View Full Version : Indian War Plan


CivGeneral
Apr 03, 2005, 02:49 PM
After going through consideration that one of the Dutch cities has an iron resource built right on top of it, it has come to our attention that the war with the Dutch would only solve nothing but a couple of razed resources and a failed attemt to deny iron to the dutch. After learning that, I have switched my stance from a Dutchcrat to an Indiancrat and push forward for a war against the Indians.

At the moment, there are two cities that have mature culture ratings that will make them immune to autorazing. The other three cities are not as mature both culture wize and population wize and suseptible to autorazing.

What I plan to have is have an army of swordsmen take the capital city and (hopefully cause capital hoping (A spin-off of Island Hoping in World War II)) capture the city to force the Indians to move their capital to another location. There I would have 2-3 swords split from the main army and head to Bombay while the rest of the army (but one defending sword) to take over Calcutta. Again there, the army splits into two. One heading to Bangalore and the other to Madras.

Once the two major cities have been captured, the capital would move to one of the size 1 cities.

Ginger_Ale
Apr 03, 2005, 03:30 PM
Instead of 1 big stack by Delhi, why don't we put a stack on the Iron hill where the plan was to start, and they take Delhi. Another stack will start on the BG N of Bentley and go N, then NE and then attack Bombay for the Silks. The Delhi stack will then go after Calcutta, the Bombay stack will go after Madras,and then they'll finish up on Bangalore.

Wouldn't that be quicker (and quicker is better if we're a Republic with WW).

Icmancin
Apr 03, 2005, 05:33 PM
Interesting....
Perhaps when finished you could take a look at my analysis for the Indian and Dutch war for the External Consul.

DaveShack
Apr 03, 2005, 05:49 PM
Is the objective still to leave the Indians in the game as a vassal state while making a limited acquisition of their prime real estate, or are we on an elimination path? You should get that clarified by the External Consul. :)

I'm inclined to capture Delhi and Bombay, and take one or more size-1 in the peace deal, and then focus our forces on the Dutch.

Icmancin
Apr 03, 2005, 05:58 PM
I can't speak for mad-bax but his policy states he is not going for complete destruction of the Indians or the Dutch.

RegentMan
Apr 03, 2005, 06:38 PM
Also, why send only two to three swords to capture a city? No matter how small, even with one spear, the RNG has a way of ticking us humans off.

CivGeneral
Apr 03, 2005, 06:48 PM
@Ginger_Ale - The red box represents the assembaly location. I do plan on having the stack on the iron resource 1 turn before the actual decration of war.

@Dave - Sounds like a good idea, but I am skeptical about the AI regarding city trades. Most of the time, the AI are hesitant of giving up their cities.

@RegentMan - Yeah, the RNG has a way to tick us humans off both playing Civ and playing the slot machines :lol:. I would beleve that 5 units would be good, but I chose 2-3 units because I had to take into consideration of our account and budget.

I am inclined to preserve some of the indian cities while encapulating them so that they would remain landlocked. One of the two immature landlocked cities would be spared from our conquest

Noldodan
Apr 03, 2005, 07:45 PM
Shouldn't we have some sort of poll on if we want to attack the Indians or not before we start planning for that war? The only war polls I see are one from early last term, which was shot down, and your recent Citizen's Pulse poll where we voted to go to war with the Dutch, rather than the Indians.

CivGeneral
Apr 03, 2005, 07:49 PM
Shouldn't we have some sort of poll on if we want to attack the Indians or not before we start planning for that war? The only war polls I see are one from early last term, which was shot down, and your recent Citizen's Pulse poll where we voted to go to war with the Dutch, rather than the Indians.
Please note that this was before Ginger Ale informed me about the iron resource that is underneath the Dutch city and that the "Denying Iron to the Dutch" would not be feasable. In the Dutch war, we would be left with autorazed cities.

I am still awaiting (Hint hint to Max-bax ;) ) for the offical one from the External Affairs office. Since at the moment, the Indian/Dutch war is an issue that has divided the citizens.

Provolution
Apr 03, 2005, 07:50 PM
I am still for the Dutch War. Civgeneral need to plan both wars.

CivGeneral
Apr 03, 2005, 07:53 PM
I am still for the Dutch War. Civgeneral need to plan both wars.
Beleve me its not easy to side for eather wars (In Real Life I am a Moderate/Centrist), As a Commander, I (as Provo states) "need to plan for both wars". If we are to go to war against the Dutch, our objectives would have to change (Since denying iron from the Dutch would be a challenge if we go to war against them first) and accept that we need to produce settlers to fill in the void the autorazed dutch cities.

blackheart
Apr 03, 2005, 08:11 PM
Sounds good, but we should take into consideration Indian reinforcements and perhaps amphibiously land a spearman behind Delhi to prevent anymore defenders joining Delhi.

Chieftess
Apr 03, 2005, 09:30 PM
Gridlines please. I'd also like to see tile-by-tile how we're going to move.

truckingpete
Apr 03, 2005, 09:33 PM
WAR!!

Umm..I think we should hold this war plan for awhile..

We are at war with Persia AND Japan!!

This could be bad!!!

I say build more units..let's stay on the defensive for these 2 wars!!!

- TP

RegentMan
Apr 03, 2005, 09:33 PM
Sounds good, but we should take into consideration Indian reinforcements and perhaps amphibiously land a spearman behind Delhi to prevent anymore defenders joining Delhi.
In my experiences, having units next to an AI city makes them whip and rush defenders to that city. Can anyone else clarify?

Black_Hole
Apr 03, 2005, 09:33 PM
I agree with Nolodan, maybe we should vote on this war before planning for and executing it. That would seem to be the best option

RegentMan
Apr 03, 2005, 09:34 PM
WAR!!

Umm..I think we should hold this war plan for awhile..

We are at war with Persia AND Japan!!

This could be bad!!!

I say build more units..let's stay on the defensive for these 2 wars!!!

- TP
We are indeed at war with these two civilizations. However, they are too far away to pose any threat. Let us continue with our India vs. Dutch war debate (go Dutch war!).

Chieftess
Apr 03, 2005, 09:54 PM
We could always have the Dutch attack Japan. That way, we can attack India, and then have the Dutch send their forces to the other side of the continent. Once we're through with India, we can attack the Dutch while they have most of their forces on the other side of the pangaea. This tactic was done multiple times in DG2.

RegentMan
Apr 03, 2005, 10:04 PM
Interesting idea, Chieftess. This would greatly speed up our conquest of the Netherlands.

Nobody
Apr 03, 2005, 10:10 PM
If we go war with india, i am in favor of wipeing them out. theres nothing to be gained by leaving a angry civ on our borders. also if we are at war with nations far away i pled with the Military not to attack them at all, so when we make peace we can make them polite. If we take there citys they will hate us for ever

CivGeneral
Apr 03, 2005, 10:29 PM
Gridlines please. I'd also like to see tile-by-tile how we're going to move.
Shesh, picky picky picky about thoes grids :p

Edit: Updated map with grids for your viewing pleasure ;).

RegentMan
Apr 04, 2005, 12:46 AM
What's going to be done about Karachi?

mad-bax
Apr 04, 2005, 04:47 AM
I will repoll the India-Dutch question.
I do not want an MA with the Dutch. It ties us to a 20 turn gap between war with india and war with the Dutch. I do not want to trash our rep at this stage and I do not want to prolong the wars so that our government switch is unduly delayed.

Commander,
I asked you to prepare two battle plans. 1 for India first and one for the Dutch first. I will combine these with Provos cultural war strategy and the "no war at all" strategy and poll them all together. I do not want to go through another loop of India or Dutch first.

The Indian battle plan only adresses India. Remember that the External Consulate has defined its objectives for such a war and you only need to meet these objectives. Going any further than that might leave us weak for the Dutch war which will start immediately afterwards if my policy is ratified by the people.

Have a look at the objectives I have set in my government thread, and if you would make an estimate of how many units of which types you will need. Remember we can build chariots and upgrade to horses at any time. Remember also that we might see a few immortals in 15-20 turns time, and so timing the battles to get our units to the East of the Netherlands might be prudent.

Now I have about half a dozen polls to write, so I'll leave it at that for now.

classical_hero
Apr 04, 2005, 10:05 AM
I like Chieftess' Idea. Lure the Dutch to go to a galaxy far, far, way. This will mean that they will not be prepared for us when we eventually attack.

greekguy
Apr 04, 2005, 02:34 PM
If we attack the Indians, they should be wiped out. there is nothing else to gain from them. If we fight the Dutch first, i say leave them with a couple cities. they'll still research and we could get a tech from them later. it will also keep other civs from knowing the Dutch exist. also i'm in favor of Dutch war first. we could be prepared for war very soon if we have enough swords/chariots. the Dutch are not invincible right now, but they will be if we wait untill they get Swiss Mercenary.

Ginger_Ale
Apr 04, 2005, 03:35 PM
Warning: Indians are about to settle yet another city. It will most likely be autorazed if we try to capture it, so perhaps we can get it and Karachi, the tundra town, in a peace deal.

Settler/warrior pair is in red rectangle.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/DG6_IndianSettler_BC1125.JPG

Gregski
Apr 04, 2005, 03:47 PM
Although I have never supported the invasion of India, leaving witnesses alive after the invasion is the worst thing to do. If we attack, it must be total elimination.

blackheart
Apr 04, 2005, 06:14 PM
Although I have never supported the invasion of India, leaving witnesses alive after the invasion is the worst thing to do. If we attack, it must be total elimination.

A little genocide eh? :p

vikingruler
Apr 04, 2005, 06:54 PM
we can't attack both civs at once because of our obviously small army. if we are to carry out chieftess' plan we will need to attack them both. even though we will have a bigger army when that time comes it is most likely be at our government switch time or they have swiss mercenaries. also with civgenerals plan i feel it would be very difficult to achieve. due to the fact our army is 6 warriors and 2 swordsmen, even if we build up and upgrade i think the indians either have to many cities or have too many reinforcements. if we are going to attack the dutch the time is now. as i said our army is too small and we can't destroy the dutch but we can weaken them, this will not only get us more cities, but also weaken them severly and possibly destroy their only source of iron so we can easily finish them off later.

LeeT911
Apr 04, 2005, 09:19 PM
The Dutch already have iron hooked up. Utrecht is build on a hill with iron (deep in their core). It is highly unlikely we will be able to take this city from them unless we build a much larger military. And even then, we will not be able to hold the city as it is too close to their capital.

I've attached a screenshot, it's not recent (1375 BC, Oxford missing), but it'll do. Borders are marked. The city circled in yellow hides the Dutch iron. The yellow dot is the most likely location of Amsterdam. This screenshot was taken several turns ago, when the Dutch iron was only connected by one road (red arrow). That may no longer be the case. I don't believe depriving the Dutch of iron is possible at the moment.

zyxy
Apr 05, 2005, 04:44 AM
CG,

On your map I can see only one Indian city that has expanded borders: Delhi. What is the other one, please?

MOTH
Apr 05, 2005, 08:24 AM
CG,

On your map I can see only one Indian city that has expanded borders: Delhi. What is the other one, please?

CG's map is slightly out of date. Bangalore and Calcutta have both recently expanded. Also, looking at (estimated) culture growth via CrpSuite indicates that India has built a 3rd temple someplace in the last 2 turns, so we could see a 3rd city expand in about 3 turns (hopefully Bombay).

Gregski
Apr 05, 2005, 08:37 AM
A little genocide eh? :p

Nah, genocide on a large scale :D
But seriously, if we make the Indians an uh 'colony', we must uh 'colonise' their entire nation.

Icmancin
Apr 05, 2005, 05:04 PM
Nah, genocide on a large scale :D
But seriously, if we make the Indians an uh 'colony', we must uh 'colonise' their entire nation.

I am completely against genocide or 'colonization' of any nation. Although I have used a brutal tactic to help in wars with large cities....

Whenever a large city is captured I cannot simply wait for the city to end resistance nor can I spare enough troops to contain the city. Instead, whenever a citizen ceases to revolt I immediately turn them to a specialist so no food is produced. The original population in 'colonized' out of exsistance and your own citizens spring up. (This is very brutal and I have used it in one of my resent games against the Spanish. Those monsters culture-flipped a city with a Crusader and two medival Infantry army....)

Gregski
Apr 05, 2005, 06:03 PM
I am completely against genocide or 'colonization' of any nation. Although I have used a brutal tactic to help in wars with large cities....

Whenever a large city is captured I cannot simply wait for the city to end resistance nor can I spare enough troops to contain the city. Instead, whenever a citizen ceases to revolt I immediately turn them to a specialist so no food is produced. The original population in 'colonized' out of exsistance and your own citizens spring up. (This is very brutal and I have used it in one of my resent games against the Spanish. Those monsters culture-flipped a city with a Crusader and two medival Infantry army....)

What I meant by 'colonization' was that we capture all cities as opposed to leaving one standing.

CivGeneral
Apr 06, 2005, 02:26 AM
Commander,
I asked you to prepare two battle plans. 1 for India first and one for the Dutch first. I will combine these with Provos cultural war strategy and the "no war at all" strategy and poll them all together. I do not want to go through another loop of India or Dutch first.

The Indian battle plan only adresses India. Remember that the External Consulate has defined its objectives for such a war and you only need to meet these objectives. Going any further than that might leave us weak for the Dutch war which will start immediately afterwards if my policy is ratified by the people.

Have a look at the objectives I have set in my government thread, and if you would make an estimate of how many units of which types you will need. Remember we can build chariots and upgrade to horses at any time. Remember also that we might see a few immortals in 15-20 turns time, and so timing the battles to get our units to the East of the Netherlands might be prudent.

Now I have about half a dozen polls to write, so I'll leave it at that for now.

I thought the purpouse of these kinds of threads was to gather comments, changes, or criticizms about my proposed plan (The route plotting) :hmm:. I do apologise If I was stepping on your or the Exsternal Affair's toes. Since the original intent of this thread was, as said before, gather comments, changes, or criticizms about my battle plan.

I am getting the feeling you have gotten confused uppon reading the thread's title and thought it was a plan that is totaly different than the objectives listed in the Exsternal Affairs thread (and yes I have read it).

In regards to the plans for the Dutch, yes I have already done that and can be found in my "Essay & Discussion: Expantion and Future War plans" and that battleplan that can be found there is for a Dutch first scenario.

Also, excuse the lateness in responce to your post. I had recently been dumped (and Ill leave it at that).

mad-bax
Apr 06, 2005, 10:17 AM
CG I didn't mean to upset you in any way. I was just concerned that your war plan went further than the External Consulates plan. Since we want to be at war with the Dutch ASAP I would just like to secure the iron, grab the silks and set up a stack to hit the Dutch Core. I don't want to spend units and turns taking out India completely.
If we do take out India completely then we will not be able to get stuff for free in the peace deal.

So the general idea was :- Attack India and go to war for 6-8 turns max. Pause for 6-10 turns to heal up and get troops into position. Then hit the Dutch.
At the moment we haven't built any chariots. It might be a good idea to get the governor to put some in his queues since they upgrade for half the price, and horses are quicker and have a better upgrade path. It's up to you of course. The Indian war should start at the beginning of the next turnset really, so there isn't much time. Any later and we will have to delay switching government. :)

DaveShack
Apr 06, 2005, 02:00 PM
@MB: Starting the next turnset? I don't think starting tomorrow is feasible, we have too few units, did you maybe mean the next one after that?

@CG: Should we shadow the Indian settler and pick up a couple of workers instead of trying to get the size 1 town in the peace deal? If we do decide to capture the settler can we afford to assign a unit to "escort" duty?

MOTH
Apr 06, 2005, 02:41 PM
Complete destruction of the Indians will take too long and should wait for a second phase of war. I think we should plan on capturing Delhi and Bombay and position us for attack on the Dutch core by about the time that reinforcements are available.

I would propose that we have 6 vet Swords available for the initial assault on Delhi and that they should assemble in Bentley to reduce the flip risk and act as Military Police. As Bentley produces warriors they should move to donsignia to be upgraded to Swords and then back to Bentley. Once we have produced sufficient Swords we should switch production to Chariots in preparation for the future Dutch war.

CivGeneral
Apr 06, 2005, 02:53 PM
@CG: Should we shadow the Indian settler and pick up a couple of workers instead of trying to get the size 1 town in the peace deal? If we do decide to capture the settler can we afford to assign a unit to "escort" duty?

I beleve its a good idea to do shadow the Indian settler. That way we can get (What the early hawks said) some Indian workers.

mad-bax
Apr 07, 2005, 01:13 AM
DS: No not today Dave - but the following turnset - 10 turns time. CG has the final say of course, but once we have 6-8 swords and military production has switched to chariots that should be it. MOTH said it all anyway.

Chieftess
Apr 07, 2005, 05:55 AM
I hope we aren't going to stop with just 6-8 swords and use chariots... I'd feel much safer (on emperor level) with closer to 15 swords atleast.

mad-bax
Apr 07, 2005, 08:36 AM
No I think we use 6-8 swords and a spear initially for India and reinforce with horses. We should build chariots and upgrade them IMO. That is why we have not traded for HBR.

Chieftess
Apr 07, 2005, 04:39 PM
Now that the Dutch are sending their troops towards China, this will help us to conquer the Dutch from the south after taking out India. I think an ancient era world war is about to erupt.

Rik Meleet
Apr 07, 2005, 05:18 PM
I think I'm going to load the save for the first time this game. Could be interesting.

MOTH
Apr 08, 2005, 08:42 AM
Commander,
What is your thoughts on when we will be ready to launch the attack on India?

A little info gathered from Civ Assist and Crpstats:
We currently have 6 reg warriors and 4 vet Swords.
In production we have: Settler in 1 turn, Chariot in 2 turns, Sword in 3 turns, Barracks in 2 turns, Vet warrior in 4 turns, Reg warrior in 3 turns.

Assuming the 6-8 Swords is the number you want and if we want to attack in about 5 turns we should make the following changes:
Camelot: Settler switch to Sword in 1 turn
Donsignia: Chariot in 2 turns to Sword in 3 turns

After the current production we should continue to produce vet warriors in Bentley.
Camelot should produce 1 settler and grow back to size 5 and we should produce vet Chariots in Camelot, donsignia, Roosting Tree, and Provolutia after this in preparation for upgrade and a Dutch war.

mad-bax
Apr 08, 2005, 08:57 AM
Yes MOTH I think that you are right. It's difficult to swap a settler for a sword, but it can be done in our present situation I think. I don't think we HAVE to go to war in EXACTLY 5 turns, but it should be the target.

I posted a war plan some time ago that I still like. The Map is a bit old but it's still fairly relevent.

Yellow dots. Indian war jump points.
Green dots. Dutch war jump points.
Red arrows. Primary Objective.
Blue arrows. Secondary objective.

Start war with 8 swords vs Delhi, and then take Bombay.

5 or 6 turns later attack Rotterdam and the Hague on the same turn. 5 Horses used vs the Hague, and perhaps a few turns healing and reinforcement for the northern stack.

If the RNG is with us, then continue to take the Dutch capital and spices.

End result will be complete control of our sector of the map.
3 new sources of iron.
2 sources of horses (since we take Groningen in the Peace Deal).
1 source of silks min.
1 source of spices (maybe)

No iron for India or the Dutch.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/warmb.jpg

It may be worth thinking about taking Madras too, but primarily the Indian war is only intended to secure our position, get another lux and set us up for the main event, which is the Dutch campaign.

Bertie
Apr 08, 2005, 10:14 AM
Good analysis, Moth; I agree with everything. I particularly agree about changing the settler to a sword. In the near future we may want to consider building a worker in Camelot (itíll grow again quickly) in between producing chariots. We may even want to consider joining a worker to Roosting Tree so it can grow and become more productive.

M-B, I continue to like your battle strategy. Taking Madras is an interesting wrinkle. Iíd be inclined to send troops in that direction to help convince India to give us a generous peace settlement; and if they donít, then we can take Madras. Itís just as easy to attack Rotterdam from Madras as it is from Bombay, so this doesnít really change the overall strategy. Iíll be very interested to see the ultimate particulars of how CivGeneral decides to execute the strategy. Heís going to have some fun battles to plan!

RegentMan
Apr 08, 2005, 11:13 AM
I still want to do a Dutch first war. However, if we are destined to wage an Indian war first, then I suggest annexing their entire nation. There's no point in keeping Gandhi alive with a few cities. He'll never be able to trade techs with us, nor any significant amounts of gold. Heck, he may even sneak-attack us with a military alliance that another AI proposes.

classical_hero
Apr 08, 2005, 11:34 AM
I still want to do a Dutch first war. However, if we are destined to wage an Indian war first, then I suggest annexing their entire nation. There's no point in keeping Gandhi alive with a few cities. He'll never be able to trade techs with us, nor any significant amounts of gold. Heck, he may even sneak-attack us with a military alliance that another AI proposes.
I agree. If we are going to attack India first, which basically is the easy option, then we are going to have to destroy them. There is no point going half hearted in a war.

MOTH
Apr 08, 2005, 12:05 PM
We will destroy India, just not in this first round of war. We will capture 2 or 3 core Indian cities and get a few small outlying size 1 cities in the peace treaty. Later we can come back and finish the job.

If we try to wipe them out during this round there are 2 problems:
1. We will auto-raze at least 2 of their cities, thus hurting our standing with the other AIs.
2. We will delay the war with the Dutch too long and could be facing their UU.

Ginger_Ale
Apr 09, 2005, 10:52 AM
Agreed a small, goal-specific war is ideal vs. India. Capture the capital for less flip risk of Bentley, and Bombay for the Silks (if we go Republic, we need luxuries). Those cities won't have lots of flip risk, as they'll still be relatively close to our capital. We can then hope to attack the Dutch with either swords or Knights/MDIs before they get massive amounts of Swiss Mercenaries. mad-bax and MOTH hit the nail on the head.

Chieftess
Apr 09, 2005, 11:11 AM
We will destroy India, just not in this first round of war. We will capture 2 or 3 core Indian cities and get a few small outlying size 1 cities in the peace treaty. Later we can come back and finish the job.

If we try to wipe them out during this round there are 2 problems:
1. We will auto-raze at least 2 of their cities, thus hurting our standing with the other AIs.
2. We will delay the war with the Dutch too long and could be facing their UU.

And another - rep hit if we completely defeat India.

Nobody
Apr 09, 2005, 11:01 PM
you need a snazy operation name, e.g. Operation Cow Cutter. (because we will be taking the citys that have cows, and because there is a indian city with a simliar name hahaha)

CivGeneral
Apr 13, 2005, 04:39 PM
Just to confurm to the department that is complaining that I am steping on their toes and exciding the objectives.

The Red Arrows are the Primary Routes that go in terms with the Objectives the EAs has set. The Green Arrows are Secondary Routes, In the event India does not accept the terms of our offer of peace or if we decide to capture any more Indian cities (whichever comes first)