on them.

E_T · October 19, 2002, 05:59

I support a war only for four reasons:
1) Generate a GA
2) Have a Possible GL
3) Liberate Rheims so that they can join our Jungle Ball league.
4) Liberate the Saltpeter Deposits from France.

I don't want the war for the French Western costal lowlands

Explansion of above:
1) A GA would allow me to get the rest of the needed core city Items into place or with them being close to completion by the end of the GA. THe GA will also Allow us to be doing some actual research for a change, on our own. We have a few Librarues currently (I'll have the list in my Construction Shack City status report for 700AD) and a few more in about 15-20 turns. Because we're getting closer to completeing Printing Press (8 turns left) and we would have to move the slider to 50% of more to have faster results now. So thereby, we are on that course for atleast 8 more turns. If we "pull the strings" in 10 turns, try to limit the war to 5 turns and use the rest of the GA to to get ourselves out of the dark ages.

At this point in time, we should be building Universities & Banks, instead of starting to build Libraries (if not having to Build Cathedrals to take care of happieness issues in our cities) and just finishing Marketplaces. Our Growth is now Pyramid driven and (in some cities) outpaces the construction of the Improvements that promote happiness. We have aquired technologies only though very tough negotiations that were very delecate (and the timeing just right, Thank the Banana!) and costly and our economy wasn't cripples by then, though they could have been.

With GA driven building and economy, I can get us more towards were we should really be at this point in time. The outer Provences are still suffering from near Catastrophic Corrution and run away growth, HOW are wo going to pay for this pipe dream of increasing our presence in the Western seas, when were still getting the Persian Provences out of Catastrophic Corruption.
We have the size, we just don't have the depth to become great. A GA will let us acheive that depth especially in combination with a short war.

2) Rome has nearly completed building JSB and when they do, the others will switch to Smith's Trading and have that completed shortly. Magellins will be taken by who ever's third in that race, unless they haven't gotten Navigation by that time. The one in fourth will get Newtons if they've gotten Theory of Gravity. If not, they'll switch Along with the reat of the lossers) to either Small Wonders or Big ticket Items (Uni or Bank). A timely GL would allow us to get one of these (I prefer Smiths for the money saved). And who knows, the Banana will smile on us and grant us two to three, one for JSB & last for an Army (for two small wonders). But we need to start the war soon, timing is key here and Rome is setting the clock ticks. I was actually expecting to be in the war now (and hoping to cut them off at their wonder seeking knees).

3) We need more 'Cultural Glue' in that area because of Greece, but Rheims puts a spot in it. Having Rheims will help knit that area up just nicely. And they will also be that last City that is elegable for a Jungle Ball Expansion Team.

4) We have only resently learned of the Saltpeter deposits that are in the French territories. If we aquire them, we can sell them and still have a surplus, for just in case one of the deposits runs out. THis also allows us to control those areas of mountains & hills for when Coal is discovered. The western Coastal lowlands doesn't have much of a chance for that at all. And Rubber's much later.

Having the War for just the Objectives of Rheims, Lyons, Besancon, Dijon & Amiens for the cities; the resourses, GA and a possible GL are all that I think that this nation needs ans should do. Anything beyond that is just plain bloodthirsty.

E_T

E_T · October 19, 2002, 06:02

Quote:

Originally posted by ruby_maser
anything but a protracted war with France is fine by me. Controlling the neck of the continent is important (assuming we can defend it) and the saltpeter and iron is a plus.

Britain, IMHO, has no strategic value and seems to be just a land grab based on the assumption that if we don't take it, someone else will and trying to justify it with a measily resource or two and Arbela safe. Perhaps bolstering Arabela's culture might be an alternative to wiping out an entire civ to keep it safe.

I'm working on getting Arbela more culture.

E_T

E_T · October 19, 2002, 06:05

How did that happen. Lessen to all, never try to post a long essay after wakeing from a sound sleep and suffer from the effect od stomack acid, you somehow douple post

E_T

Skanky Burns · October 19, 2002, 06:20

The age-old dream, a short victorious war...

That said, a lightning strike against the French looks to be just what our nation needs.

GePap · October 19, 2002, 13:21

I agree fundamentally with E_T:

We are the biggest civ, and while our army may not be number 1, being human ves us a huge force multiplier: the AI needs a very large numerical superiority to beat a human player:

The lands we have are backwards-we need no more and can handle no more either. We have to build our infrastructure, and a state with a representative form of gov. will work best towards internal development.

I also agree that any future wars must be driven by specific, limited aims, like gaining control of certain cities, wornders, or resource tiles. Wars simply for territorial aggrandizement are not worth it. May I add that we have as of yet discussed the vitory condition we seek to fulfill. The only reason I can see for further gains of cities that contribute nothing is if we aim for dominion or conquest vicotries: if that is what certain individuals want, then say it out loud, don't cloak intentions in mindless sloganeering.

I suport a stroing military for defense and for gaining limited objectives. but creating a realm worthy of this project, not only in size, but in advancement and wealth, should be our top priority: not endless landgrabs.

E_T · October 19, 2002, 14:28

As I stated above, I have released the Construction Shack - 700AD City Status and is current as of the End of Term IV at this time. Take a gander at it while debating this issue.

E_T

mrmitchell · October 20, 2002, 16:06

A little war with France to grab Rheims, Amiens, Dijon, something like that would be okay.

If we were to _conquer_ france it would keep us from building city improvements (which are always vital).

More importantly, if enough AIs could be bought by other AIs into declaring war on us, (say Russia/Greece/Germany) after we conquer france, we'll have the same forces over a fat line, attacked on most sides and armies divided. This could especially become possible once we get to MPPs. I might sound pessimistic, but anything's possible.

No war with Britain until France is out of our way. They're not anything strategic positionlike anyway.

OT: Is Persia only have two cities left? I actually feel pity for them if it's true, our armies did a good job.

Apocalypse · October 20, 2002, 16:17

Persia has 3 actually.

England is strategic - they are in a prime position to set off in search of new civs.

ThePlagueRat · October 20, 2002, 17:51

I think there is a time for peace and there is a time for war...

When no one points their spearhead at us,
and we need to improve our infrastructure, culture, trade
and research capabilities. - It is time for peace.

When some aggressor starts to harass Apolytonia,
they are asking for trouble. Then it's time for the blacksmith
to create sharp objects. And if that aggressor wages war against our trade companions, or grows into our sphere of interest... - It's time for war.

This could be the ratified by the UN charter as well!