Ministry of War report

DinoDoc · November 24, 2002, 17:37

Gentlemen:

This is my first poll/thread as your Minister of War so try to be gentle.

Let me get straight to the point. It is my opinion that the defenses we currently have in our cities are fairly paper thin given the fact that our closest rival, the Celts, is researching ironclads. Given our relative position on the power graph, it is likely to assume that they will be used against us.

Here are my recommendations to remedy this situation:

a) Given how close we are to getting Metallurgy, I propose that, as soon as we are able, we work coastal fortresses into the build queue of the cities a reasonable distance from the Celts.
b) In the mean time I suggest that we add another musketeer to the current average of 2 in our cities.

I’ll leave the issue to your collective wisdom.

Regards,
Your Minister of War

Hydey · November 24, 2002, 17:52

do not forget that the muskets will be rifles soon enough

atawa · November 24, 2002, 17:54

Quote:

a) Given how close we are to getting Metallurgy, I propose that, as soon as we are able, we work coastal fortresses into the build queue of the cities a reasonable distance from the Celts.

Excellent plan

Quote:

b) In the mean time I suggest that we add another musketeer to the current average of 2 in our cities.

Since our musks arent vets becouse most of them upgraded, we might considder making a push for conscription

DinoDoc · November 24, 2002, 18:06

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa
Since our musks arent vets becouse most of them upgraded, we might considder making a push for conscription

Even better.

BruceTheStupid · November 24, 2002, 19:14

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Gentlemen:

Given how close we are to getting Metallurgy, I propose that, as soon as we are able, we work coastal fortresses into the build queue of the cities a reasonable distance from the Celts.

Apologies if I'm repeating myself

, but a sound strategy of war is to make the enemy fight you at a place of your choosing. If we build (or capture) one or two cities which are located between our mainland and the Celts' mainland, it is likely that when war breaks out, the Celts will attack there first, and continue to focus a disproportianate amount of effort there simply because it's easier than travelling twice the distance to get to our mainland. We might then have to build coastal fortresses/extra defenders in fewer cities, and run less risk of our defensive forces being spread out trying to cover many possible skirmish sites

.

cavebear · November 24, 2002, 20:07

Now that we are in Democracy, and don't have corruption problems, it wouldn't hurt to have a couple of outpost cities that are defense-oriented to attract incipient Celtic agressiveness. I like Bruce's suggestion.

We placed a city near the Japanese to watch their expansion; we can do the same with the Celts while staying in a defensive posture.

One of these 2 locations might work well (and the one to the right is on a hill).

cavebear · November 24, 2002, 20:23

Minister of War DinoDoc - I personally like Coastal Fortresses; use them often. I love to lure the AI Civs into naval techs and then let them find I have the coastal fortresses and they don't.

But I think it is early for that. We can build coastal fortresses faster than the Celts can build and send Ironclads if and when we need to. We have other more basic city improvements to build first, is all I mean. Marketplaces, Libraries, etc...

I think we are WAY behind on the city improvement schedule, and there are things we had better do before the Coastal Fortresses even though I want those also.

Do we really need more than 2 Musketeers per city right now (and many have more)? I'm concerned with our low shield production and the additional units would reduce that already low value. We should have most cities up to 12-15 shields per turn by now and they are not.

cavebear · November 24, 2002, 20:43

It was a good poll, BTW, DinoDoc. The choices were clear, and you got the Banana involved.

BruceTheStupid · November 24, 2002, 21:11

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
One of these 2 locations might work well (and the one to the right is on a hill).

Do we have an indication of these possible locations on a bigger map?

cavebear · November 24, 2002, 22:28

Quote:

Originally posted by BruceTheStupid

Do we have an indication of these possible locations on a bigger map?

Does this help? Panama City is in the lower left.

mrboo123 · November 25, 2002, 08:48

Nice plan but:

Quote:

Time out:0 days...

I think this has to be fixed...

atawa · November 25, 2002, 12:22

The hill-location on the right looks excelent, a whale for arrows/happyness and 2 foodspecials

DinoDoc · November 25, 2002, 14:29

Quote:

Originally posted by BruceTheStupid
Apologies if I'm repeating myself

, but a sound strategy of war is to make the enemy fight you at a place of your choosing.

I would love to go on the offensive with the Celts but the pervailing sentiment seems to be against that.

JCP · November 25, 2002, 14:42

Globaly, OK with hard defended cities near the Celts.
The location near whales and on a nill (to be mined before city building) is good.
But why more musks? Or only in coastal cities ?

Ben Kenobi · November 25, 2002, 14:54

Could we bribe some of the Celtic cities? This would be
more cost-effective, and their ancient units will upgrade to riflemen soon after we capture a city. Hydey, how much is this likely to cost?

This way, we could direct the Celts' attention to defending their homeland, rather than building 'Clads. An additional bonus would be reducing their powergraph ranking.

I don't know if this violates the spirit of our

nation or not, but I think this could save us many hassles in the long run.

DinoDoc · November 25, 2002, 15:12

Quote:

Originally posted by JCP
Or only in coastal cities ?

Coastal cities were my main concern.

cavebear · November 25, 2002, 20:10

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I would love to go on the offensive with the Celts but the pervailing sentiment seems to be against that.

That's only because we played Democracy Game #1 as a conquering Civ and decided to try a different game this time. For pure winning's sake, I would agree with you completely, though. There are a lot of situations in this game that just beg us to go on the offensive.

But we must stay strong and attempt the challenge we have given ourselves for this one.

Maybe the next game will be bloodlust. Or maybe it will "super-science". Who knows?

BruceTheStupid · November 27, 2002, 21:37

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I would love to go on the offensive with the Celts but the pervailing sentiment seems to be against that.

I didn't actually mean to take the war to them, but in the context of this game, merely to put a city inbetween us and have it fully stocked with defensive units. If (when!) they attack, if that's the first place on their journey to get us, that's where the AI will fight the battle. What I mean is that because we know how the AI nearly always fights, we can choose where the battle will be.

I think the city on the left is better. If we go to the right, that looks "off the straight line" between the Celts and ourselves - we run the risk of the AI deciding not to attack it. However since I originally posted the first suggestion, cities have been founded in other locations, and it may need other cities inbetween "us and them".