Cavaleiros Embassy & Intelligence

Discussion in 'Team Kazakhstan' started by Provolution, Jan 14, 2009.

  1. mikotian

    mikotian Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    211
    Location:
    Chicago
    well if we are going with Cav should we inform them that we think Sancta has a 20 stack waiting to attacK?
     
  2. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    we can certainly tell them, but half the stuff SANCTA say is a load of smoke and misdirection
     
  3. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    They said they could attack Cav in 5 turns, which to me means the SoD would have to have been built already... lurking 5 turns away from the Cav border.

    Our Spy does not see any such stack so far, but we should try to verify that there is no such stack, rather than just assume that there is no such stack.

    I agree that SANCTA might possibly be exaggerating, but we are the ones they will attack first, and Cavalieros has already gotten us to agree to wait 30 turns for military help... So, we need to keep tabs on SANCTA's military movements.
     
  4. Indiansmoke

    Indiansmoke Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,124
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Sancta has 20 units stack?
    highly dought it.
     
  5. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    Yea remember Memphus claiming that they did...?

    Anyway, that is my point... We highly doubted that they (SANCTA) would attack us in the Iron Age (well, I didn't doubt it personally, but as a team we doubted) ... and yet they managed to do it anyway.

    I just would feel more comfortable if we tried to verify what SANCTA's military is, and where it is...

    Just arbitrarily declaring... "Meh... SANCTA can't do that" or "Hmmph, SANCTA don't have that" is not a good strategy. We need to use spies to check. Especially since we are depending on Cavalieros to help us. If we need to send them another sternly worded letter to move up their unit-production timline we will need good intel.;)

    Unconquered Sun said that SANCTA was capable of producing 1 Horse Archer PER TURN:eek: If they have 3 cities that can do that. They could easily make a 20 unit stack in 5 turns.:(
     
  6. Indiansmoke

    Indiansmoke Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,124
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Sommer Sancta did not attack us in the iron age, they killed 2 chariots of ours outside TKY.
    US said 1 unit per turn from heroic epic, they cannot have 3 heroic epics :lol:

    Anyway our spy is on the way to check.
     
  7. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    :lol: OK Smokey... So If they have 1 city that can make 1 unit per turn, and 5 cities that can make 1 unit every 2 turns that equals 15 units in 5 turns. They have over 15 cities don't they? :lol: Im sure a few have pretty good production.

    My point is... We should be building military units, not libraries, because SANCtA is capable of fielding a large army and Cavalieros are not sending help for a long while. If we lose three cities waiting for the Cavalry de los Cavalieros, it will be too late for us to recover.

    Oh and you are right... I did not say "Iron Age" before... I had actually always been saying that they would attack us before Construction, and that we should be ready to fight them with Chariots and Axemen. Good catch;)
     
  8. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    a small skirmish involving killing a couple of chariots near to a barb city they wanted to take and which we wanted to raze does not constitute a serious "attack" in my book. And I'll keep saying this to you when you come up with these "I said this would happen" type comments - what should we have done differently? We build axes as soon as we hooked up iron so I don't see how we could have built any sooner. And by that stage SANCTA already had several axes in the area of Angle. They had copper near to their capital, we didn't. Had we a closer source of copper or iron, things would have been different, but we are where we are.
     
  9. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    1. What SANCTA did to us DOES count as serious attack in my book.

    2. They Declared War on Us and their units killed our units... Over and Over again... They trapped us and cut off our expansion prospects. They destroyed our army. It is a little dubious that you guys keep trying to say we weren't attacked.:dubious: What has to happen for you to consider it an attack?:confused: Do we have to lose a city for it to constitute a "serious attack" :lol: I guess Custer didn't "attack" the Sioux at Little Bighorn because he only killed 30 of their 2000 warriors. :lol:

    All you are trying to do is take one thing (an attack) and just call it something else (small skirmish) in order to diminish the truth of what happened... ie., We were caught unprepared, because we did not think SANCTA would attack us... period.

    3. Being attacked is about more than just losing units or health points... SANCTA founded Zero (and probably Dragon Tears) to block us in, cut us off, and deny us the wheat resource. All of that was part of their attack. Or are you thinking that an "attack" can only be the actions taken on the turn the DoW happens?

    It is critical that we acknowledge that error in judgment (thinking we would not be attacked) in order to avoid making the same error again, (which we are about to do IMO).
     
  10. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    As far as what we could have done differently... You keep asking and will I keep answering...

    1. We should have built Horse City first and delayed Aktau until after securing the copper
    2. We should have built Taraz, or a city where Angle is, or captured Angle (if it was even there) after the Horse city
    3. We should have built nothing but Chariots and settlers (excluding GLib) once we got the horse. I posted tests where we had 10 chariots before turn 100. We would have crushed SANCTAs Axes near Angle if we had done this.
    4. We built too many workers, we should have built settlers instead
    5. We should have skipped the temple in favor of more chariots, or a settler
    6. We should have built Iron City first and and delayed Shymkent until after securing the copper
    7. We should have brought Saturn into a 4 on 1 against SANCTA
    8. We should have formally accepted the balance of power deal and started spamming cities (like Cavalieros did)
    9. We should not have split up our forces when attacking SANCTA, and we should have waited to get the whole group together before attacking.

    I could go on and on, but I think that this list should be enough...;)

    Yes that is true, however...

    1. We DID NOT get Iron as soon as we could have (as I was pleading for us to do), because we built Shymkent first. We could have had Axes a few turns sooner.

    2. We also knew about the Copper ages before the Iron, but we constantly refused to expand towards the Copper (like I wanted). So we could have had Copper (and Axes) waaay sooner.

    Yes because we took so long to get to the center... If we had prioritized getting to the center, by getting the Horse city (Oskemen) first, as I wanted, and by then continuing to expand towards the center (Taraz). We could have been there before SANCTA, maybe even before Angle.

    Ths comment is sort of like the "We got screwed by the RNG" complaint. In other words, "The game is somehow rigged and cheating against us"... No we are losing because we made poor decisions... And we need to stop making those same kinds of decisions.

    We did have a visible source of Copper, (in the center) we just failed to claim it in a timely fashion.

    The bottom line is... it does not matter what we could have done differently, it is all water under the bridge.

    What MATTERS, is that we DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE going forward. That is why I keep pointing out how we were wrong in the past... to remind us not to make the same faulty assumptions again.

    I will say it again KEEP BUILDING MILITARY... Yes, once we get Theocracy, our military will be even better, but we lost to SANCTA because of inferior NUMBERS, not inferior units or promotions.
     
  11. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    If we had gone for the copper city earlier we would have lost it. And Aktau was the city that produced many of our early settlers and workers, we would not have been able to expand as fast later on if we had skipped Aktau.

    Going for Angle as our fourth city would have been a big stretch and without axes would have been very hard to defend from barbs not least from Axes that SANCTA had coming. Roading all that way so early would have also taken quite a bit of time.

    We did build Chariots and Settlers but we also built monuments (to pop borders), granaries (to grow faster) and workers (we probably could have done with more, not fewer of them). perhaps we could have skipped a couple of missionaries though.

    Saturn tried to expand out and lost cities to barb as they didn't have a source of copper either. But at least they had iron nearby. The mountains generate a lot of barbs and a city that far away from our capital so early I think, even in hindsight, is just unrealistic.

    Skipping Shymkent to get Atyrau faster wouldn't have gotten us iron much quicker as we had issues at the time with defending from barbs and we also had the issue of worker availability. Iron a couple of turns quicker wouldn't have helped a huge amount.

    Fewer workers would have meant having cities but not being able to improve the terrain we built those cities for!

    I agree we could have skipped the temple though. And we should have kept our stack together.

    We don't know for sure Saturn would have accepted 4v1 and isn't that a bit boring anyway ;)
     
  12. Kaleb

    Kaleb Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    London
    Well, I don't agree. They did block us in, and it was a surprise that they had that many units in the area to secure the city. Whether they were 'attacking' us I don't know as by that stage they didn't even know where we were!! We came along to a spot they wanted and they had more units in the locale and got their way. We missed a vital move at the time due to an unfortunate turn roll which would have made it even losses and later on I made a hasty move that also lost us a chariot. So instead of it being 2 axes for 2 chariots it was 1 for 3 which made the outcome look rather unpleasant for us!

    What they were doing was what we needed to do but weren't able to - spread out but do so with military units to defend what you take and have workers on hand to improve what you get.
     
  13. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    No, we could have had copper earlier, Axes earlier, and we could have been able to defend it (or even retake it) with already whipped Axes. The point is, if we had founded it earlier it would have totally changed the game. It is pure speculation to say, "we would have lost it", anyway so poo... We don't know what would have happened because we didn't do it. What we know is what WE DID didn't work out well for us.

    And SANCTA and Cavalieros expanded out and are winning... We had horses early, which were great against barbs. We should have used them to get the copper... Not doing so was a costly mistake.

    Yes but another Axe or two, a couple turns earlier would have made all the difference in the SANCTA war... Don't you see this? It's obvious.:p

    You seem really shaky on this... :) We don't know they would have refused either do we? At least admit that we should have tried to do this.

    :lol: So you agree that they blocked us in...You agree that they got the drop on us, or, they "suprised" us as you say... But you still "don't know if they attacked us"?:dubious:

    Well, I know whether they attacked us... They did. So since you "don't know", or aren't sure, take my word for it... They attacked us. ;)

    As for your comment that "they didn't even know where we were" (so they couldn't possibly attack us)...:dubious: C'mon... You know for certain that they didn't have any spies or any leaks from other teams to know where we were? You think they couldn't figure out where we were from where our wb came from? And they certainly knew "where we were" when they founded Zero didn't they?

    The bottom line: We should just acknowledge that we were wrong about SANCTA and we should not make that mistake again. We need to keep building ONLY military for a while.
     
  14. damnrunner

    damnrunner Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,003
    Sommers –

    I think you go too far in asserting that our teams previous play was flawed and reflected a neglected military. We have been unlucky, and have had some badly executed play - but if we played it over again odds are we would have had much more military success and would be acting pretty smug right now for how clever we were.

    Early on we should have killed one more of Sancta’s axes with our chariots - and when we moved in with the maces a betting man would have given us very good odds to have taken Zero, TKY, and Dragon Tears. Yes a larger military would have helped, but it was not needed for victory. Focusing more on military also has an opportunity cost. We were able to attack Sancta with a major tech advantage which was possible due to our previous investments in infrastructure. We may have been able to build a few more units if we had skipped some infrastructure – but attacking with maces gave us a larger strategic advantage.

    We should have delayed our attack and moved in with a larger stack (including a Xbow also might have been wise) but overall we had a very successful plan that should have succeed. We made some tactical mistakes and then our fate was sealed by a very unkind RNG.

    You also mentioned that we could have rushed to have built a city near the copper early. That is true but it would have significantly slowed down our economy – higher maintenance. And the units needed to defend the city would have slowed our growth a great deal. At the end of the day (assuming sancta did not capture the city), we would be in the same situation but would have a much weaker infrastructure base. We would still be boxed in with Santca to the North and East and Cav to the West. Yes one more city with high production potential would be great but our strategic outlook would not be changed.

    That said, I share some of your concerns about neglecting the military at the present.
     
  15. cav scout

    cav scout The Continuum

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,630
    Conversation with CAV regarding the Lib race. They have a great engineer and want to use it to build the Taj Mahal. But they could also use him to start a golden age to get Lib one turn sooner, increasing the chances of beating SANCTA...


    Spoiler :
    oyzar says:
    hi

    Raskolnikov has been added to the conversation.

    Rune has been added to the conversation.

    oyzar says:
    we can just talk with cavscout
    Jon says:
    hey im here
    Raskolnikov says:
    we can
    Raskolnikov says:
    Hi
    Raskolnikov says:
    Kaleb ask us two things...
    Raskolnikov says:
    asked
    Raskolnikov says:
    :
    Raskolnikov says:
    what we plan with our GE, and what are our future plan regarding SANCTA iirc
    Jon says:
    ah ok
    Jon says:
    well Kaleb just got back from vacation
    Raskolnikov says:
    are you aware of that?
    Raskolnikov says:
    ok
    Jon says:
    we already worked out the plan for SANCTA
    Raskolnikov says:
    what did he told you?
    Jon says:
    i havent talked to Kaleb yet since he has been back
    Raskolnikov says:
    hum ok
    Raskolnikov says:
    so perhaps it's better you have an internal talk before ?
    Jon says:
    ok...is there something controversial going on?
    Jon says:
    I thought we had reached an understanding about how to proceed against SANCTA
    oyzar says:
    it is regarding lib
    Raskolnikov says:
    yeah
    Raskolnikov says:
    it's better you inform Kaleb then
    Raskolnikov says:
    about lib: whatever the GE is used for, we'll get lib in 2 tuns
    oyzar says:
    no
    oyzar says:
    we get lib in 2 turns if it is needed
    oyzar says:
    for that we have to use the GE
    Raskolnikov says:
    yeah it is that sorry
    oyzar says:
    if getting lib in 2 turns isn't needed, we won't have to use the GE
    oyzar says:
    likely
    Jon says:
    well what plans do you have for the GE?
    Jon says:
    it would be nice if you maximized the benefit to the alliance
    Raskolnikov says:
    that's our main concern imo
    oyzar says:
    to get lib in 2 turns we would likely have to start a GA
    Jon says:
    well which way are you guys leaning towards right now?
    oyzar says:
    what do you mean?
    Jon says:
    using the GE for a GA or not is a dilema
    Jon says:
    which way does your team want to go?
    oyzar says:
    well using GE for Taj also gives a GA, cept then each subsequent GA doesn't cost one more
    oyzar says:
    but losing lib to sancta would suck
    oyzar says:
    thats 5K beakers difference...
    Jon says:
    yeah
    Jon says:
    my personal opinion is there is always more GEs but only one Lib race
    Jon says:
    and if we can still win it despite SANCTAs best efforts I would say go for it
    oyzar says:
    how are there always more GE's?
    Jon says:
    well this isnt the last one you guys will spawn in the game
    Rune says:
    there's always more techs, but only one Taj Mahal
    oyzar says:
    caste doesn't give infinite GE slots, so getting one is a gamble at best before the modern age
    Rune says:
    but yes, clearly we don't want to lose liberalism
    Rune says:
    ideally we'd get both
    Rune says:
    for 24 turns of GA and military build-up
    Jon says:
    yeah that would obviously be the best
    Jon says:
    my concern is that one opportunity missed will give the Lib race to SANCTA
    Jon says:
    they are clearly no pushovers and are going 100% to win
    Jon says:
    and denying them the free tech is even more valuable then gaining itJon says:
    so if you don't start a golden age with the GE then SANCTA is guaranteed to win the Lib race?
    oyzar says:
    huh?
    oyzar says:
    no
    oyzar says:
    if they pop a GS next turn and we still don't start a golden age, then sancta might win the lib race if we can't find enough research conventionally
    Jon says:
    so starting a GA just reduces the risk from SANCTA but its still possible to win Lib without it
    Rune says:
    very much so
    Jon says:
    well i guess it boils down to how much risk we are willing to accept on the Lib race for the benefits of the Taj
    Jon says:
    and Taj would help substantially in gearing for war
    Jon says:
    if SANCTA sees they can't win the race they will save the bulbs
    Jon says:
    perhaps anyways
    oyzar says:
    but they won't see it, even if we tell it to them straight up
    oyzar says:
    and really since they are just going to bulb it, they aren't giving up that much
    Jon says:
    well i'm undecided as to which way to go at the moment. I will post in my forum and then let you know how my team feels about the whole thing
    Jon says:
    thanks for bringing it up for discussion
     
  16. damnrunner

    damnrunner Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,003
    I'd go for the GA now. Saving the GE for later does no good if they are not able to build Taj.

    If Sancta gets liberalism we can bet they will use it for nationalism, and in that case, they can probably build the Taj before we can tech nationalism ourselves.
     
  17. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    So that's settled... Smoke was right all along. Cavalieros always wanted to get Nationalism with the bulb (and the Taj)... So the whole point of the Liberalism race, abandoning Guilds, and giving up on acounterattack with Knights was that so Cavalieros could get the Taj and a Golden Age. Grrrr:mad:

    I agree with Damnrunner that GE for Taj is useless if SANCTA get Liberalism first, however, Cavalieros might want to save their GE for a different wonder. Just because we dropped everything to chase Liberalism does not mean that Cavalieros will do the same.;)

    As to Damnrunner's prior comment about our bad luck rather than poor choices leading to our current poor situation... well... What I ask is...

    When we beat Saturn to Confu, was it because we planned well or because of pure luck? When a Saturn'er says we lucked out (because of our turn order), I would say, "no we planned well, that's how we beat you to it".

    It is normal human nature that when you do well we pat ourselves for "being clever" as you said, but when we do poorly we blame outside forces and "luck." That is exactly wrong.

    Success/Failure has to either be mostly luck or mostly Choice... I think that when you succeed it is because of good choices, and when you fail it is because of poor choices... not "Choice when I succeed and Bad luck/Dirty tricks when I fail." ;)
     
  18. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd Shades of the Sun

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    20,846
    Location:
    Murica
    Oh yes and I almost forgot... Damnrunner agreed that we needed to keep building military, which was my whole point anyway.:)
     
  19. mikotian

    mikotian Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    211
    Location:
    Chicago
    I think it's obvious that Cav should use their GE for a golden age. More techs for the alliance, 1 less tech for Sancta, 1 less wonder that Cav can use to defeat us later.
     
  20. Indiansmoke

    Indiansmoke Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,124
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    They should start a golden age and get liberialism sooner, otherwise we will lose it propably.

    We have not enough time for optics anyway so they will get nationalism from Liberialism and with their golden age can maunally build the Taj.

    Since they will be getting Taj we can ask them for something...lets think about what that could be...maybe a couple of carracks loaded with units?
     

Share This Page