Shall we attack Carthage?

MrWhereItsAt · June 17, 2002, 08:24

In my new War proposal thread I suggest we attack the Carthaginians' city of Oea with the (soon to be) Cavalry and Rifleman we have in a Caravfel up there. However this is not a result from Hydey's Foreign Office report poll , thus I started this one to seek the ppls' permission.

My reasons for attacking are that Carthage is pathetic. Just one look here shows they have no units to challenge us and we would be very careless or unlucky to lose any units to the might of their legions/elephants and phalanx (their top units). I think we can take this city quickly, not expect much in the way of reinforcements from Carthage. If they do send reinforcements, that just means their homeland is all the more depleted for later on

Plus we get some of their 2000+ gold.

OTOH, we may end up having to put some gold into buying Walls and another Rifleman here to defend ourselves, and our reputation will drop if we have to attack them during a peace (Oh NO what a tragedy

). I can see no other downsides at all.

Vote away...

Minister of WAR, not peace.
MrWIA.

-Jrabbit · June 17, 2002, 09:07

Within a very few terms, only Comrades of Apolyton will be available to judge our reputation -- and we KNOW

how they will vote!!

Ren · June 17, 2002, 09:17

"Affirmative Sergeant, send 'em in!"

mrboo123 · June 17, 2002, 17:50

BANANA, BANANA, lets worried about them later, we got India to worried about, (if we were forced to worried)

Zedd · June 17, 2002, 18:17

I replied in the "Corrected latest ministry of war plans" and will just say that liberating carthage while we build an effective force against india.

JCP · June 18, 2002, 04:25

We may attack Carthaginians before the end of the other wars (I suggest after the war against Indians, but in the same time of the war against Babylonians, because we have the means for it !

).
But Oea is a little city, and Carthaginians have a lot of military units : at least 4 or 5 by cities (their military service is up to 11 years !).
If we attack them by ground units, their cities will be destroyed before empty.

If we want military basis on this continent, we must empty cities with ironclads, or bribe them !

Hydey · June 18, 2002, 06:04

I say let the military advisory stick to military and leave the foreign affairs to me, unless he wants to have the people vote for me to be removed from my possition now.

I people have indicated on the foreign affairs polls they way they want to go, when they vote for peace we have peace, when they vote for war we have war and then and only then does the military advisor do what he does best and kick some AI arse.

show restraint MrWIA your fun will come in all good time.

MrWhereItsAt · June 18, 2002, 06:25

Sorry Hydey - I realize your poll is the definite article and we need to work together on such things, but your poll was posted before I included my plan.

I thought perhaps I should have contacted you first, but you weren't likely to be online that late and I thought that I wouldn't have the time to be online today.

Sorry, sorry, sorry. War is a joint domain for us - I wanted only to get this done quickly, whilst the opportunity had presented itself.

(Humbled) Minister of WAR, not peace.
MrWIA.

civman2000 · June 18, 2002, 08:16

slow down, get the other people before considering it (though we could have our units stay there ready for the city for a few turns...)

cavebear · June 18, 2002, 10:22

Peace, Honored Ministers...

As we did not have an active Foreign Minister last term, some of the overall Foreign Affairs planning duties fell to the Minister of War by default. Our goals were somewhat determined by militarily opportunistic targets rather than a coordinated overall plan.

So, I readily understand the Minister of War pointing out an excellent chance to pick off an isolated enemy city and establish a base for future operations. Just such an action gave us Elephantine and led to our successful campaign against the Egyptians and then the Americans. I praise the observation of the vulnerability of Oea.

And I should also point out that there can be conflicting proposals from different Ministers. The Minister of War always has the right to propose a military action even when another Minister proposes a different course of action (as can happen between the Ministers of Trade and War, or Trade and City planning, etc)

On the other hand, the Foreign Minister is quite correct in pointing out that the Citizens are already voting on what to do about the Carthaginians, and the voting there is overwhelmingly in favor of leaving them in peace for right now. We can hardly go and take Oea and leave the Carthaginians alone at the same time.

When conflicting proposals are made (and when both seem to gain Citizen approval), the President has to reconcile the plans as best possible.

Let this idea of taking Oea act, for now, as pre-planning for the inevitable assault

on the Carths, when the Citizens decide the time has come.

MrWhereItsAt · June 22, 2002, 20:32

Thanks for taking the leading role here Premier - I think it was needed, as I didn't know what to do about the
conflicting poll results!

I think, Mr Head of the Foreign Office, that you understand my mistake and I hope you have forgiven this transgression - in future you will be consulted first!

(Where's the peace smiley when you need one?)

Minister of WAR, not peace.
MrWIA.

Marquis de Sodaq · June 22, 2002, 22:45

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
(Where's the peace smiley when you need one?)

, dude

cavebear · June 23, 2002, 00:01

...V