War Academy: Next taget England or France - Page 2

Reddawg · October 17, 2002, 15:47

Now that Aggie has eased my fears that this attack would be any sooner than 10 or 15 turns, and will last under 10 turns... basically I have enough faith in our SMC to defer to whatever he decides. But this is my opinion:

England is serving as a check to Aztec power. Now that the Persians are defunct, and the Aztecs have made some nice gains from America, we need the English to step into the power vacuum enough to counter the Aztecs. I don't think destroying them makes any sense whatsoever at this junction.

And while I'm a francophile, and would hate to see the French be killed off, they are the "logical" state to go after, as they are weakest (although making some small gains) and hold some strategic value... so if war it must be, then it should be against France.

vive l'Apolyton!

Meshelic · October 17, 2002, 15:49

France is small enough to absorb quickly. A near-monopoly on saltpeter will help keep us powerful and our foes weak!

joncnunn · October 17, 2002, 16:27

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

Saltpeter is only dominent for a specific period. I don't think riflemen require saltpeter for some reason and I know Infantry does not require it.

Riflemen don't need any resources.

But CALVARY also needs saltpeter.

When we have Tanks it will be safe to sell Saltpeter to civs on our own contientant, but not before.

Donegeal · October 17, 2002, 16:44

Do the English have muskets yet? I know they have GP and saltpeter, but have they built any Muskets yet? If they have, then war with them wouln't be an option until we get Cavalry. In reguards to France, I still feel that SMC Aggie is overly optimistic on his plans for France.

As I have said before, Knights against fortified Pike in hilled cities is NOT in our favor. I would predict we loose 3 to 5 Knights per hilled city (and all of the cities that have the objective resourses are hilled). We could loose nearly our entire offensive force taking 3 cities that we just don't need.

With Persia, it was 2 lux that we NEEDED at the time and the Pyramids that has been a truly great addition. There was stiff resistance to the prolonged war with Persia when we had clearly identified the tremendous boost that taking the land would give us.

We have two sources of Iron. We have two sources of Saltpeter. I see no need to attack France.

joncnunn · October 17, 2002, 16:50

Darn it, why couldn't the French have built their cities on grass land instead of hills so we could run them over easier?

Aggie · October 17, 2002, 19:16

I am sorry its taken so long to post these I have been very busy, but here they are at last.
First the French War.
The reason for the french war are very obvious.
1) They are in an area that has great strategic value
2sources of iron/saltpeter and control the "neck" of our continent.
2) This would allow us to connect hole in the wall to our empire physically and give us several good ports(some with harbors already) on the west coast.
3) They have warriors which are pretty cool to get GA,
4) Rhiems is a burr in our saddle and needs to be ours.
5) They are on hills and where as they can be attacked now, when they get musketeers they will have a defense of 6 on a hill.
Ok here is the map. Unseen on this map are 5 wc that will attack units near rheims AFTER Rheims has fallen.
Aggie

Meshelic · October 17, 2002, 19:23

What does that say near the Greco/French border?

Aggie · October 17, 2002, 19:29

This is the plan of attack on England, we will attack N first, then spare units can go south and attack oxford, maybe a sword or more even earlier.
There are compelling reasons to attack England they are
1. They are a power and need to be pruned.
2. We can take their only source of SP and sell it to them
3. Arbela would be flip proof
4. Our area near the pyramids would be utterly secure
5. This would give us somemore ports on the east coast
6. They are still new to GP we can get them before many musketeers are made.
7. We could keep our forces more concentrated and thus safe.
8. We could get another wine to sell the other civs.
9. Grassland makes blitzkrieg easier.
10. Our border would be reduced to 3 cities in that area instead of 5+
11. They will probably have tech to give for peace especially if we move toward London.
Aggie

Aggie · October 17, 2002, 19:45

Meslelic sorry for the printing it looked better on a larger image. It say that I estimate that 9knights will be alive and healthy enough to gather at this point, basically 6/15 in the north will be dead or not healed by this time
In the South the number is 2knights so 2knights of the 5knight+3longbow units will be able to move and help to attack capital.
Also I hereby request a force of 5 workers be at the disposal of the Army to road quickly.
Now some request/comments
I hereby announce that the time for this attack is planned on the 16th turn.
I hereby request that between now and then we build 14 more WC and upgrade 6.
This will give us 20knights and 10 wc's, the Wc's will be deployed in the central and east for defense, in addition I would like 500lyptons be set aside in savings for upgrade of 5 of these, just in case france brings in somebody other than greece. This money WILL NOT be spent on upgrades unless an alliance occurs against us. Once the war is over this money will be spent using our normal budget. If we attack england the above order remain except the WC would be in the west instead of east.
The code names for these plans are
French----Burn at the Stake or BATS
English---Take out bad Elizebeth or TOBE
Aggie

GodKing · October 17, 2002, 20:10

Can we get some peace for a bit!!! I would like us to build a couple of markets, libraries, banks, cathedrals, etc, as well as an overwealming military, before the next war. Lets declair peace with everybody, wait the 20 turns, then start to reevaluate our situation then.

I say look at germany though before the panzers arive. They are so centrally located, so much good land, so close to our capitol and FP locations... think about that.

Meshelic · October 17, 2002, 21:20

We could get away with capturing a few French or English cities and eventually they'd forgive us and get used to it.

The Germans on the other hand are known to hold eternal grudges (at least so it has seemed in my own games) and I don't recommend attacking Germans right now.

Panzer32 · October 17, 2002, 22:33

War with either the English or the French has to be RIGHT NOW, before they get too many mustet men/eers

Panzer32 · October 17, 2002, 22:47

or we could just leave them both alone and concentrate on building our infrastructure.

Panzer32 · October 17, 2002, 22:48

HAHA im cheiftan now...

Just a few more posts 'till emperor...

Reddawg · October 17, 2002, 23:40

Um, GK you probably know where I really stand on this. Aggie has said any attack would be at least two turnchats away; I'd really like three or four but if he is confident that the war will be short, I'd support a small war after 2 or 3 turnchats...

but now I'm worried... remember what happened the last time we entered into what was going to be a "short" war with France? Yeah... we just ended that, and this was during Term 3!!! Lol... what if France brings in Greece? Or worse, Aztec... I'm having doubts.

REassure me, Aggie!!!

nz_upy · October 18, 2002, 01:22

Decimate the plague of frogs on Our Very Apolytonia (Egypt).

Meshelic · October 18, 2002, 01:28

Egypt? Never heard of 'em. What do you know of these "Egyptians"?

E_T · October 18, 2002, 01:38

Quote:

Originally posted by GodKing
Can we get some peace for a bit!!! I would like us to build a couple of markets, libraries, banks, cathedrals, etc, as well as an overwealming military, before the next war. Lets declair peace with everybody, wait the 20 turns, then start to reevaluate our situation then.

I say look at germany though before the panzers arive. They are so centrally located, so much good land, so close to our capitol and FP locations... think about that.

And with one Wonder. There is quite a lot that still will be needed to bring us up to speed with the other Civ's. Germany seems to the the Technology giant.

France will be good to trigger our GA, Taking Rhemes and some of the other cities. But we should concentrate mostly on the Resources, GA and some of the cities. Try to limit the war to just 5 turns, not 10. France has no vital technologies or wonders that we need.

I would rather that we "pull the strings" in 740AD (two turnchats away), that way it will reduce the chance of France getting GP and we can get on with other things as quikly as possible.

The sooner the war gets started and having a shorter war is a better option, at least to me.

E_T

Kloreep · October 18, 2002, 01:48

I would just like to state I am against a GA at this point, and will be until we build the FP. So don't assume the people will approve the use of War Chariots.

As for war, I've become convinced war with England would be too costly; I might support a limited war against France, but I'm also worried about the prospect of an alliance against us.

Aggie · October 18, 2002, 10:03

Well her's what we do, we sell them a useless tech for all there money and quickly seixe Salt peter ansd iron so they have no bargaining chips. additionally the other forces will counter attack quickly if an alliance is amde against us, thus ensuring a quick peace on all fronts.
Aggie

Shiber · October 18, 2002, 10:22

It's salt paper, damnit! Not salt peter.
Has OPD taken over you too Aggie?
/me is reminded of a scene from 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.

DAVOUT · October 18, 2002, 10:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
It's salt paper, damnit! Not salt peter.
Has OPD taken over you too Aggie?

Shiber · October 18, 2002, 12:39

HOLY COW...
I have just realized that IT IS saltpeter! I must be dyslectic!

Wait, if I can spell dyslectic it must mean that I'm not.

Is there a law against excessive use of emoticons?

Panzer32 · October 18, 2002, 15:56

There are two issues here:

1. France will get gunpowder soon and build musketeers

2. Our war chariots are already outdated. We need to use them now or never. We could always build a wonder to get a GA, but there is no guarantee we will build it first.

Considering this, I believe we have 2 options:

1. Go to war with France right now, as in ONE TO FIVE turns from now

2. Forget war, and build up our infrastructure so we have a better chance of finishing a GA-starting wonder.

Thats the options that I see.

ruby_maser · October 18, 2002, 17:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
Is there a law against excessive use of emoticons?

Well... if there ain't, there oughtta be

I'm for a limited war against France provided we feel confident they won't pull someone else in against us. But the arguement that 'England is a power and needs to be pruned' seems a bit light. Same with securing a smaller border to defend by taking them out... afterall, it was imperialism that got us that precarious border to begin with.

There are virtues and wisdom to rattling the saber a little less. Being too big and having too much may be ill-advised. However, France should step aside... and afterwards, let the armies rest a while.

joncnunn · October 21, 2002, 12:27

If we want a pre-Musketter attack with Knights at all we have to do it around 16 turns from now.

On the English front, several cities need relocating / converted to workers.

The first might be moving York to the plains west of the Saltpeter. (Much lower chance of a flip) We will need to found the "New" York before abanoded Old York since that plains square may be inside London's culture boundary.

I'd vote for France first. How do we keep Hole in the Wall from being occuplied by the French for most of the war though?

I don't like the idea of selling Saltpeter to the English if they are still on our boarder. (even pushed back)

ManicStarSeed · October 21, 2002, 14:43

We need to annex france soon, before they discover GP.

E_T · October 23, 2002, 18:27

I'm bumping this, so as the DOW vote can have some previous discussions to look at. I'll be linking it into my post in the Poll, soon.

E_T