War Academy: Our military doctrine for the early Medieval age

[Shiber]

I suggested that we build an army not necessarily for military purposes but to be able to build the Heroic Epic after we win a battle with our army and have a greater chance of getting GLs in the future.

[Harovan]

As there seem to be some doubts, I feel the need to state once more my position on AI blackmails.

If I feel, that I am military inferior and that the blackmailing civ is out for blood, I tend to give in to demands. This takes place mainly in the early game, when I haven't finished my basic buildup yet and have a weak military. But I'm aware, that giving in to demands marks me a weak civ in the eyes of all the others too, so if I give in too much, the frequency of extortions will increase.

Extortions are a good indicator of my own lack of strength. So I get not mad, if I am extorted and gave in, but take it as a hint to build up my own military. At some point (somewhere in the early medieval age) usually the extortions stop, because I am military strong. So I also tend to give in to extortions, when it's appropriate. The AIs have big science, growth and production bonuses, so in the early game it's no shame if I sacrifice a few gold coins for a safer expansion. Early wars are only beneficial, If I start them.

However, to plan to give in to demands in the future, is clearly the wrong way. The AIs will learn from each other, that the Apolytonians are sissies and very soon we will get extorted more and more often. We have 11 AI civs on our home continent. Do we want to get extorted by puny civs like Babylon, just because they have a bunch of Knights and we don't? And don't we risk to be sneak attacked without an earlier extortion by some weak nation with a stack of merely 5-6 Knights? They clearly can take 2 or 3 cities this way and we aren't even able to retake them, if we have no offensive army. And even if we retake them some lucky way, we lost 2 or 3 temples, libraries, cathedrals and universities, as they get destroyed! So many lost shields! Only because we were too thrifty to spend some shields for an active defense.

Build up our military I say, and keep it up to date. Ah yes, and a good offense is still the best defense.

[Panag]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yes, Spiffor. When you have no army and they demand, you give.

But that is no guarantee they do not attack the next turn. I have often seen the demand, then the column shows up. When the column shows up, they attack. There is nothing else to it.

Better to have an army. Then they do not demand. They never dispatch the column. We are not easy pickin's.

hi ,

indeed we should have army's , ....
the shall still ask , but either they shall go to declare war , and never set foot on our soil , (distand civ) or try to provoke a war with our neighbors , ....

yet in most case when we tell them to get lost they shall do nothing , ...

still we cant blame them for trying , ....

have a nice day

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Extortions are a good indicator of my own lack of strength

Yes, but it's more subtle than that. You probably noticed we got extorsions (we even gave in to some) although we have the most powerful army.
We got them because of our lack of defense in some cities, + the lack of defense of our worker stacks.
I'm not saying defensive troops only are enough. But extorsions don't necessarily mean we should build-up our offensive ability : our defensive ability too.

[GePap]

I personally can't understand the notion that a defensive byuilding strategy at this point is cowardly because it leaves us with a small and puny state, for the simple reason that:

AFTER OUR WARS WITH FRANCE AND THE AMERICANS, WE WILL HAVE THE LARGEST EMPIRE IN THIS CONTINENT, BAR NON. YES, THE LARGEST EMPIRE IN THE CONTINENT.

We will have more cities, more land, and more resources than anyone else. Our weakness then will be in a continued lack of infrastrcuture and city development, i.e, a lot of size one cities not connected to each other. With a bulding strategy we would create a massive empire, and with creative diplomacy, it would be a massive empire with no significant external threats to itself.

I do agree with SirRalph that a good offensive force is better than lots of pikemen: such a force is cheaper, and I believe that using or basic human superiority at fighting pitched battles will get us much further than awaiting sieges, or counter sieges: kill the enemy before thry get to our cities, not after they take them. BUt having kinghts doesn't help jugle enclosed cities if they don't have a road to them. Infrastructure in the form of a great road network is crucial for any mobil;e force to be worth a damn.

We already are the strongest empire in the land- its time to make us the best empire also.

[Shiber]

Cheers GePap!

[Panag]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Yes, but it's more subtle than that. You probably noticed we got extorsions (we even gave in to some) although we have the most powerful army.
We got them because of our lack of defense in some cities, + the lack of defense of our worker stacks.
I'm not saying defensive troops only are enough. But extorsions don't necessarily mean we should build-up our offensive ability : our defensive ability too.

hi ,

we should start to get a fast moving group aswell , so that we can move a couple horseman ( chariot) to a hot point , ...

in the future we should get knights , they could be a large role-player for us (!)

with some pikeman in the city , some swordman , yeah we should be good , ...

have a nice day