Welcome to the Ministry of Defense

Officers
Defense Minister, General of the Army CivGeneral

Defense Deputy, High Colonel Strider

What is a "poilu"?
Date: 1914
: a French soldier; especially : a front-line soldier in World War I

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads6/DG3_MillitaryStat_2150BC.JPG

Ok, this time Im going to try something new, posting screenshots of the military stats page :).

Congratulations.
What is the ministry's policy regarding early wars?
In particular what strategies will be employed and how will the army be organised?

(im just a major huh?, cmon, at least put me up as a friggin normal General, just below General Of The Army in rank)

Id suggest initially a quick expansionism to go with the settler buildup, get those settlers protected first, then we can start the mass build up to fight barbarians. This production of course is used just before building improvements, then we start some killing. If we get a close neighbor, Id kill him ASAP, especially if they will likely block your expansion if were on a big penennsula.

In the end, the ancient age military build up should be a settler-protecting, barbarian-killing, and eliminating nearby civs type in my personal opinion.

Originally posted by Peri
Congratulations.
What is the ministry's policy regarding early wars?
In particular what strategies will be employed and how will the army be organised?

Well, first things first. I would have to create about 5 warriors, Just for exploration purpouses. The number cound will depend on the size of the land we have.

I will try to have the Trade and Tech department to aquire Iron working and once thats done, I will have the Internal Affairs locate a good location of an iron city. The Iron City is the only city connected to the iron resource. Iron City should have a barracks built. Once that is done, the other cities can build warriors and have them head enroute to Iron City to up grade to Swordsmen. Though I would also have to work with the Internal Affairs and the Trade and Sci Dept to make sure we get enough coffers for the upgrades.

I plan to raise an army of 10-15 Swordsmen.

For our Cavalry, I am going to also place Horseback riding on secondary priority (Unless we are lucky to pop a goodie hut). The Cavalry's job in the ancent world will be strictly sabatauge for the time being untill we aquire knights.

(cmon, Im a General! not a Major!)

I doubt they will do that, as the upgrading is too much money to spend initially on military. Science will be a big amount of effort for a long time, so they probably wont do that. I had forgot to write that the extra warriors will be used for exploration while the others initally should be for settler-guarding/Citly Guarding/Barbarian hunting (which can also be an explorer job).

Iagree with the cavalry role though, They can also have a few to explore due to the extra movement. Iron is also my sugesstion for initial research (after bronze working of course). For an offensive against another civ, the cavalry will be essential for tearing up the nation anf to hi their workers if possible. I wouldt tear the country up too badly as having roads already made can help save time though id hit resources.

Civ General, BTW since were the French in this game do you think the rank names in the french army would be appropriate?

It's kind of pointless right now to make any military plans as the map has yet to be made.

I would say only to attack a near-by civ if the land is good. Ancient Age wars can be costly, defiantly if a military alliance is formed against you, building swordsmen instead of marketplaces/libries can slow down your growth later on.

I would like to know if the Military Department would think it advisable to take a small group (2 or 3) of warriors for exploration purposes and to seek and destroy the first civ they encounter early in the game, before substantial defenses can be constructed. I think that it would be a good idea to try this, and even if it doesn't work we're only out a couple of warriors without the likelyhood that the war would be waged long enough to see any retaliation at all. If it succeeds, we will have a new city and a good base for expansion in that area.

I support Bootstoots' proposal. An early war is essential to a conquest victory. Using warriors is very risky though. Swordsmen would be better. Building swordsmen instead of Marketplace/Libraries will not hurt growth if we conquer another city.

Well for the first technology I highly reccomend Mathematics for which we can trade for other technology. I think we should wait until we find the surroundings of our capitol (maybe no mountains or hills...). We may have a different outlook on what should go when the Creation is started.

@Sharkey, Swordsmen may be better though they ARE costly. They take time to build without having cities with +10 shields per turn. We probably wont have those type of cities (besides our capitol) until the late Ancient Age and Early Middle Ages. If we realy need Swordsmen, then building warriors and upgrading would be better. We would have to save up to around 400 gold to upgrade 10 swordsmen, for 15 its around 600 gold.

In my opinion, we should build a couple warriors and kill our first neigbor (like Bootstoots said) and go for infastructure and build a good nation peacefully until Longbowmen, Knights and Medieval Infantry.

I agree with amirsan here. I think it would be best if we pursued an early ancient war, one where we get them before they have more than about two cities and have only warriors for defense (excepting scientific civs). In my current game, I got a significant advantage by wiping out Rome in 2900 BC by a lucky lone warrior. If we can quickly build two or three warriors and send them to take out the first civ they can find, we can potentially get a strong advantage, with which we can rapidly expand peacefully (encompassing both the area around where we controlled and the area that our vanquished opponent would have controlled)until the Middle Ages when we get some good offensive units. If we were to wait for swordsmen before attacking, it would be too late to quickly eliminate a civ; instead, we would have to fight a typical Ancient war for a considerable amount of time. And if the RNG doesn't favor us with the early warrior strategy, we wouldn't be out anything other than a small band of warriors, and might even get techs and gold in the peace deal.

yeah, but even with Scientific civs it should work, we just need to do it very early. Our queue must get 3 warriors and sending them in different directions but not too far either (so if we find a civ from one direction we could get the other two warriors to the same front faster).

Reminder! We must also look all around the capitol for the highest and best attack bonus. Look for Hills or Mountains. If we dont have it then it would be best to gather atleast 2 warriors. If its a Spearmen, no less than 3 warriors shoul;d attack.

I agree with this Idea, but we must be cautious as this can backfire very easily. Though despite this risk, I thik we could be in for some major profits by doing this.

Originally posted by amirsan
Reminder! We must also look all around the capitol for the highest and best attack bonus. Look for Hills or Mountains. If we dont have it then it would be best to gather atleast 2 warriors. If its a Spearmen, no less than 3 warriors shoul;d attack.

i didn't know that. do attackers get a % bonus from the terrain??

yeah, I think so. Becuase all of my warrior attacks from Mountains were fantastic but when on Grassland I lossed without putting any damage on the enemy.

I think that was just RNG odds rather than terrain, but I could be wrong. As for backfiring, I don't really see how that could happen, the war won't last long enough for them to get in a counter-strike, though it might create animosity which may make them more likely to attack us in the future (if we fail, that is). Still, it's worth that risk.

Originally posted by Bootstoots
As for backfiring, I don't really see how that could happen, the war won't last long enough for them to get in a counter-strike, though it might create animosity which may make them more likely to attack us in the future (if we fail, that is). Still, it's worth that risk.

thats the thing, those ancient civs you attack become a REAL PAIN in the future. Best we make sure that we kill them.

guys, what seems like the idea in the thread concerning prefered victory conditions is a 20K city (i'll edit to provide a link later) this may require coming up with a tech pace that matches both purposes, it seems like the war department's responsibility will be 1)elimination (or at least damaging) of closest cultural rival, 2) control of the contient

a good idea would probably be to go right to iron working, as the 20 K city can work on the collosus, while we find iron. we can then go for the wheel, mainly to provide horse location, and then ceremonial burial to keep the infastructure people happy, or masonary for the pyramids, we can then convince them to go after horseback riding, math, or map making, map making would work well for all(harbors, great light, galleys) i dought much of an early war would gain much suport until knights, unless it's the warrior stumble proposed. the early focus will pobably be expansion and infustructure. i say go for the warrior thing and get knights built, mass upgrades are too costly to gain much suport, remember, if we lose the warrior explorer war thing, we'll have a harder time convincing the citizens for another war, i think we're (the general citizens) are going to be of a war problem than the AI

EDIT: are here it is: click here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73715)

I agree with what ybbor has said here, CivGeneral, what do you think of his idea?

Hmm, sounds good to me. Once I get the map tommorow, I should start plotting pathways of where the Warrior Explorers should go, though I will update the plot map everytime we encounter oceans or Mountans.

Originally posted by ybbor
a good idea would probably be to go right to iron working, as the 20 K city can work on the collosus, while we find iron. we can then go for the wheel, mainly to provide horse location, and then ceremonial burial to keep the infastructure people happy, or masonary for the pyramids, we can then convince them to go after horseback riding, math, or map making

i disagree. to keep up in tech with the other civs, we should go matehematics, followed by currency, and trade for bronze, iron, cermonial burial, and other essential techs. if we really want to build an early wonder, the pyramids (we start with masonry) will suffice as prebuid for the moment.

since both mathematics and currency are high techs, we will end up with minimizing our tech spending to make more gpt during the first 40 + 40 turns. the gold can be used to buy tech or upgrade swords while we are able to stay high in the techrace at a low cost.

I disagree with these proposals, because a 20k culture city requires any cultural building it can get ASAP. We should research Ceremonial Burial ASAP.

Ok, again, why research cheap tiny techs when we could trade for it and research expensive techs. We are playing on Monarch, not Emperor or Diety. We should be sure to get Math and Currency first for the bext money booster. About ybbor's suggestion, all the techs you stated could be traded at a cheap price.

I think a 20k victory will suck, because it sticks out positions like the military position to having a better word in the government. Sinse we are going cultural, then why do wars? "Forget he military minister!" is what I think will happen. This is why I think histograph was the best becuase it brings every aspect of the game together.

Math is the best way to go. Whats wrong with learning numbers?

I think we shouldn't go to war too early because it could weigh heavily on our early economy.

Originally posted by wlievens
I think we shouldn't go to war too early because it could weigh heavily on our early economy.

However, if we completely defeat another civilization, our economy will grow. We could either capture cities or raze cities for more ground to build cities.

Also, a question for the minister: Do you plan to raze or capture cities?

Originally posted by Sharkey
Also, a question for the minister: Do you plan to raze or capture cities?

This is a question I have answered many times. I will only plan to capture cities. Razing cities is a waste of resources and efficency. The only time I raze cities if they are dead beat cities that refuses to move above size 2 and is surrounded by mountans.

i agree with that, razing cities is a bad idea.

I agree with the General and Sarevok: razing is bad! Let's just capture those cities.

what about horseman? i made some good experiences with them in my last game as they can retreat....

Procedures on approaching Goodie huts

All goodie huts must not be poped unless its determined safe in the polls.

Originally posted by CivGeneral
Procedures on approaching Goodie huts

All goodie huts must not be poped [sic] unless its determined safe in the polls.

Perhaps I am just being dense here, but what does "safe in the polls' mean exactly? And how is it determined?

Did you mean...

A) Citizens are consulted and majority think it is safe to pop the hut?

B) Chat participants are polled and a majority think it is safe to pop the hut (which to my mind is different from A).

C) Somehow we determine that it is safe to pop into the polls and then gather together later at the pub. :lol:

Originally posted by dreiche2
what about horseman? i made some good experiences with them in my last game as they can retreat....

I agree, these are the best for late Ancient and Early Middle. They provide an excellent way to upgrade to the Medieval war machine. :) In my games I usually build around 30 and upgrade all of them as soon as Chivalry is reached.

maybe we should discuss what kind of units we want in our army?

Originally posted by TerminalMan90


Perhaps I am just being dense here, but what does "safe in the polls' mean exactly? And how is it determined?

Did you mean...

A) Citizens are consulted and majority think it is safe to pop the hut?

B) Chat participants are polled and a majority think it is safe to pop the hut (which to my mind is different from A).

C) Somehow we determine that it is safe to pop into the polls and then gather together later at the pub. :lol:

A is the correct choice within the game.

B is a valid technique if there are no instructions, but illegal if there is a binding instruction already posted. There are no official spot polls within the chat, only informal advice.

C - have we invented pubs yet? sometime I wish we used a mod with "brewing" as one of the optional early techs. It's even historically accurate, I once read the Babylonians had beer before they had bread... :lol:

I have an announcement:

I am now offering my resignation to CivGeneral for the position of Defense Deputy in the first terms.

The reasons for this resignation offer is that I feel that after a series of crisis both in the forum and out has made my fufulling my position as deputy for the future impossible.

I will continue to post advice/agreements/disagreements here to help the Defense Dept in acheiving the goal of making a great offensive and defensive war machine. i most likely will not run for second term Defense Minister, but will for third as by then this crisis will be over.

It is up to CivGeneral wether or not to accept or decline.

- Sarevok

Originally posted by Sarevok
I have an announcement:

I am now offering my resignation to CivGeneral for the position of Defense Deputy in the first terms...

...It is up to CivGeneral wether or not to accept or decline.

- Sarevok

Well, its your desition, nothing is going to stop you. Ill find a replacement.

Mr. General sir,

I respectfully ask that you lend your voice to the call to raise a new militia to replace the honorable Chuck brigade that gave their lives so valiantly on our behalf.

The current build queue is a settler, and I hope that you will bring your vast experience to the table and recommend to Governor Plexus that we shift immediate production to a warrior unit.

Since RF is currently without a position might I recommend him for your consideration.

Minister CG,

When you have a chance, would you please keep an updated summary of our Military power in your initial post?

Thanks!
-- Ravensfire

Originally posted by ravensfire
Minister CG,

When you have a chance, would you please keep an updated summary of our Military power in your initial post?

Thanks!
-- Ravensfire

Ill create an Excel spreadsheat on it :)

Originally posted by CivGeneral


Ill create an Excel spreadsheat on it :)

Any update on this, CG? The information is useful to have ...

-- Ravensfire

Dear Defense Minister.

I request the following things:
1) post your instructions no later than 1 hour before the scheduled turnchat. This prevents rush-jobs which can lead to unpleasant situations. I am sure you are aware of the fact that only legal instructions which are posted no later than 1 hour prior to the scheduled TC are carried out. You can't add, change or withdraw instructions after that time. The DP only considers the instructions as they are 1 hour before the start. If none are posted, the DP desides them.

2) Post clear instructions. Preferably mention each unit individually and the task and route he has to take. Also mention when that task stops, e.g. "when we spot barbs / other civs / goody huts / reach the coast / etc.", giving their control to the DP. Give the DP the room to work.

3) Refrain from general instructions. E.G. "Any changes of movement or warrior usage should have prior authorization by me." is not workable. Only general instructions which lift your authorisation (see 2) are workable.

4) Involve our citizens in the decision making. I strongly advise you to make your plans (instructions) visible in the citizen-thread to allow discussion and perhaps even polling. This would mean posting them there at least 36 hours before the scheduled TC. You (and I too) are elected by the citizens; we carry out their wishes. Give them the possibility to express their wishes.

I hope this will lead to a more fruitfull cooperation.

Your President,
Rik Meleet

First post edited.

The First post now contains unit list and a map for the current discussion of exploration routes.

Latest addition to the discussion thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1524852#post1524852)

Thanks CG!

-- Ravensfire

Two Ministry of Defense sponsered threads and polls

Military Poll: Unit Quantity (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75905)

Military Discussion: Attack Russia or no? (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75904)

The Possition of Military Deputyship is still open. Please apply within.

Strider has gotten the job since he asked me via chat :)

CivGeneral

I feel the Defense Ministry needs to update their maps on exploration.
We need to know the wereabouts of other people, and of the plans for exploration. Personally, I d very much like to see military maps updated regularly. That would go for strategy discussions as well :)

Thank you

Paalikles

Monsieur General,
For better efficiency of the Foreign Affairs Department, I believe better cooperation with the Military Department is needed. I again request from this office plans for exploration.

Merci beaucoup

Paalikles
FA Deputy

First post updated now containing the stats of the military. For the FA here is the map :)

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads6/DG3_MillitaryExplor_2150BC.JPG

The arrows are the general direction on where the warriors go, the enclosed area is what I call the free movement area so that the DP can easely move around blocked paths and other hazards.

id frag the warrior, thern send him out to go find some other barbarians that may be lurking around. You never now what could be out there...

It would be helpful to have an assessment of our neighbors, their relative military strengths and aggressive vs passive tendencies, and whether they represent a current threat.

Russia is too far away in my opinion to be a major threat. As far as technology is concerned... How advanced are they?