How to wage an effective war with a democratic government:

[Moonsinger]

I can see why Russia is at "Agression Level 4". However, she seems well behave in most of my game. As long as I'm stronger than her, she won't dare declaring war.

 

[JFL_Dragon]

Moonsinger you are a cruel player. I could never starve my own citizens to death

 

[Trinity]

Originally posted by JFL_Dragon
Moonsinger you are a cruel player. I could never starve my own citizens to death

I guess I fall into that category. I play a democracy like Stalin. You are weary of a war I didn't start. You decide to riot. Rioters get no food. Shield production doesn't drop. I cut food first. :skull:

So just before major war weariness set in, I wanted to take one more city because of the oil resources (it turns out there's aluminum there ), then I was done with my business with Persia. The Iroquois were about to wipe them out anyway. The Brits had been annoyed and suddenly became polite. I thought something was up. One of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition states: The bigger the smile, the sharper the knife.

That turn, Xerses forms an alliance with the Brits. I settle with Xerses. Elizabeth won't talk. Elizabeth bombards a coastal city. So I go after one of hers that has oil. I cut a deal with Shaka to sell him gems. Next turn I try to settle with the Brits. She won't talk. I take the British city, and nail 8 bombers in the process. I try to settle, and she still won't talk. Okay. This means I take her harbor on that small northern continent next turn, and her last oil resource. I think she'll talk then.

BTW as soon as I settled with Xerses, the war weariness left, and it was unaffected by the evil British attack.

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by JFL_Dragon
Moonsinger you are a cruel player. I could never starve my own citizens to death

At least they died with a smile on their face. If the other civ get a hold of them, their fates could have been worst.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Moonsinger: We seem to have very similar playing styles Especially how you establish that beachhead

and I love starving resistors and whiners

 

[Mad Bomber]

Democracies can sustain war for a long time if they follow a few rules

1) Obtain as many luxuries as possible (this is critical for a democracy) at least 6 is needed to sustain a 30 turn war
(luxuries w/ Marketplaces will increase happy faces 12 happy faces w/ 6 luxieries, 16 @7 luxuries and 20@ 8. A temple/cathedral/ marketplace w/ 8 luxuries and you can be at war as long as you like. In fact I will go to war more for a luxury than for a strategic resourse.

2) never end a turn w/ units in enemy territory or if you do only do this for a very short time.

3) Dont initiate first combat in enemy territory

4) When capturing a new city, rush build a temple after resistance ends.

5) Dont raise a city to the ground when first captured but if it culture flips, then BURN, BABY, BURN!

Luxuries are the most important factor in waging long wars w/ Democracy, if you dont have 6. These should be proirity #1 if you plan to go to war (otherwise make it short and sweet

 

[Trinity]

The problem with #2 is that you may not be able to attack the city the ensuing turn unless you have knights, cavalry, tanks, modern armor, and may be more likely to have enemy units in your territory at the end of the turn.

WW is done very strangely. If you're winning the war, it should go down. If you're losing, it should go up. It should be geared to whether or not you're taking cities, how many troops get sent home to you in body bags, not on a specific number of turns. Otherwise we never would have survived WWII.

I may end a turn with 40 units in enemy territory attacking 5 to 8 cities depending upon what opposition I'm facing. This is where religious civs come in handy. Temple, cathedral, marketplace in combo with Sistine Chapel, and as many luxury resources you can get your hands on comes in handy. If the commie college kids want communism -- they get it.

 

[Mad Bomber]

Yeah religious civs are great at that, Keep in mind
every civ has to be played differently

That being said we are talking about war as a democracy not as a commie.

to #2, yeah you might have troops in enemy territory for a few turns, thats ok, just dont have it done on a continual basis. When you take a city its now part of your territory, use it to your advantage. Dont start out for a new city until the next turn, if you have a few troops still in enemy territory regroup them in your newly accuired territory (this may not be an option but you should regroup your forces every 5-6 turns or so.)

 

[Klem]

Originally posted by Lawrence
It is possible to get limited war weariness.

The points:
1. Thou shalt not let enemy enter your territory and stay for 1 turn or more.
2. Thou shalt not lose cities.
3. Thou shalt manage to lose as little units as you can.
4. Thou shalt not have enemy nationals in your country.
( Well, I have some doubt for this, don't know if it counts but it SEEMS to count )

In this way you can get 40+ turns with limited war weariness.

A few more points:
Capture one or more enemy cities at least every other turn. I’ve observed that I can decrease the number of entertainers, and/or the happiness tax, after a capturing a city or two. A solid string of victories sometimes produces WLTKD!

Also, I believe point 4 above is valid. Before advancing, I always eliminate all enemy units from within my borders. This calms my people, and protects my interior cities which are only lightly defended, usually with non-upgradeable, out-of-date units.

As stated by others, once I’m in Democracy, I really don’t want to switch, or go back and forth - this action is too expensive. So, plan and prepare so that when the war starts, you can make it short and sweet.

I would add another point, too. Make the other guy declare war. Most often this is accomplished when you ask a trespasser to leave, but they declare war instead.

Using all of the above, my experience is that I can maintain a war almost indefinitely as a Democracy without starving my population and while still maintaining reasonable production. Practically, because of the cost, I try to capture a preset objective quickly, then negotiate a favorable peace. The objectives always include specific geography, and maybe luxuries or resources. At Emperor and Diety levels, the goal may include obtaining one or more advances. The objective should be sufficient to noticably improve my game standing, otherwise the war is pointless.

Most of my wars have been highly profitable and not problematic, but they haven’t been 40 turns either - I might hit 20. This leads to a question:

Why fight a 40 turn war? If you’re losing the war, you sue for peace as soon as possible. If you’re winning the war, hit the enemy hard, then make them part with the goodies you want, besides the territory you already took. They can/will only give so much no matter how long the war. Unless you plan to eliminate the AI Civ, practically, you can probably do better with two ten turn wars, than one 20 turn war. So, why fight long wars?
Klem

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Klem
Why fight a 40 turn war? If you’re losing the war, you sue for peace as soon as possible.

I would always sue for peace as soon as peace talk is possible. However, sometimes, they refused to talk. Even though they are loosing the war badly, they still refuse to talk. Can't sue for peace if they refuse to accept our diplomatic convoy.

 

[Klem]

Originally posted by Moonsinger

I would always sue for peace as soon as peace talk is possible. However, sometimes, they refused to talk. Even though they are loosing the war badly, they still refuse to talk. Can't sue for peace if they refuse to accept our diplomatic convoy.

I've had games with maybe 12 or 15 turns where the AI would refuse to talk. I can't prove it, but my gut feel is that I wasn't hitting them hard enough to bring them to the table. And it's nice to know you can end the war, particularly if the objective is limited, such as a critical resource.

My recent experiences, usually Emperor level, seem to indicate that taking multiple cities, preferably every turn, and killing all AI troops on your turf every turn, is capable of starting the peace process in 4 or 5 turns or so. If I can't be agressive, then I try to avoid war because it might drag out and not be of any value.
Klem

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Klem
I've had games with maybe 12 or 15 turns where the AI would refuse to talk. I can't prove it, but my gut feel is that I wasn't hitting them hard enough to bring them to the table. And it's nice to know you can end the war, particularly if the objective is limited, such as a critical resource.

I have noticed in patch 1.29f, if I enter the war honorably, they will talk within 10 turns or less. Nowadays, before I declare war, I check for "Active" treaty. If there is no active treaty, I'm sure they will talk within 20 turns or less. And yes, hitting them hard would definitely bring them to the table sooner.

 

[frog_gamer]

I have been looking at this problem of the civ refusing to talk to you when you are successfull. I have found that an easy way to get the dialogue going is not to attack them at all for one turn. The next turn they are ready to talk.

 

[Mad Bomber]

Best way to enter war in honor.

Make sure you have NO troops in the target's territory.

1)go to diplomacy diologue
2)Check to see if there are any active trades or agreements, if there are wait until they expire.
3) When all agreements have expired, renegotiate the peace treaty (double click on it)
4) If they don't give you what you want (you are starting this war for a reason, right?) then click "forget it", Then agree that the civ is scum and you are at war with no political repercussions.

 

[truetom]

@ Moonsinger

Nice tactics. But loathsome. Loathsome? LOATHSOME!

The real chalenge is to try to play the game like in real life. Kohabitate, buy resurces, use extortion, trade resurces and if can't do it this way and you're threatened then make war. If they piss you off - a lot - then make war. That's the chalenge.

The game dosen't simulate very well what happens if you act like you - I mean in trading sence. NOBODY would trade with you if you'd be acting like this in real life. And you don't have to act as a state or a nation. Ask your friends what they would say if you acted like this in relations with them.

 

[Moonsinger]

Edit: double post!

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by truetom
The real chalenge is to try to play the game like in real life. Kohabitate, buy resurces, use extortion, trade resurces and if can't do it this way and you're threatened then make war. If they piss you off - a lot - then make war. That's the chalenge.

The game dosen't simulate very well what happens if you act like you - I mean in trading sence. NOBODY would trade with you if you'd be acting like this in real life. And you don't have to act as a state or a nation. Ask your friends what they would say if you acted like this in relations with them.

Actually, even in real life, nobody would know that you are bad if you don't get caught! Of course, since I have never broken a treaty with anyone, how can they possibly refuse to trade with me? For example, you and I, we have signed a peace treaty for 20 turns. Within 10 turns or so, you break the peace treaty with me and attack me first (of course, you were forced by MPP or whatever, but either ways, you are the one who break the treaty, not me). Now, I retaliate and raze 3 of your major cities...can you possibly blame me for what just happened? If you didn't declare war against me in the first place, I could never have any reason to raze your cities. Therefore, in a way, you brought that upon yourself. After the war is over, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't want to trade with me. I razed your cities because I was upset and deeply hurt by your treachery. (At least that's my story and I'm sticking to it.)

 

[syversblade]

If you are gonna declare war in a democracy, it is very viable, that you end it quick, or become a commie, one or the other. Because it is very rare you have 5-8 differing luxuries under you control. SOOOO, in conclusion, opress your people with communism, betray every treaty you ever sign, and take off the diplomatic victory!!!!



PS: these are not my real life views, and do not reflect this chat board, or the commercials shown here's views

PSS: I have a signed contract, it's a disclaimer i gotta put on all harsh posts with no humanity in them at all

PSSS: I dont really have a contract.

 

[sumthinelse]

Originally posted by Lawrence
It is possible to get limited war weariness.

The points:
1. Thou shalt not let enemy enter your territory and stay for 1 turn or more.
2. Thou shalt not lose cities.
3. Thou shalt manage to lose as little units as you can.
4. Thou shalt not have enemy nationals in your country.
( Well, I have some doubt for this, don't know if it counts but it SEEMS to count )

In this way you can get 40+ turns with limited war weariness.

If you (democracy) leave units in enemy territory for more than 1 turn that can cause war weariness even if you comply with all the above rules, even if you never lose a single unit or city.

 

[OmegaMega]

I personally only switch tod democracy for one time, and switch back to republic after. That time is the very important railroad building time.