Informational Poll: Shall we be an Agressor?

Falcon02

General

Joined

Dec 11, 2001

Messages

3,100

Location

Maryland, USA

• Aug 3, 2003

• #1

Just want to know what the public feeling is on the subject.

Do you think we should prepare for an agressive war against one of our weaker neighbors (ie. Egypt, Aztec, or Greece).

 

ravensfire

Member of the Opposition

Joined

Feb 1, 2002

Messages

5,281

Location

Gateway to the West

• Aug 3, 2003

• #2

Once we get Cavalry, we could use some breathing room. And a chance to exercise our new soldiers. By choosing our targets carefully, we could also slow down the more powerful opponents we might have, and gain some valuable techs and revenue for us!

-- Ravensfire

 

Falcon02

General

Joined

Dec 11, 2001

Messages

3,100

Location

Maryland, USA

• Aug 3, 2003

• #3

Don't forget the possibility for a GL to rush those Nice Cultural wonders

 

D

deshelbr

International Playboy

Joined

Jan 7, 2003

Messages

455

Location

Azelatrof, Fanatica

• Aug 4, 2003

• #4

It is hard to vote on something like this because it doesn't really state who we would be taking action against. It suggests more of a philisophical dove/hawk choice. I'm all up for sacking Egypt, but I'm not sure I would feel the same right now if we were talking about the Aztecs.

 

Donovan Zoi

The Return

Joined

Oct 22, 2002

Messages

4,960

Location

Chicago

• Aug 4, 2003

• #5

I voted No.

I would like to try our hand at playing the "good guys" once. Of course there may be diplomatic ways to draw Egypt into a war , but I wouldn't pursue that until we have some Cavalry(or a huge batch of Knights) ready.

 

donsig

Low level intermediary

Joined

Mar 6, 2001

Messages

12,905

Location

Rochester, NY

• Aug 4, 2003

• #6

I have also voted no. We spent term three building infrastructure and trying to stay competitive in the tech race. We started one war which proved very unpopular to say the least. Our country does not have the stomach for war.

 

zorven

12,000 Suns

Joined

May 13, 2003

Messages

1,964

• Aug 4, 2003

• #7

I voted "Maybe" (abstain). I don't see a problem with annexing some territory here or there, or "trimming the tree" of a big civ once in a while, but it really depends on who, when, the condition of our military, infrastructure, etc.

 

Falcon02

General

Joined

Dec 11, 2001

Messages

3,100

Location

Maryland, USA

• Aug 4, 2003

• #8

Well, the "Who" is for another poll. All I want to really know is if the public in general has their eyes on any one in particular that we might want to prepare an agressive war against.

In my mind Egyptians are the most logical choice should this occure, but to others it may be someone else. Basically all I want to know is a "Hawk" or "Dove" long term planning essentially.

and it's just "informational" got get the public opinion, a "Yes" win doesn't mean we must go all out to invade someone, as a "No" win doesn't mean we should stop all spending on Military.

It's just to give me a general idea of how hard I should be promoting the production of Knights/Cavalry over Muskets.

 

zorven

12,000 Suns

Joined

May 13, 2003

Messages

1,964

• Aug 4, 2003

• #9

@ Falcon02, maybe you can call me a Dove Hawk

I think we need to be the Dove for awhile, but then we could go Hawk on Egypt.

 

Falcon02

General

Joined

Dec 11, 2001

Messages

3,100

Location

Maryland, USA

• Aug 4, 2003

• #10

BTW: I have not voted as of yet, because I'm undecided, I think Egypt needs to go (at least so we can use Memphis' FP to it's fullest potential). But right now I'm worried an invasion will cost us much if we don't start an upgrade program or at least in some way replace the Spears with Muskets (ie. build 'em)

 

donsig

Low level intermediary

Joined

Mar 6, 2001

Messages

12,905

Location

Rochester, NY

• Aug 4, 2003

• #11

Hmmm... I thought the FP was in New Jedina not Memphis...

 

Donovan Zoi

The Return

Joined

Oct 22, 2002

Messages

4,960

Location

Chicago

• Aug 4, 2003

• #12

@donsig, I think it is, but the benefits would be about the same. We do need those cities in that area, as Falcon said. But barring that, I plan on taking the dove stance for the remainder of the game.

Try to maintain peace, but fight vigorously if provoked.

 

Falcon02

General

Joined

Dec 11, 2001

Messages

3,100

Location

Maryland, USA

• Aug 4, 2003

• #13

Originally posted by donsig
Hmmm... I thought the FP was in New Jedina not Memphis...

Click to expand...

I thought it was the other way around, but I'm probobly wrong, don't have the save up to look at right now though

 

Siegmund

King

Joined

Jan 9, 2003

Messages

603

Location

northwest Montana

• Aug 5, 2003

• #14

I am 90% Dove, but would support exactly one more war of agression, in some thirty or so to turns when we are prepared for it, with the goal of claiming the rest of the land near the forbidden palace. Eliminating Egypt, since they already will hate us forever, wouldn't bother me either. Anything beyond that, no, I am not eager to see.

 

Bootstoots

Deity

Retired Moderator

Joined

Mar 2, 2003

Messages

9,426

Location

Mid-Illinois

• Aug 8, 2003

• #15

I voted Yes. I am in favor of war when it's on our own terms and we're well prepared for it. In fact, I wouldn't be opposed to taking out the entire continent, so long as we win a peaceful victory method in the end. We should certainly take Egypt during this term. Additional infrastructure won't do us that much good as long as we focus on having high production in each possible city, plus some science improvements to boost our tech research.