This is the Third Term Military Department Thread.

Here we discuss and lay down the Military Policies and actions of Pheonetica.

Term 2 Military Department Thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21643)

chat repreentatives
could you please port the order for your chat representatives in this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23795)?

Welcome to yet another term as our enlightened military leader Falcon!:goodjob: What do you think did I over do it with the sucking up:lol:.

The Crusaders fully supported Falcons Military Politics. We hopefully also get support by the Millitary for our Crusade!

I don't think we should provoke war with anyone, however should war with the Iroqious come, I will make the cities desired by the Crusaders a priority.

I feel that it may be a good idea to plan for any war with the Iroquois so that if war does come we are already well prepared for it. Also have we now concluded our other wars (aztecs,etc), and does any body feel that china is still a threat.:eek:

Is somebody going to post a screen shot of the game soon. The game doesn't work when I download it so I rely on these screen shots.

Originally posted by Phoenix
Is somebody going to post a screen shot of the game soon. The game doesn't work when I download it so I rely on these screen shots.

The latest screenshots are here. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22462)

Yes, I do believe that China is small, close, yet a threat, and those lands would be very nice to assimilate to our noble Civilization. We'd have more places to rush cultural improvements, and if we're going for a cultural victory that would be a wise choice, if otherwise they'd put pressure on nearby cities and we'd just continue to grow, bad corruption maybe, but they should do fairly well.

As far as corruption goes I personaly don't see that much of a problem in it. Ok we may lose most of our income and production in those cities to corruption but we are still picking up cold and production that we otherwise wouldn't have. Also as the AI only counts the amount of units that we have in total (and doesn't divide by the number of cities) we could have a weak military compared to the amount of cities but the AI would still think of us as strong. Bring on China!

After having a look at the amount of territory that China has I can only assume that its economy isn't large enough for them to have a big enough military force to defeat us. Also if we did capture China I don't think that corruption, etc wuld be that much of a problem (compared to many of the cities in our territory anyway).

I also think that they will not attack us (as China cannot have a big enough army to challenge our position). So any warmongers out there: if we are going to take out China we are going too have to make the first move.

Perhaps we should wait a while, until say, we have cavalry or we have tanks, perhaps take out some with Cavalry, and finish it up with tanks and then take the rest of the world (or a bit) and this is very peculiar that I'm requesting war, but it is for culture anyways.

IF we pursue war I feel Cavalry is very important (even if we wait for other's to declare war). I would love to take China, for the reasons stated, but the established policy of Pheonatica has been one of keeping our Rep. as clean as possible, which includes not attacking first.

Regardless, a Declaration of War (unless they're the aggressors) can only be called for by a citizen's vote. (If it isn't in the constititution I think it should be).

Anyway, I do agree we need to be working more for preperations for an upcoming war, however our the CAP program seems to have prioirty in the minds of most.

Based on current policy, we will only declare war if we would be allying with another nation against a lower ranking nation in public opinion. We can, of course, re-examine our policy, if you like.

China ranks near the bottom in public opinion, so it may not be hard to get support for military action anyway. However, I like your proposal that we should wait until capable forces are available to make military action quick and effective.

China presents us with some interesting possibilities. There is Cumae - which appears to be heavily defended, but probably well worth taking so as to stabilize that section of the frontier. There is also a Chinese city (I forget the name) just north of our newly acquired Chondote - again this would make a very pleasing addition and consolidate our hold on this region. We may also consider a sea-borne invasion of the Chinese island. As for China proper, well I guess the option is simply keep pouring in attackers and they will eventually succumb.

NB. even though China is small compared to us the war would be costly in terms of gold and units, and also fairly long if we were to take all of China proper. A more limited campaign, which might be worth considering, would be to go on the defensive against the main Chinese forces from China proper, and just 'clean up' their outlying cities (as above) - this option would be quicker, cleaner and much less expensive.

Yes I've heard of the defencive stratergy. It involves sending your best defencive unit onto an excellent defencive postition just in side the enemy's boarders. What we could do is to send in some workers to fortify a postition in some mountains or hills. Then when they attack they waste their almostt their entire army. Also while they have been distracted by this we could launch a sea invasion and capture the northern most part of China. This would leave them with most of their units dead from attacking the defencive postition we held and the rest of thier units fighting a war on two fronts.:goodjob:

is it allowed for us to burn out an enemy with gpt? if we manage to get the iros and china to pay us gpt over their budget, they will declare war on us. this would then not be against our foreign policy. but should be voted on, of course.

England can't be that large, it is probablly just learning knights, I say we take England and thier supposed luxery too!

Plexus, the thing is we don't know where England is YET. Maybe once we see them and find exactly what kind of condition they're in (cause their tech could be supplied by other AI's) then we can talk about conquering them.

Also, I'm not opposed to using gpt to get war, but it's a matter that will have to be voted on and we first need to make sure our military up to date and stronger before we attempt to get anyone to declare war on us. Also, as you said, any action taken with the intent of starting war needs to go to a citizen vote.

I also think that most of China's Offensive forces are down at Cumea (concidering the massive stacks there). So I think that if we do decide to prepare for war with China we should construct fortresses down with Muskets to help give them some shooting practice when such a war starts. :)

right falcon. maybe you should spawn a separate thread for citizen discussion to develop a defense plan. or we could pre-develop an offensive plan for each evil-nation we know (rated lowest on foreignaffairs-thread)

I wanted to note that we discovered Magnetism, Military Tradition, and Nationalism. This will give us the opportunity to upgrade our muskets (did we finish the pike upgrades?), caravels, and knights. I will stand behind our military leader to lobby for funds to support these upgrades.

We also may build Frigates now to protect our caravels, however, steam power is close at hand, and Ironclads may prove better protection, for what limited navy we enjoy.

What year are we now in? The download that I have is 1180. We have not finished upgrading the pikes and we have only 852 gold in the bank. Also I have noticed that we don't have a very big navy (cannot see any rival navy though). What do you guys think about the Greek build up near Alexandria? They are still in their territory at the moment and may be simpley there to see of our musketman in their boarders.:cry: They have got riflemen - should we try to buy nationalism of them and then upgrade our units.

Also does anybody still like the idea of making China declare war on us by making them pay to much gold pur turn? I like that one and would love to have the territory that china possesses.;)

Originally posted by Phoenix
What year are we now in? The download that I have is 1180.

We are at the end of 1230 AD.

The last save is in this thread. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23789)

Thanks donsig. Also thanks for helping me to sort out downloading the saving games on my P.C!

IMO the state of our military is not good. We have many units of inferior status, requiring an upgrade programme of massive proportions. Also, from what I can see, our finances are rather slim (to say the least). I think we need to plan a long-term strategy to rectify this situation.

Despite our Military State, I propose to Disband the two remaining Spearmen. It will cost a total of 240gold to upgrade both, which is a little much. and disbanding them will save 2 gpt and give us a small boost (very small though) I still dislike the Idea of upgrading 27 Pikes for 100 gold Each (2700 gold for all) to Riflemen, but these we can't just "disband." since they are MUCH more numerous and valuable than the Spears.

I'm also making upgrading the 20 Knights to Cavalry a priority (since it will only cost 20 gold to upgrade each, a total of 400 gold). We need a better offensive army. Once that is complete I want Military funds to be used to continue upgrading Pikes.

My Goal is to have at least 1 Modern Defender for each City, and then 2. Since we have 37 Cities that means 37 Riflemen (at least until we get Infantry)

General, I suggest you apply for the 400 gold to upgrade the cavalry. A potent mobile force combined with railroads should take the pressure of having to upgrade our pikemen and musketmen. These can be upgraded later as our fiscal situation improves.

I agree. Cavalry with rails is hyper mobile and with 20 of them even a very large incursion could be stopped in its tracks. A highly mobile counter attack force seriously reduces the need for a static defense force.

I agree also. Falcon02's plan is a relatively "cheap" and quick way of boosting our flagging military. Since, however, the the cav.'s ultimate mobility is contingent on rails, we should still be setting aside a reasonable sum for turn-by-turn upgrades of Pikes+Muskets.

This is a reminder too all cabinet members and governers to post their turn chat instructions here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23980) for tonight's turn chat, if you haven't done so already.

I agree: we should have an attacking force. If any other civ is stupid enough to try and attack us then a swift counter attack should scatter them quickly enough. However we should still maintain a good defensive force just in case they try to blitz us before we can respond. How did the military get into such a state. We MUST upgrade NOW!

I agree too. Prepare for a defensive war.

I think the point is that we need to prepare for both offensive and defensive scenarios. We need balanced forces, which can undertake a range of tasks - from straight defense of our borders and cities, to limited campaigns (such as that commenced in the Aztec war), to all out invasions.

I for one would not be satisfied with a defence-only long-term strategy. Any civ which attacks us must be made to pay when we counterattack with brutally overwhelming force. ;)

Originally posted by Lecky
I think the point is that we need to prepare for both offensive and defensive scenarios. We need balanced forces, which can undertake a range of tasks - from straight defense of our borders and cities, to limited campaigns (such as that commenced in the Aztec war), to all out invasions.

I for one would not be satisfied with a defence-only long-term strategy. Any civ which attacks us must be made to pay when we counterattack with brutally overwhelming force. ;)

I disagree. There is no need to get revenge.

Well first we must make them reget war.

Secondly, I feel we must take the opertunity of Aggression against us to Forcibly grow (if possible).

Originally posted by punkbass2000


I disagree. There is no need to get revenge.

What? Two wrongs don't make a right, but they make you fell a damn sight better:lol:

Two wrongs don't make a right...but three lefts do!

My personal feeling is that if we get attacked our first priority is to defend our territory. Our second priority is to hurt the agressor very very badly. Taking territory and cities is the best way to do that.

I see no reason why we need to significantly harm the aggressor, other than to force them into peace. WE have no need to grow our empire at this point.

If we do not make agression against us costly, we encourage more agression.

By taking all/most of the aggressors territory than we expand our empire. Some people argue against this because of the rampant corruption. Say the corruption was wasting 90% of our income form a particular city, that is still 10% income from that city that we otherwise wouldn't of had.

Expanding the empire is always good news in civ. We should than only put a minimal garassion in these new cities to reflect their value in terms of income of productivity (or lack of it).

OK, so I'm a bit of the point. But basicaly what I am trying to say is that we need a good strong attacking force to drive back the enemy (if you need more convincing look at the first line of my signiture).

Another thing to point out is by Expanding our Empire by taking most of theirs, hurts their ability to wage war against us in the future, since they lose cities and therefore money and production.

It is critical to have a Rapid Deployment Force of offensive units in the railroad era.

A group of Calvary and Infantry/Riflemen based near PDX or Fox Nest that is ready to be sent to any border for use in bringing the battle to the enemy is good, and a prudent move for peace loving nations.

I am not in favor of opening hostilities for expansion ourselves, as the cost would outweigh any benefit, however, it if another sovereign nation attacks us, we should be prepared to respond and wage a war that leads to the elimination of that nation as a threat. That is how you teach the AI to respect you.

Bill
...in PDX

Originally posted by Shaitan
If we do not make agression against us costly, we encourage more agression.

This argument is akin to the argument that jail sentences need to be increased to deter criminals. This is not true, and I also have no reason to believe the AI thinks in this way.

Originally posted by Phoenix
By taking all/most of the aggressors territory than we expand our empire. Some people argue against this because of the rampant corruption. Say the corruption was wasting 90% of our income form a particular city, that is still 10% income from that city that we otherwise wouldn't of had.

Though seemingly logical, this argument is fallacious because gaining more cities will increase the corruption levels in our core cities.

Expanding the empire is always good news in civ.

Though this was the case in both Civ 1 and 2, it is not in Civ 3 for the above reason.

OK, so I'm a bit of the point. But basicaly what I am trying to say is that we need a good strong attacking force to drive back the enemy (if you need more convincing look at the first line of my signiture).

I agree that we should be prepared to defend ourselves.

Originally posted by Falcon02
Another thing to point out is by Expanding our Empire by taking most of theirs, hurts their ability to wage war against us in the future, since they lose cities and therefore money and production.

There aren't any civs that can seriously damage us anyway, and with that perspective we could easily say that we should just conquer everyone so we have no one to fear.

Originally posted by Bill_in_PDX
It is critical to have a Rapid Deployment Force of offensive units in the railroad era.

A group of Calvary and Infantry/Riflemen based near PDX or Fox Nest that is ready to be sent to any border for use in bringing the battle to the enemy is good, and a prudent move for peace loving nations.

I am not in favor of opening hostilities for expansion ourselves, as the cost would outweigh any benefit, however, it if another sovereign nation attacks us, we should be prepared to respond and wage a war that leads to the elimination of that nation as a threat. That is how you teach the AI to respect you.

Bill
...in PDX

I don't think the AI will ever learn to respect you. Their opinions of us, however, will become further negative and inspire them attack us in the future.

Defense. That's why we should be getting infantry before tanks. We are upgrading offensively at this time. Infantry on our borders will secure them permanently. We should just be developing our infrastructure now, and trying to grow in an efficient manner. Stop talking about war and aggression. Let the aggressors come to us and let us be prepared to defend ourselves.

Originally posted by Cyc
Defense. That's why we should be getting infantry before tanks. We are upgrading offensively at this time. Infantry on our borders will secure them permanently. We should just be developing our infrastructure now, and trying to grow in an efficient manner. Stop talking about war and aggression. Let the aggressors come to us and let us be prepared to defend ourselves.

Hear hear!:goodjob:

The reason the Offensive units were upgraded first was because it would only take 300 gold to upgrade all of them to a modern level, for BOTH offensive and Defensive uses.

Once we have all those 20 gold upgrades finished I intend to use ALL the Military's money to upgrade our defensive units (100 gold for pike, which will be upgraded before Muskets). I do agree Defence BEFORE Offence, but that doesn't mean that we can't use offensive units for defence, and that offensive expedition's aren't a suitable responce to attacks (defensive wars).

Also, it seems like some people think I'm trying to instigate war (likely because of pb's mass postings)....

I'M NOT!!!!!!

If the citizenry calls for it we will declare war, but under no other circumstance. I just feel that when another civ declares war on us it would be advantagious to have forces to take the fight to them rather than sit at home and defend, defend, defend, until they get tired of attacking us. Once they want peace, for acceptable terms (peace for peace, or actually get something ourselves out of the deal), war will end unless the citizenry votes to keep it going.

Simply put. I want to be able to have the forces to quickly take as much land as possible from enemies in as short of a period of time in order to get them to beg for peace quickly so we can be at war as short as possible.

Also, The AI does learn to respect you via, your Power, geographic and military size, and Culture (IIRC), along with other factors.

The General is on the right track with his current plan since he is working within budget constraints. Speaking of being in the right 'track', our domestic leader has called for our governors to recruit two workers from each province for work on our national railnet. This network is would prove crucial to the defense of our country should we be attacked.

Yes, I was on earlier and had written a paragragh telling falc that I agreed with his cavalry upgrades and generally liked his approach to the protection of the nation. When I went to post it, I got a message stating that TF was installing some new feature to the forum and lost the post. And I do think he is doing a good job, and I don't think he would hastily or unjustifiably take us into war. I just wanted to state my believe that we should take the lower tech tree path to Electronics before moving on to tanks.

I fully support the current military programme and Falc's overall upgrade plans

Originally posted by Falcon02
Also, it seems like some people think I'm trying to instigate war (likely because of pb's mass postings)....


FTR, I never made the remotest implication that you or anyone is trying to instigate war.

Originally posted by punkbass2000
quote from Shaitan
If we do not make agression against us costly, we encourage more agression.

This argument is akin to the argument that jail sentences need to be increased to deter criminals. This is not true, and I also have no reason to believe the AI thinks in this way.
No, it's akin to letting the punishment fit the crime. ;)

I'm not too interested in how the AI thinks. I like to roleplay and the role I'm playing now is if my homeland is attacked without provocation, I want to kick some serious butt.

Originally posted by punkbass2000


There aren't any civs that can seriously damage us anyway, and with that perspective we could easily say that we should just conquer everyone so we have no one to fear.

Great idea, we should destoy every other civ.:lol:

I did a quick count of Greece's troop movement in our territory and found maybe 40 or so units headed across Kashmir for possibly Iroquois lands. I wondered how the military would respond to such a force and also wondered on how secure our people of Kashmir are, should that force be directed on it.

Re Greek Troop movements

Our present military capabilities are structured around a two-fold strategy: limited static defences consisting of riflemen (and units upgrading to riflemen over the next several turns) mainly fortified within cities; and a significant mobile 'fire brigade' consisting of 20-odd Cav. units.

The (simple) plan, as I understand it, is that the static defences hold out until the cavalry arrives - whereupon the backside-kicking commences. The plan is, however, contingent upon a fully integrated railway system on which to transport the Cav., pretty much instantly, to ANY position where it is needed.

It should be noted that such a rail system is still under construction, and therefore the operability plan has significant limitations. The problem, until the railway is completed, is that it may take the Cav. longer to reach the theatre of operations than the static defences can hold out for. That is the general position.

Specifically, if those Greek units were aimed at our Kashmiri cities, then we would have a real struggle on our hands. This is, of course, hypothetical - we have seen them coming already and if we were engaged in hostilities with Alexander (and not in an ROP agreement) then we would have had at least 2 turns to deploy the Cav. to Kashmir and would probably be engaging now on reasonably favourable terms. I also note that Alexander may have plenty of riflemen (which would be difficult to dislodge), but his offensive units are actually pretty poor.

In summary, our military position has been greatly enhanced by the recent modernisation programme. It will be further accommodated by the integrated national rail network presently being prioritised for construction. One final point: how do we deal with stacks of enemy riflemen? Stacks of our own cannons and (eventually) artillary of course!

The modernization of our military forces has now reached the point where we must consider what to do with our pikemen (27) and immortals (15) as well as our glorious army of immortals. The President's office would like to hear the miltary department's plans for further modernization (especially in the area of cannon production) and economy in our military forces.
The President's office would also like our troop dispositions reviewed and any necessary orders for redeployment entered into the Turn chat 1315 AD (June 12) thread. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24529)

The FA position on Greek movement is stated in the Dept FA thread. I wish to voice my militaristic recommendations here:

- use some unit-blocking to allow passage of Greek troops but steer them away from directly passing our cities, if possible.

- readying of a counter force in range of this movement

- sufficient defense of Kashmir cities

This is looking worring...

My views on the immortals and pikes is that we could do either of two things. We could disband them all now and then build newer units. Or we could upgrade the pikes eventualy but some time we will have to disband them immortals.

Disband those immortals and we could have ourselves a few improvements and we could have ourselves 15 more gold per turn, greatly aiding the failing CAP and helping the brilliant military upgrades programs.

At 100 gold per head, I think the pike-rifle is very expensive. Inner cities do not need riflemen protection, IMHO, so I would be content to let pikes defend those so there is at least 1 unit in each city (an empty city is a bigtime invitation for war) but manufacture rifles for and upgrade units in border cities. Maybe we could spare a rifle or 2 for the odd inner city though, just in case a town needs a quick local response.

We must save at least an honor guard of immortals for the Palace and Forbidden Palace.

While I generally agree with the suggestions of disbandment for Immortals and only partial upgrades of Pikes, there are some other matters which I think we should consider. First, I think we should delay any disbandment, and prioritise with upgrades in Kashmir, until such time as we have a reasonably clear understanding of Greek intentions. Secondly, and only if the potential threat to Kashmir is removed, then disbandment and partial upgrades should be phased in over several turns and co-ordinated with general redeployment. By this stage our rail network should be nearing completion thus facilitating more fluid defence of the whole nation.

There is a further consideration which we should take into account with respect to the disbandment of the Immortals. A quick survey reveals, I think, that we have a number of elite Immortals which we may wish to retain and utilise because of the enhanced opportunities of creating a Leader. They are currently (and conveniently) stationed as follows: Cyrus (2); Alexandria (2); Macao (1) and Justinian (1). In the event of hostilities these elite units still pack something of a punch, and could be used quite effectively to pick off enemy units which have been damaged but not destroyed, with some chance of Leader creation. We also have an Immortal Army (in Heliopolis) which is still a powerful group. I am not convinced that these units - 9 in total (6 individual units plus 3 in the Army) have ceased to be effectively operational, and for this reason I would recommend against disbandment in the near future. The other 6 Immortals are of lesser quality and could be safely disbanded once the Greek "threat" has passed.

Depending upon how seriously we estimate Greek intentions, we should think about a war plan versus Greece.

Here is one option. We can muster a fairly significant strike force at Macao (without seriously compromising the Kashmiri theatre) and with it invade Greek Eretria, and then possibly Rhodes). It would take 3 turns to muster, cost 312 gold, and consist of 7 Cav., 3 Immortals (2 elite), 2 cannons and 1 or 2 riflemen. Here's how it works: 1. move 2 cav from Lutetia to Macao; 2. move 3 cav from Pherris, PDX and Shailonegha to Macao; 3. move rifleman NE of Asyut to Asyut; 4. move present Asyut garrison (3 units) to Macao; 5. move cav., elite Immortal and catapult from Justinian to Macao; 6. rush Barracks in Macao (cost 132); 7. upgrade both catapults and and Pike in Macao (cost 180). If this plan is implemented, and if the Greeks turn hostile, we can put a significant stike force on the doorstep of Eretria in 1-2 turns after a declaration of war.

There are some other preparations which we should think about to be prepared for in the event of a Greek war. There are presently 3 cav. in Memphis and Thebes - these should move to Heliopolis. We should also move 1 rifleman from Memphis to Thebes, and upgrade the last Pike in Memphis (cost 100). Depending on Greek threats we might also consider switching Justinian from cav. to rifleman. Kashmir also presently has a number of riflemen and one musket guarding workers. In the event of war all these units should retreat into the nearest cities.

We could just upgrade the Catapult in Justinian, negating the 132 cost to rush a barracks in Macao.

However I like your plan.

Does anybody else feel that it is still taking to long for the game to advance. We run out of stuff to talk about and find ourselves talking about how slow the game is going!

I prefer giving a long time between games, makes us MUCH more careful. It also provides time for people to criticize plans set the first day. And last minute Revelations about flaws in plans.

I don't think I'm gonna be able to fullfill my duties for over a week, going on vacation. So I'm assigning my Deputy to take over my duties while I'm gone. I should be able to check in and comment, but I won't be able to spend much time on it, and I may not be able to look at the saves, so my abilities will be reduced.

Understood. I should be able to fill in.

Originally posted by Falcon02
We could just upgrade the Catapult in Justinian, negating the 132 cost to rush a barracks in Macao.

However I like your plan.

True the catapult in Justinian could be upgraded there, but rushing the barracks in Macao would also be necessary for the upgrades of the other units - otherwise we would have to shunt them through Justinian and lose precious time.

Pheonix, if war still exists by the end of the Turn Chat please post a poll on what action to take.

Side with Iro.
Side with Greece and India or
Stay Neutral

Hi, I know I don't post in the Military Dept. thread as much as I'd like to, but as hectic a turn chat as we had tonight, I'd like to make a few suggestions.

I believe we should have more than on rifleman in Fox Nest. We need another to fortify our Capital.

I believe we need to take a rifleman from Memphis and place him in Thebes. As in Fox Nest, we need to fortify our Palace, even if it is the second Palace.

And most importantly, as I was going through the cities, I noticed that Chie sent it's fortification out into the field or to another post. It is completely barren of troops and there's no way to bring in another troop this turn. I'm sure someone could land a skiff off the coast of Shailonegha and launch a quick cavalry attack directly into Chie. The best remedy I see for this situation is in Shailonegha. We can rush the next cavalry battalion there for a mere 64 gold and send them of to Chie.

Thoughts?
EDIT: I just re-opened the game and noticed a rifleman standing next to New Falcon's Haven. I don't know how I missed it last time. I must have been using the Advisor screens instead of looking at the map. So I guess rushing the cavalry won't be necessary. Sorry.

Just a quick note about troop dispositions: as we are in the process of upgrading units and not all cities have barracks there has been much shuffling around of units in order to continue the upgrade process.
Any orders for troop dispositions or upgrade instructions posted by the military department in the turn chat thread would be followed.

While we are not currently at war, the military situation is quite intense at the moment. It appears that the thrust of much FA activity is to keep us out of this war, a stance which I endorse, but I think we also need to take a long hard look at our military capacities. There is, of course, a very real posibility that the war will come to us. If it does, then it is more likely to be on a large scale than a small one. How are we disposed therefore?

The railways are proceeding well, but not yet complete, and will not be completed for a considerable time yet. Our upgrades and modernisation programmes are advancing, but still a fairly long way from being in a state where we could operate to maximum effect. These two factors will limit the kind of military options we can present to the nation if we end up in a war any time soon.

There is also a call for increased expenditure on CAP. The rationale is that we will take (by culture) the war-weakened border towns in the SE. This expenditure, if granted, will channel funds away from military programmes. While the rationale for CAP is praiseworthy, I am a little doubtful as to whether we should be allowing our military programmes to suffer while our competitors are arming themselves to the teeth. The CAP is fine if we can stay out of the hostilities, but this is an assumption which I am doubtful about. I do not think that now is the time to be weakening our relative military strength.

I would therefore like to call upon our leaders to maintain a significant amount of expenditure on military programmes.

Good analysis Lecky. I agree that we must increase our military capabilities. If war does come we mus be able to quickly repulse the enemy before war weariness destroys our nation. In Civ preparing for war really is the best way to keep peace.

Our cultural plan is a good one but what good is culture if the enemy takes all of our cities? I feel that we should maintain the cultural programe whilst trying to find extra money for our armed forces. I might post a poll for this.

Every city culture flipped is a new, free rifleman.

Every city cultue flipped is a military situation too: a new border; more or different defensive requirements etc.

I feel it's good for us to seek new cities by Cultural Assimulation. It's the only peacetime way of expanding territory. This is why I support the CAP, however I feel that Military upgrades shouldn't be compromised too much. Considering the importance of these two projects, my feeling is that each should get 50% of the Surplus, minus any funds required by other projects and depts.

The Department of Foreign Affairs would like to draw the attention of the Military Dept regarding our possible involvement in the big war against Greece. More details can be found here:
Foreign Affairs Proposal for June 20 Turn (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25251)

FA suggests the possibility of a "big" war v. the Greeks?

If this war is declared we should have a strategy in place. As a general plan, I would favour a lightening strike on Eretria (see my earlier post), a defensive stance on the central front (Justinian - Kashmir) and then a large scale offensive on the 3-4 Greek cities in south Kashmir.

We certainly will need a significant amount of artillery. There are 2 cannons which should be upgraded. Artillery production should now replace cav. production. We have a good numberof cav., but their day will pass before long (when we get tanks) so I think we should switch to Arty. for offensive capabilities.

The Immortals should all be thrown into the offensive. Most of them are due for disbandment anyway, but in a large war they could still be useful to pick of weakened enemy units, and the elites amongst them stand some chance of a Leader creation.

Tactically, we should muster a strike force in Macao for the Eretria campaign. We can do this now (upgrading the 2 cannons in the region) and place the units "on manouvre" ;) ready to cross the border when/if the war comes.

We also need to protect Cumae, or atleast stand ready to take it if the Greeks though. More than likely, Greece will send a large force out of desperation. They are in anarchy now, so that gives us a few turns to work on. On the tech front, after Electronics, we're only 4 tanks away from tanks.

Naval matters:

I notice that the Greeks have an ironclad off Chondote. Hmm. Nothing much we can do about this - even in the fairly long-term.

BTW - what are our caravels doing? Perhaps we should recall them to port and think about upgrading.

One caravel is wandering the high seas and the other is fortified somewhere...

I have been away form the site for a few days because by Internet wasn't working. I hope that I didn't miss anything important but it seems that everybody covered well, thanks.

Did I miss any turn chats? Does anybody know when Falcon will be returning from vaccation?

There was a turn chat a couple nights ago. There is another in a little more than 2 hours...

The Foreign Affairs Department asks for the Military Department's co-operation in exploring the possibility in warring with Greece. Please share your views in these threads:

Foreign Affairs Discussion for June 23 turn (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25452)

War with Greece! (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25454)

Thanks,
chiefpaco, Foreign Affairs Leader

The possibility of war with Greece appears to be increasing. With the Roman conquest of Eretria, this theatre is now effectively closed to us for offensive operations. I therefore amend my previous recommendations: strategically we should stand on the defensive across the entire southern frontier, and concentrate our entire offensive in the Kashmir region. As for timimg. if we get the green light to go on the attack then I hope that we will be given an advance warning to make some necessary preparations. With 3 turns warning, and access to a significant war chest, I think we can mount an effective blitz and take 3-5 Greek cities in the Kasmir theatre within a few turns. We will need some more artillery so these will have to be rushed, there is probably sufficient cavalry, and we should also upgrade a number of Pikes to Infantry for additional back up. I also believe we should throw all the Immortals into the attack.

Just to bring it to the Mil. Dept.'s attention... Has anyone noticed that Babylon is gaining on the Greeks? They have 4 of their cities! (Athens included!)

I've been missing the posts from the Military department and am a bit dismayed to see little opinion on FA proposals. Perhaps the Military Dept is working more secretively these days? :lol: Public leadership is key to our progress.

In a recent poll posted by the FA Dept, 70% of our citizens favoured a war with Greece either now or in the near future. Speed in planning and execution is critical. Any thoughts from the Military Dept on this?

Yeh cheifpaco, My web has been going haywire recently and Falcon has been away (very bad timming for my Internet to break!).
Just like to say that I think that Falcon is back, I noticed that he accepted a nomination for the military post today. He may confirm this later if he is (sorrey for telling everybody Falc'). So we may be able to return to normal soon.

Our military academy in Pherris will produce its first (and Phoenatica's second) army in four turns. The Military Dept. may want to lobby the governor of Normandy for another army as its completion would allow for the building of the Pentagon for the General.

the other army is already in the queue.

I like the idea of specialist cities. I think that this city could be used to pump out a large amount of armies and units (to fill the armies). However the Governer may not like the idea of his city turning into a factory

One of my suggested city locations (in the Domestic Dept. - Term 3 thread) shows a city site that can produce units every other turn.

I'd like to bring it before military a reason of mine (and Justus and PB will probably agree with me) that the destruction of Greece and the Iroquois must happen because they are our cultural rivals. When they are destroyed it will be far easier to win a cultural victory due to the half culture rule. Thus I view that this shall allow a victory to be obtained, and the assimilation of those nations would vastly expand our nation. Surely some of you understand my point, and shall support the wars as such.

Chiefpaco calls for a military analysis for a possible offensive campaign against Greece. Basically the military awaits orders from the President, after all proper constitutional requirements have been fulfilled, and war is declared, to launch an attack. I take it that any such war will need to be conducted as quickly and decisively as possible. With the appropriate conditions and preparation this is possible.

I have earlier recommended a 3 turn "mobilisation" (I don't mean formal mobilisation of the economy) period for the military to prepare for an offensive campaign. Given the current 4 turn projection for the new Army, I would extent this period to 4 turns from 0 turn next. 4 reduces to 3 on turn 1, but thereafter remains at 3. The reason for the "mobilisation period" is, as stated, to expend funds on bringing the forces up to optimal combat potential and to position forces in their "jumping off points". Once the order is given, then, the offensive could commence immediately.

As for expenditure, there are 2 areas where we would be well advised to concentrate. Firstly, we should recruit a significant force of artillery. Secondly, we should recruit/upgrade some more infantry. Just how these 2 areas are to be expended can be quite flexible - if we are prepared to change some build queues and do some rushing - but the overall spend would probably be somewhere in the vicinity of 2000 gp I would think.

If Greece is the target, then I would recommend concentrating the offensive in the Kashmir region initially. There are 3-5 cities there we can take, hopefully quite quickly and without too much trouble. Oka would be an early target, as would the the 3 exposed cities to the south of Kashmir - then push on to Delphi. I anticipate Delphi will be a difficult nut to crack, but its strategic position is invaluable. With the proper preparations we could possibly do all this in about 10 turns from the kick-off. From there it would depend upon our strategic objectives: push on and conquer the remainder of Greece, swooping down from Delphi, or stop there and see if Alex wants to bargain for his life.

I'm officially back and I'm trying to make sure I'm completly up to date on everything that's happened.

I appreciate Lecky's effort and think it is a good proposal. FA would back a war in the coming turns, as it has been shown that the citizens are in support.

Greece has been identified as a target and there may be valuable land in Kashmir (like the excess gems we once owned). After turn 4, War may be started using spies so as to put the declaration responsibility on the other nation.

I support a short term of military production to prepare for war.

I'm not really sure how we have come to the point of considering war as a nation, but as a citizen of Phoenatica and the Governor of Kashmir, I would much rather we secure the southern coast of Kashmir than the Babs.
I would strongly recommend a slight change in Lecky's approach to the situation. I believe the initial strike target should be Delphi. This would basically split the nation of Greece. Delphi is not only strategically located, but also close to Thebes. In taking Delhi first, we would have a better idea of the required troop strength to secure the coast. Delphi will be a tough battle and if we concentrate on the more easterly Greek cities, we may expend too many troops to regroup for a Delphi assault.

Cyc has a very good point. I think we agree on the importance of Delphi. The problem with a Delphi 1st strike is that it may actually take a few turns to take the city, and during that time we will no doubt have trouble in our backyard ie. 'all along the watchtower' in Kashmir - which has the potential to draw our focus away from Delphi before it can be secured.

I would suggest starting with a 2 pronged attack: one army group targets Oka and another (larger) group targets Herakleia. Hopefully these 2 targets can be gained quite quickly. We then redeploy, again with 2 army groups, and the secondary targets would be Thessalonika and Delphi. We should go for Thessalonika with our best offensive units as quickly as possible, and possibly only start to position Infantry around Delphi at this stage. The plan here would be to let the Greeks wear themselves out hitting our Infantry on the mountains around Delphi while we take the now isolated Thessalonika, and then Ephesis. Then, finally with the backyard cleared, we push on with combined forces to Delphi - and perhaps further.

I like Lecky's proposal too, but I think it might be good to get more Factories in our core cities before manually mobalizing them. Also I think we shouldn't set a time limit, but a Production goal, say so many Artillary and so many Infantry.

Falcon, with respect, I think that if we are to go to war with Greece then time is of the essence. It would be marvellous to take the time and actually build the units from factory cities, but the other civs appear to making strong progress against Greece and if we delay for too long then our opportunity will be lost. We have a large potential war chest (over 4000 I think) and with some build queue amedments and rushing we can probably get the arty. we need quick smart.

BTW what do people think we need in the way of extra units? I'll make an openning bid for another 10 arty. and another 10 Infantry.

We can't have too much arty. Until tanks or bombers come along they are the best/only way to take entrenched positions. The more arty there is, the quicker cities can be taken and with less overall damage to the target.

EDIT: In other words I recommend more arty construction compared to new infantry. For a full offensive with infantry and arty I go for a 50/50 mix, plus 2 infantry per city to be taken.

I believe that a quick strike is essential due to war wariness. However spliting the Greece in half is a very good idea - my suggestion would be to investigate a few of the cities and then, if necessary, re-asses.

Lecky, are you aware that you have been nominated for the military position?

Originally posted by chiefpaco
I appreciate Lecky's effort and think it is a good proposal. FA would back a war in the coming turns, as it has been shown that the citizens are in support.



I think you may be getting a little liberal in your interpretation of the poll results. The NO votes outnumber the yes' quite handily. Those, who voted to prepare are not necesarily voting YES. So we should be careful, there is not a mandate for this government to declare war.

I voted NO, but prepare, as I wanted to see just this type of discussion going on before we just blindly jumped and watched our Calvary get shredded against fortified Infantry in metros.

Originally posted by curufinwe
I'd like to bring it before military a reason of mine (and Justus and PB will probably agree with me) that the destruction of Greece and the Iroquois must happen because they are our cultural rivals.

I don't disagree with your assessment, however, the Iroquois currently enjoy Most Favored Nation status with us. I ask what have they done to deserve a backstabbing such as this?

Bill
...in PDX

Originally posted by Bill_in_PDX


I think you may be getting a little liberal in your interpretation of the poll results. The NO votes outnumber the yes' quite handily. Those, who voted to prepare are not necesarily voting YES. So we should be careful, there is not a mandate for this government to declare war.

I voted NO, but prepare, as I wanted to see just this type of discussion going on before we just blindly jumped and watched our Calvary get shredded against fortified Infantry in metros.

Apologies if my wording implied a war declaration. I am still under the impression that a 2/3 majority is needed to specifically declare war. I agree with you that the poll did not show this and I totally agree with your statement.

What I am trying to say is that the majority of citizens either support a war or support preparing for a war. I believe this means we should be focusing on building more military units. Whether or not we use them is up to a future poll. What we also lack is a solid plan for war and the possible means to get there (i.e. production) - which may be the responsibility of the Miltary Dept and the reason I posted here.

Previous War with Greece Poll (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25454)

I Looked at the situation and I agree Delphi would be a prime target in any offensive against greece. (Even without a declaration of War we can still plan stradegy for potential conflicts ahead of time)

Lecky, I see your logic, however it may be good to at least rush a few Factories.

Please vote in the new Military Dept. Funds Request Poll (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25765)

Please vote to grant the Military Dept. all the funds we need to finish upgrading the pikes.

Council Vote in session

Falcon02, please cast your vote in the Council Vote to approve new Provincial Borders (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25820).

I had Chieftess request that Greece remove an Infantry next to Memphis. This inadvertantly got the Idiotic Alex to declare war on us.

Our last war was with the Aztecs, and we neither gained nor lost anything. While I'd love to say "FINISH GREECE OFF" I realize the pacifists wouldn't like that. So I'm setting the goal of launching an offensive until Greece agrees to an acceptable peace where we gain reperations for the trouble he's caused us, or at the very least Peace for Peace. I'll be posting polls shortly to verify this goal and stradegy.

Please vote in the following two polls to help determine Military policy in this war.

Stradegy against Greece (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25863)

Acceptable End to the War against Greece (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25864)

I also welcome any suggestions on the details of our stradegy from anyone. I'll be posting my own plan later.

One of the first questions to decide is what to do with the Immortals. My view is that we should throw them all into the offensive. They are largely obsolete anyway, but there are a few elite ones (with a chance of Leader creation). I do not recommend that we use these units for primary attacks - because they will surely get destroyed by fortified Infantry - but they should be very useful for secondary attacks. The idea would be to allow our arty. and cav. to knock Greek units down to red, then finish them off with Immortals

i would propose using the immortals for a pilage-campaign on strategic resources.

The elites could attack weakened infantry.

I agree, Elite Immortals can be used to "clean up" near dead units.

The immortals are basicaly useless. We should throw them at Greece just before our main force (but in the same turn). This will allow thenm to weaken the defenders making life easier for our main force.

We could also use the regular and veteran immortals for garrison duty in our cities far from the main theaters thus freeing infantry for the front.

Our elite immortals could be sent to the front for opportunistic actions.

We also have an army of immortals to consider.

Speaking of armies we may want to rush the one being formed in Pherris.

Pheonix, I Disaggree, throwing the Immortals first will just get them killed and make Veteran and Elite Infantry for the Enemy.

Donsig, that's always been my intent for the Reg. and Vet. Immortals.

One thing does come to mind, the fact that every unit only creates 1 GL until the next upgrade. And we don't know which of those Elite Immortals have already made a GL.

I'm not quite sure what to do with the Army of Immortals except maybe Disband them to help production, or use them for Garrison.

The army will make an excellent resistance queller for captured cities. It counts as 4 units.

Good Idea, Shaitan

I was just wondering how effective an army would be.

Also, aside from the filling out of Kashmir (The Primary Target), the Trade Department would like the Military Department to put these 2 cities in their war plans:

Secondary Targets.

Corinth - They have 5 additional sources of incense.
Delphi - They have 4 additional sources of spice! :D

Alternative Targets.

Sparta - They have 1 iron, and a nice area for growth (useful for CAP).

Pharsalos - They have 1 oil (not connected). We could take this before the Babylonians do, and use CAP on the occupied Greecian cities (4 under Babylonian control).

I think Delphi is part of Kashmir. If not it's been part of my assault plans for southern Kashmir anyway (cutting off unit supplies to those cities).

Corinth, is another city I wish to take as at the same time as Kashmir because of the Incense. (I've just forgotten to show my desire to take it.)

Sparta and Pharsalos will likely be primary targets after the initial goals are met (so long as the Offensive after Kashmir remains 1st in the poll, or if All of Greece eventually wins out)

Originally posted by Falcon02
Pheonix, I Disaggree, throwing the Immortals first will just get them killed and make Veteran and Elite Infantry for the Enemy.

Donsig, that's always been my intent for the Reg. and Vet. Immortals.

One thing does come to mind, the fact that every unit only creates 1 GL until the next upgrade. And we don't know which of those Elite Immortals have already made a GL.

I'm not quite sure what to do with the Army of Immortals except maybe Disband them to help production, or use them for Garrison.

Good point and one that I overlooked. I also argee with the idea for garassing them for resistance or to free up other troops.

We could use the elite immortals on weakened troops, maybe even conscripts.

Was there a vote on asking the infantry to leave? I thinkthere was obviously a good chance of a declaration of war, and that this simply may have been a move designed to get us to war despite the people's wishes.

It wasn't a designed move, trust me.

Asking them to leave was a reasonable request to me.

No there was no vote on the matter, I noticed the Infantry in the save and saw there was no ROP and asked CT to ask Greece to remove the infantry. CT went ahead with the request.

Honestly, the possibility of war did arise in my own mind after I made the request, however I never tried to stop CT because I thought we needed to get that Infantry out of our territory, and figured that Greece would likely choose to remove the infantry rather than declare war on a much stronger neighbor. I was wrong, and yes that action did get something I wanted... war with Greece, which is why in the chat I raised the concern that such accusations might arise.

Everyone there seemed to feel my request was reasonable, esp. since there was a good possibility that Greece would not declare war.

If you wish go ahead and ask for an investigation, but regardless of the result of my actions or the results of any investigation that might be launched, I will maintain that I didn't purposely try to engineer the war with Greece. But go ahead and launch an investigation if you wish, that's why they're there. And I feel, and hope that I will be proved innocent in any such investigation.

Originally posted by punkbass2000
Was there a vote on asking the infantry to leave? I thinkthere was obviously a good chance of a declaration of war, and that this simply may have been a move designed to get us to war despite the people's wishes.

No, there was no vote. To be honest, none of us at the chat thought spoke up about having a vote. I for one did not think Greece would be foolhardy enough to declare war, especially since their infantry would be much better off in Greece anyway! It was an unfortunate thing to happen but I don't think there was any intent to provoke this war. This is another example of something new in Phoenatica that no one really anticipated. It's been thousands of years since we asked foreign troops to leave our soil - if we've done it at all!

BTW, we are set to research flight next. We should re-evaluate the science queue in light of the war. We may want flight next or we may want to proceed in a different direction.

will there be a graphical presentation of our war-plan? attack movements on geographical background maps? you could look at the phoenatical geographical society-maps for a map.
i urge you to do this general falcon, as this will help understanding of our tactics.

I intend to (I've done it before), I'm just trying to get everything worked out.

Even I was surprised that they were ACTUALLY brazen enough to declare war! Especially with their lands being gobbled up by Rome and Babylon.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads/Kashmirplans.jpg

The above plans are the way in which I propose to attack Kashmir. Taking Delphi First, then launching an attack along the coast, then taking Oka in the north.

I have the Delphi Attack ending up on a mountian incase we encounter more resistance than expected and we'll have a good defensive position. Also for any units left behind when the city is taken and the fact that Delphi is nearly surrouned by mountians and it would be a little too much trouble to hook all the way around to lower ground and non-productive to say the least.

I figure that we have 15 border cities at the moment. Which I would like to have 2 Infantry posted at each.

These border citie are (In alphabetical order)...

Abydos
Alexandria
Asyut
Byzantium
Chondote
CSIM
Cyrus
Elephantine
Heliopolis
Justinian
Lutetia
Memphis
Pheonix's Den
Plexia
Thebes

We have a total of 61 Infantry, so with two in each of these cities would amount to 30 Infantry used guarding border cities.

Next we must account for the 1 unit garrisons of the core cities. With Daaraa's total of 42 cities this leaves us with 26 cities left to be garrisoned in the core.

We can use Cavalry, Immortals, and/or Infantry to accomplish this. I figure the remainder can be sent against Greece.

With 11 Immortals (4 of which are in the Army and may be used against Resistance. If we use all those remaining Immortals we are left with 15 cities left to be garrisoned. However this would eliminate the use of Elite Immortals to try and get GL's.

So the problem is managing the 26 core cities before being able to access our resources for any offensive. If we use up the Immortals we only have 15 cities to garrison with Modern units.

Another argument could me made that with the National Railroad system, we no longer need Core Garrisons and could just take units from the Border cities in case of an attack on inner cities, but I personally don't like this.

Feed back would be appriciated.

I have a few suggestions, or possible modifications, to Falcon's excellent tactical plans.

Let's not delay hitting Oka until after southern Kashmir. Let's hit it straight away, before anything else, on turn 0. If we delay then the Iros (or even the Romans) may take it first. I like a nice clean backyard before I go out rampaging, so I think it would be good to deal with this city first up.

Secondly, and here's my blitz plan: I believe that (using Falcon's dark blue route) it is possible to reach both Herakleia and Thessalonika with Cav. on turn 0. It would be excellent to also capture these 2 cities before the Greeks can even react. Here's a plan to even extend this to Ephesis - also on turn 0. Follow the dark blue route - hit Herakleia first, then Thessalonika. Then follow up with some workers and lay some rails down, basically along the dark blue line. I think as few as 1 or 2 tiles of extra rails will give our Cav. enough mobility to reach Ephesis (and will also help us garrison Herakleia and Thessalonika with defenders). Hey presto! We blitz Kashmir and take the whole lot on turn 0 before the Greeks even know what's hit them!

The Delphi plan looks good to me. If trouble is encountered there on turn 0, then we can reinforce it via the southern route with units from southern Kashmir - hopefully as early as turn 1.

i would propose the strike-discussion should take place in the thread in citizen forum. as for the departmental threads should
a) no be cluttered
b) are changed next term
if we spawn it to the citizen-thread the discussion can continue after elections undisturbed. and its hard for me to follow a split discussion anyways.

now redirect all comments and suggestion into:
citizen discussion thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25958)

updated map of war area in the citizen discussion:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=351551#post351551

I'm not really looking for an investigation. But really, have you guys ever played this game before? I could have told you they would have declared war. I wish I had been at the turnchat :(

I never asked troops to leave before. :)

PB, yes I have played the game and have asked a civ to remove their troops on NUMEROUS occations, ussually without a war. Only in a few cases has war occured.

The current game I'm playing everyone hates everyone else.... 6 civs and all but russia and germany are furious to everyone else.... And their only cautious to each other!!! (I hate playing on deity)

Edit: The point is everyone hates everyone else and everyone takes the leberty of moving their troops into your terrority.

I think that Falcon did nothing wrong by telling the Greeks to remove their troops. They should have never been in our territory and most of the time they would just have removed them. We cannot let rival civ's troops to march in through our lands, our boarders are there for a reason. No wonder that Greece are at war with so many people.:lol: :nuke:

Originally posted by punkbass2000
I'm not really looking for an investigation. But really, have you guys ever played this game before? I could have told you they would have declared war. I wish I had been at the turnchat :(

I agree with punkbass. I find that furious, warring, Communist nations are often eager to decalre war. I'm not sure the harm that single infantry was doing. In any case, I'm not against the actions taken and I think demanding removal is a valid thing to do, but perhaps greater care and consideration could be taken next time in like circumstances - in light of possible war.

An English galley and a Man-O-War has been sighted sailing between Atlanta and Chicago. What is on board? I am not sure. We have some undefended cities near there. England is at war with Greece so perhaps they are headed there. We have a ROP with England. Perhaps we should see that our cities are not open to attack. Remember Rome?

Thanks for bringing that to our attention cheifpaco. Although I think that automaticaly saying defend our cities; they might attack is being a bit paranoid, whats wrong with that. We can not be over protective of our territory and defending our cities is a good idea. On a related incident where is our naval strength? We should have a large navel force. After all the ships are just flooting artillery. :goodjob:

Yes. With railroads, we may want to re-think our ROP policy altogether. It is now quite easy for any friendly but sneaky civ to abuse a ROP and land a unit in an undefended town anywhere. I've seen it done in games I've played.

I also think we need way more troops.

well, if we're so concerrned with our ROP's and with pontential enemies using our railway creating a gateway for open attack we should cancel them or put alot more troops in our border cities