City 4 location

The water would make a difference if say it was 10+tiles distance but it isnt, it is about 4/5 a galley could sit on the edge of our borders and drop troops within a 2 turns if need be, they wouldnt even need many galleys to have a successfull naval invasion- 3 maybe 4 and thats 6/8 units across.
 
BAT is much weeker, has two religious capitiols, no copper and is a rival for Iron and some great city locations.
 
Yep, it's not a bad idea to attack them, considering our lack of good land. Don't skimp on the galleys, tho, as we need to scout their land, and also there is nothing worse than having spare troops watching the action from across the channel.
 
Well lets get rolling on some attack plans. They make the most sense and they may be thinking the same thing. Hit them before they hit us....AND MOST IMPORTANT...do not let ANY other civ know.

HECK we could settle and hit them soon after...if we play it right. Also..BAT would be next. Its time to start playing this game with military goals in mind. I usually know who my first attack will be by the time city 2 is settled and settler 3 is being built.
 
Looks like the posts favor settling across the water near GCA and preparing an attack on them.

Before deciding though consider that BAT is weaker and has no copper, has two religious capitols to capture and has much lower production than GCA. As for distance BAT capitol is about 16 tiles away but may end up being closer as we discover more cities SW of Fever River. GCA is 9 tiles away but much further to walk to. Also keep in mind that GCA’s four cities are much more spread out and BAT’s 3 appear to be closer.

Probably a major problem with an attack on BAT would be the potential for a rear attack by GCA. I say invite GCA to participate. The successful conquest of BAT will provide much for us to share in booty especially if cooperation in this endeavor is the basis for a game long alliance.
 
If we are going to attack someone i think it should be GCA, we may as well knock them out now, having nearer more proftiable land will be of more benefit to us than attacking a nation which looks quite far away and we dont know a 'quick' route.
 
Why are you saying "might as well knock them out now.” Has it been pre-ordained that CFC and GCA will be enemies?
 
In my mind they are an enemy simply by being the closest to us. Ask anyone who has played a pitboss game. Its hard to maintain a friendship with a neighbor because sooner or later they will block your expansion. In addition fighting far from home is not as easy as right next door.

Tactically we would have an advantage fighting them over fighting BAT just because of the avenues of approach. In addition, its probably better to attack a them because they appear to be teh more powerful enemy. Always kill a strong enemy first. BAT can be taken care of later on if they do not have iron. OR someone else may do us a favor and kill them.


ALSO...we have to maintain good relations with them up to the moment of attack...dont offer long term deals. Just friendly deals. Better to shock them than let them see it coming. Our reason for attacking after they ask...they were simply to close for comfort.
 
Vassalman has a good point :) Sorry RM.

Which would be fine if we pick the right civ to be a vassal to. However RM I have to give you credit...without you Dave would have never won as easily
 
Agression vs your neighbours leads to a much stronger position in the long run, and if we take out a stronger enemy now, we'll have a weak enemy to absorb easier later.
 
If we succeed then it could be a boon but what is the margin for error?

GCA has a larger population and more cities.

According to the power graph we are more powerful than GCA by about 4-6,000 troops, but we have 3 warriors and an axe out exploring (equivalent to 5,000 troops) while GCA has explored mostly with scouts (do not count as troops).

It is so far unclear how many axemen we can build and ship to their shores but consider that while our manufacturing is 18 and theirs is only 10 it has been as high as 15.

Our units will also cost money. Our economy is currently as high as its ever been at 17gpt but GCA has made large jumps in both previous turns to something like 20.

Very nearly even, so is surprise to be our only advantage? We will need a great deal more than that if we hope to destroy them and not just get stuck in a quagmire that drags us both into ruin.
 
Good point 1889

but we leave them alone too long and we won't stand a chance. Keep in mind they will probably (if they don't already) have the same line of thought as ourselves. I can't see this game ending with both GCA and CFC in the running. The geography just doesn't allow for it.
 
I forgot to mention that an axe has a 62% chance of success against an unfortified archer in a city so we would need at least twice as many axes as they have archers.

If left alone their thoughts probably would turn against us, that is why we should engade them in diplomacy and make them part of our plans.
 
That is another option...if it would work out. It depends on their reliability as an ally. So far it seems we don't really know where they stand, and there is the fact that they are uncomfortably close

I don't like the prospects of this war...but it seems our list of options grows thin
 
We have to take risks to win this game. It's roughly 50-50 chance of us winning at the moment, so we want to increase our chances with our choices in the short term to increase our chance of a medium term attack.
 
We'll need to take risks but we can certainly look for better odds than 50%. What are the chances that GCA will work with us against BAT? It is just as difficult for them to attack us. Maybe together we can find a better outcome than stalemate. Talking to them may risk the element of surprise but that is of slim and transitory benefit anyway.
 
War is a risk...BUT we need to take risks to win. Face it..we frankly...SUCK at diplo. So we aren't gaining any ground with diplo.

Lets do something and be proactive instead of responding to someone elses actions. I rather die fighting than die talking.
 
Top Bottom