The Civil Defense Board

Ohwell · Apr 3, 2002

Welcome to the Civil Defense Board. Our beliefs are to defend our nation, and keep the citizens content to better our resistance to outsiders.

Our charter:
-----------------------
- Defense, is the backbone of the economy. It is an incentive to produce more, knowing your ventures and gains are protected by law.

- Defense is the backbone of the Republic. The control it exerts dissolves revolutionary uprisings and keeps the citizens in line, bettering their ability to work in the fields and shops.

- Defense is the true showing of power in the world community. The more defense forces that are available, the more we are able to bend and change world opinions and descicions to our needs and desires.

- Defense allows us to live without fear of being attacked when we are at our weakest, knowing that our armed forces can repel an invasion is a truly great thought. The better the morale our men and women have, the more efficient our economy will run.

- Defense forces are the means by which nations extend their control and power. Our forces can seek to extend our power as well.
------------------------

We wish to have a large standing army, both offensive and defensive. The citizens will to defend our nation can also be called upon in drafts, and we look fondly upon drafts.

While armies cost money, they in fact give back all they are payed for and more by protecting interests of the nation.

Current Members: 5
--------------
Ohwell
Immortal
Rangers85
donsig
Daaraa
Strider

Immortal · Apr 3, 2002

I proudly support this group, I believe our trade and commerce is useless unless our nation can defend itself. Our economy will prosper without the heavy-handed approach others may propose.

marshalljames · Apr 3, 2002

Then What is the Civil Defences position on Building barracks in every city.Present domestic policy is not to build a barracks and produce simply reguler troops.A grave error IMO.Veteran defenders are better and increase the chances of leaders.

Ohwell · Apr 3, 2002

Originally posted by marshalljames
Then What is the Civil Defences position on Building barracks in every city.Present domestic policy is not to build a barracks and produce simply reguler troops.A grave error IMO.Veteran defenders are better and increase the chances of leaders.

This is a big YES. Barracks, Harbors, and Airports are important improvements.

But when I say Defense Forces, I mean both offensive and defensive.

Grey Fox · Apr 4, 2002

Originally posted by marshalljames
Then What is the Civil Defences position on Building barracks in every city.Present domestic policy is not to build a barracks and produce simply reguler troops.A grave error IMO.Veteran defenders are better and increase the chances of leaders.

This is NOT our policy. You are Totally wrong, and I won't sit back when you come to this conclusions on your own. I don't even know were you have gotten these Ideas from. We have only played 24 turns or so... if we would have built a barrack in that time, we might still be stuck with one city and ONE warrior.

The first couple of warriors are only for exploration purposes so they need no extra experience. They should get it on their exploration.

Barracks will be built when the time is right.

I want barracks in all our major cities too.

russia1292000 · Apr 5, 2002

Originally posted by Immortal
I believe our trade and commerce is useless unless our nation can defend itself.

Remember our Military is usless if we don't have the Economy to Support it.

Immortal · Apr 7, 2002

Originally posted by russia1292000
Remember our Military is usless if we don't have the Economy to Support it.

very true, thats why I support another guild as well.

rangers85 · Apr 7, 2002

I fully support this board and wish to be a part of it.

Also, on the subject of barracks above. I believe they are important to be in our cities, but not needed at the beginning. As with our charter, I'd rather have 5-7 or so regular warriors out roaming right now rather than 1-2 veteran warriors out roaming. Really helps with our defense in a time of need.

donsig · Apr 7, 2002

I endorse the CDB. Any organization that draws presidential ire is worth supporting on general priciples.

BTW, Grey Fox, marshalljames was talking about 'present' domestic policy being NOT to build barracks. At the time of his post that was domestic policy. You even said that barracks will be built when the time is 'right' - which you indicated hadn't yet come. If you want to disagree about timing then do so, but be straight with us about what the domestic policy really is!!!

Ohwell · Apr 7, 2002

Welcome Immortal, rangers85, and donsig. Our nation will soon recognize our growing numbers and we will influence the senate :nya:

I certainly do hope the War Church recognizes us as not peacemongers, but brothers who are ready for a fight. I am personally a member of the War Church

donsig · Apr 7, 2002

We have at least 14 turns to ready the defenses before war is declared. As members of the CDB I think we should monitor the debate concerning the building of barracks and if neccessary petition the government to move this project along!

Ohwell · Apr 7, 2002

Originally posted by donsig
We have at least 14 turns to ready the defenses before war is declared. As members of the CDB I think we should monitor the debate concerning the building of barracks and if neccessary petition the government to move this project along!

Yes! Barracks are needed badly so we can get veteran warriors ready. Then we can make some veteran immortals and increase our military. Once we create enough soldiers our civilized nation will be the model to which the world looks, not to mention the monetary value it will plunder from underneath Abe's nose!

But for now we should concentrate on making more warriors, although regulars they can be used for emergency defense. And 3 regular warroirs is far better than one veteran or elite warrior.

donsig · Apr 7, 2002

3 reg. warriors may be better than one vet warrior but remember that a barracks does not triple the production cost of a unit! Since a barracks costs 40 shields it is equal to 4 reg warriors. Yet, once the barracks is built it will produce vet warriors at 10 shileds per. the question is then what is more important NOW, 4 warriors or a barracks.

In 4000 BC the answer was '4 warriors'. Now that it is after 2000 BC I think the barracks is more important. We now have 9 warriors. 2 are exploring to the south, 2 are on garrison duty, one is healing the other 4 are exploring near America. (This is the best I can tell from the screen shots - I can't look at the game right now.) Not much of a defense and not an offense at all!

The plan being bandied about in the military dept. is to make warriors and upgrade them to immortals. Forgetting for a minute whether we can afford to do this or not, we have to remember that no barracks = no upgrades!

Given the current lack effort in even building a barracks, given that we do not have iron 'on-line' and given that the best defense is a good offense:

We should considers raising a force of archers to invade America.

By the time we start building or upgrading to immortals we could have a force of archers in the field attacking American cities. If we get Abe defending his cities he won't be able to harass ours!

Ohwell · Apr 7, 2002

Perhaps...

Actually an archer force might not be half bad! We are able to build them I think... and they are cheap. But we should use them marginally. I say barracks in every city! Then make archers, warriors, and Immortals when the time is right. Plus some spearmen. Remember although the best defense is a good offense, we need static defense in all of our cities because once our offense is gone fighting in their back yard, they could send units to OUR back yard.

But above all we just need a large, and well trained army

donsig · Apr 7, 2002

EDIT: the following is moot since the war has been postponed.

we need static defense in all of our cities because once our offense is gone fighting in their back yard, they could send units to OUR back yard.

Right. We currently have four cities: one defended by spearmen, 2 by warriors and the other by nothing! The latter is working on a temple to expand its borders and fighing rights.

Not only must we build an offensive army we must build this staitic defense as well. Since there are only so many shields to go around we have to work with what we have. Building a large army of immortals will take longer.

A maxim of war is to 'strike the fastest with the most.' The key to defeating America AND securing our defenses is to attack with archers.

Charis · Apr 8, 2002

Donsig... good to see you take an active interest in the well-being of Phoenatica! :hammer:

I'll be keeping an eye on this thread as well as the War Church, but will leave most posting in the Military. But an idea came up here that isn't showing up elsewhere that I wanted to address...

Archers????????

Under our conditions of being shield limited, and with iron within a few turns of coming online, may I ask why...

20 shields for attack value of 2, defense of 1, beats
10 shields for attack value of 4, defense of 2, for about 20 more gold.

Unless I'm missing something profound... this is neither fastest nor best, and there will be *NO* archers built. Trust in the immortals, my friends. They are all we need until cavalry.

In fact, proto-immortals are our best current defenders, at 10 shields for defense 2, plus some gold. And the ones at home only need be upgraded if war is declared on us.

We do thank all of you in the Civil Defense board for your support of homeland defense and the timely construction of barracks, and hope that the others here the voice of the people as expressed here.

General Charis

joespaniel · Apr 8, 2002

Charis has a point. Immortals are giving us a tough time in the Japan SG, and we have Samurai!
They are, without a doubt, the badest ancient-age unit in the game.
Give us 6 of them and :hammer:

! No more neighbors and room to expand.

eyrei · Apr 8, 2002

You will all be happy to know that iron is a few turns from being connected, and that barracks are in the build queue of two cities. We will not be building barracks in every city, as most will not need them, and they cost 1 gold /turn to upkeep. Two or three cities will be designated as military training sites, and will contain barracks. The rest will be building USEFUL improvements, that actually benefit the empire.

Knight-Dragon · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by Ohwell
I certainly do hope the War Church recognizes us as not peacemongers, but brothers who are ready for a fight. I am personally a member of the War Church

Of course, the Knights of the War Church value and recognize the members of the Board as brothers-in-arms and our staunchest allies.

However I won't join as yet as there's been certain talk of segregating organizers/leaders/whatever of citizen groupings from the Administration, so I best keep a lower or no profile at all in such fine organizations.

donsig · Apr 8, 2002

Re: archers

Another round went by after I brought up the idea of building archers. Even if that round hadn't gone through the idea was of marginal value. (That's why I brought it up here rather than the military thread.) I think the best way to conduct a quick war is to build a force of archers at the outset and use them to conquer a neighbor. Since our nation did not begin this 2000 years ago the usefulness of archers continues to decline. I agree that we have reached the point where archers should not be built.

Despite this, there is still talk of a 'quick' war. I don't see that happening even with immortals. First of all we are a long way from possessing a sizeable force of immortals. Second, I am not sure that upgrading warriors to immortals is a good way to go about raising such a force. The upgrade cost is 40 per. the Military Dept. has stated that a force of 9 regiments is needed for war. That's 360 bags of gold to start. then there would be the 40 bags per for replacements. I doubt we could pull this off and have gold left for any other purposes. Then there is the distance to America itself to consider, as well as the terrain and American resistance to our forces. I think we should not fool ourselves about a 'quick' war.

Two or three cities will be designated as military training sites, and will contain barracks. The rest will be building USEFUL improvements, that actually benefit the empire.

Whoever said barracks were useful? We'll be fine without them as long as we never have to fight anyone. :rolleyes:

The Civil Defense Board

Deity

Deity

XXX

Deity

Master of Points

Chieftain

Deity

Official Thread Killer

Low level intermediary

Deity

Low level intermediary

Deity

Low level intermediary

Deity

Low level intermediary

Realms Beyond

Unescorted Settler

Deity

Unhidden Dragon

Low level intermediary

Similar threads