Butterball
Bear
Kickbooti said:
Uhh ... what's "it"?
BB
Department of General Musings
- Thread starter Whomp
- Start date
Uhh ... what's "it"?
BB
Daghdha
Absent Minded
says:Sign a treaty with TNT/Nuts, separate, that says we will aid them in the war as soon as we've eliminated MIA if, but only if, they do not help MIA in any way during our conflict. TNT/Nuts will keep fighting (both waiting for us to come) and we will have no dog pile. In meantime we go straight to cavs while cutting down MIA to OCC. Since they're not elimininated we don't have to help anyone. What we do is invade one of them and when we have troopers enough, we keep rolling. When work is done we ask MIA if they wanna go "Mano a Mano".
Daghdha
Absent Minded
I've done some sneakin' in the saves and mails and I have found that:
Dec 17 (turn 77) TNT has not philo and CoL
Dec 19 (turn 77) we offer TNT to trade for philo and CoL (Nuts has the save)
Dec 20 6AM donsig sends reply that they don't want philo, only CoL
Dec 20 6.01AM donsig posts TNT's turn 78 in turn tracker
Dec 21 Chamnix posts "Turn 78 unzipped, whistled at, and packed off to K.I.S.S."
Dec 22, when we get turn 78, TNT is no longer missing philo
What has happend is that as soon as TNT recieves our proposal, they contacted MIA. Then, within turn 78, they make a trade including TNT gets philo from MIA and MIA get something to be whistled at in return, and when Beorn plays our turn 78, TNT is only CoL down on us.
I wonder what MIA got from TNT. In fact I think we should ask them...
No matter what, it clearly shows MIA has been dealing very much behind our backs.
The other scenarios is that (a) our proposal, funnily enough, were made the same turn TNT finished Philo, or (b) that TNT traded Philo from Nuts.
One is possible but very unlikely, the other is impossible due to game mechanics.
Maybe it's time for Tubby to do a CivAssist scan on the tech situation.
Dec 17 (turn 77) TNT has not philo and CoL
Dec 19 (turn 77) we offer TNT to trade for philo and CoL (Nuts has the save)
Dec 20 6AM donsig sends reply that they don't want philo, only CoL
Dec 20 6.01AM donsig posts TNT's turn 78 in turn tracker
Dec 21 Chamnix posts "Turn 78 unzipped, whistled at, and packed off to K.I.S.S."
Dec 22, when we get turn 78, TNT is no longer missing philo
What has happend is that as soon as TNT recieves our proposal, they contacted MIA. Then, within turn 78, they make a trade including TNT gets philo from MIA and MIA get something to be whistled at in return, and when Beorn plays our turn 78, TNT is only CoL down on us.
I wonder what MIA got from TNT. In fact I think we should ask them...
No matter what, it clearly shows MIA has been dealing very much behind our backs.
The other scenarios is that (a) our proposal, funnily enough, were made the same turn TNT finished Philo, or (b) that TNT traded Philo from Nuts.
One is possible but very unlikely, the other is impossible due to game mechanics.
Maybe it's time for Tubby to do a CivAssist scan on the tech situation.
Tubby Rower
Chronic Slacker
As requested, here is the techs learned by each civ since turn 61. I used our outgoing saves as a standard. I had to assume two spots in the chart. I assumed that MIA traded for Math and Currency in their respective turns since we did not have the pre-requisite tech to view that tech. Upon learning Masonry, all 3 opponents had Math. Upon learning Math, only TNT & MIA know Currency and those are still the only two civs that know the art of not just trading pigs for haircuts.
Attachments
Kickbooti
Ecclesia Militans
So, the war is off for at least 20 turns.
Do we attack the other continent, still go for MIA, or just turn the settler pump back on and fill out our expansion?
I'm undecided, since I can't sleep and fatigue is addling my brain.
Do we attack the other continent, still go for MIA, or just turn the settler pump back on and fill out our expansion?
I'm undecided, since I can't sleep and fatigue is addling my brain.
Pentium
Digital Matter
We don't have enough ships to invade the Other Continent right now, so we could make some use of our trait and expand with 2 settler factories and (only?) one GS pump.
Kickbooti
Ecclesia Militans
I think that we had better have a discussion about overall strategy at this point.
We are the leader and our position is, if not secure, then more secure than the other teams. It is time to think about how we are going to win.
What is our greatest threat? We are in a position now to work toward the elimination of that long-range threat.
* If it is the Battle Isle, MIA still seems willing to engage in cooperative military action to reduce our competitors there.
* If it is MIA, 20 turns does nothing except help us create more GS and find an Alpha-Continental partner.
We are by nature a suspicious lot, and walking up to the brink with MIA as we have is going to make them suspect and half-hearted partners with anything less than a long-term peace deal.
If we decide that anyone other than MIA needs to fall first, we should cut that deal. Otherwise, we should trade research, lux, etc., but no renew on the peace deal.
Personally, I like MIA. I think some of their 'bad press' has been a result of our paranoia. I would love to put the hurt on TNT (they just aren't fun), though the Nuts would be fine too.
Anyway, I think we should set our sights on the first oponent to eliminate and then work toward that end.
We are the leader and our position is, if not secure, then more secure than the other teams. It is time to think about how we are going to win.
What is our greatest threat? We are in a position now to work toward the elimination of that long-range threat.
* If it is the Battle Isle, MIA still seems willing to engage in cooperative military action to reduce our competitors there.
* If it is MIA, 20 turns does nothing except help us create more GS and find an Alpha-Continental partner.
We are by nature a suspicious lot, and walking up to the brink with MIA as we have is going to make them suspect and half-hearted partners with anything less than a long-term peace deal.
If we decide that anyone other than MIA needs to fall first, we should cut that deal. Otherwise, we should trade research, lux, etc., but no renew on the peace deal.
Personally, I like MIA. I think some of their 'bad press' has been a result of our paranoia. I would love to put the hurt on TNT (they just aren't fun), though the Nuts would be fine too.
Anyway, I think we should set our sights on the first oponent to eliminate and then work toward that end.
Daghdha
Absent Minded
I think we have to consider what kind of VC we are trying at. Dom would mean settling but if conquest, that is of less importance.....space anyone?
There are a few things to consider short term and long term IMO.
Short term
1. Barb Uprising. Our short term goal should be to farm these barbs for as many GS elites as humanly possible.
Long Term
2. Aggressive settlment of Battle Island. The advantage we have here is map making is in our hands and not in TNT or Donut hands. Their GA's are likely over and any attack against us would activate ours. These properties should be geared towards poaching luxs and resources. Tax and science farms. The negative is logistics. Fortifying these outposts will be difficult especially without full cooperation with MIA.
3. War on our continent. The advantage on our continent is logistics. They are slowly roading to the luxs so roads will be our advantage within the next 20 turns. The disadvantage is time and surprise would likely not be capable.
4. War overseas. There doesn't seem to be any advantage of attacking Donut. They're simply too far away. The advantage of attacking TNT is the creation of a two front war. With our UU and cooperation with MIA to do the same with Donut means we can conquer more territory than MIA could overseas. They don't have the offensive capability we do. Hence more land, tax/science farms. Disadvantage is spreading our troops too thin. It would require full cooperation with MIA through a long term peace treaty and their agreeing to conquer Donut.
Space seems to be an absolute last resort. With our slew of great warmongers I see no reason why we wouldn't fully utilize them.
Short term
1. Barb Uprising. Our short term goal should be to farm these barbs for as many GS elites as humanly possible.
Long Term
2. Aggressive settlment of Battle Island. The advantage we have here is map making is in our hands and not in TNT or Donut hands. Their GA's are likely over and any attack against us would activate ours. These properties should be geared towards poaching luxs and resources. Tax and science farms. The negative is logistics. Fortifying these outposts will be difficult especially without full cooperation with MIA.
3. War on our continent. The advantage on our continent is logistics. They are slowly roading to the luxs so roads will be our advantage within the next 20 turns. The disadvantage is time and surprise would likely not be capable.
4. War overseas. There doesn't seem to be any advantage of attacking Donut. They're simply too far away. The advantage of attacking TNT is the creation of a two front war. With our UU and cooperation with MIA to do the same with Donut means we can conquer more territory than MIA could overseas. They don't have the offensive capability we do. Hence more land, tax/science farms. Disadvantage is spreading our troops too thin. It would require full cooperation with MIA through a long term peace treaty and their agreeing to conquer Donut.
Space seems to be an absolute last resort. With our slew of great warmongers I see no reason why we wouldn't fully utilize them.
I like the idea of pushing our noses onto the other continent before those guys learn how to read maps.
I trust the Whomper's judgement on the logistics issues, so the best call looks to be war with TNT while our little friends to the south play hardball with the D-nuts.
Brinksmanship worked this time, but may not the next time. If we can ring in MIA with KISS towns south of the jungle border that would be the best option.
I trust the Whomper's judgement on the logistics issues, so the best call looks to be war with TNT while our little friends to the south play hardball with the D-nuts.
Brinksmanship worked this time, but may not the next time. If we can ring in MIA with KISS towns south of the jungle border that would be the best option.
Pentium
Digital Matter
I like it too. MIA-KISS treaty prevents them from declaring war as well, so our mission overseas should be safe. We'll also see if they have a hidden aliance with D'nuts.
So we better call Admiral in to build a couple of his wooden flotation devices.
So we better call Admiral in to build a couple of his wooden flotation devices.
The other thought I have is having both MIA and KISS negotiate helping opposite teams.
MIA dialing up TNT saying "would you like us to offer a diversionary force to string out Donut's troops" and we do the same with Donut. The reality would be both of us would be preparing large forces against both. This would require full secrecy between MIA and KISS on what the real intentions are.
Ultimately, the advantage would be ours because we have better offense, more likely GA started, a wonder to go after(not that it's worth much), 5 luxs vs. 3 for MIA and some of the most skilled warmongers a team could construct.
MIA dialing up TNT saying "would you like us to offer a diversionary force to string out Donut's troops" and we do the same with Donut. The reality would be both of us would be preparing large forces against both. This would require full secrecy between MIA and KISS on what the real intentions are.
Ultimately, the advantage would be ours because we have better offense, more likely GA started, a wonder to go after(not that it's worth much), 5 luxs vs. 3 for MIA and some of the most skilled warmongers a team could construct.
Kickbooti
Ecclesia Militans
I've always liked the idea of smacking TNT.
I think Bede's point of aggressive settlement south of the jungle is wise. Even if they barely grow they serve as a 'loosable' ring of minor cities in the eventuality of an MIA war.
I think if we are going for TNT the best thing to do is settle near the fur at the narrows. There is a river for defense and iron for resource deprivation. As the curragh heads north we'll be able to confirm this old data, but a city there could have troops ferried to it. It would attrack TNT's attention and allow for the possiblility of (relatively) unmolested exploration/settlement further south.
Cut the deal with MIA. Give them a 50 - 75 turn peace if this is the desired course of action. Peace is in their benefit, they would honor it.
I think Bede's point of aggressive settlement south of the jungle is wise. Even if they barely grow they serve as a 'loosable' ring of minor cities in the eventuality of an MIA war.
I think if we are going for TNT the best thing to do is settle near the fur at the narrows. There is a river for defense and iron for resource deprivation. As the curragh heads north we'll be able to confirm this old data, but a city there could have troops ferried to it. It would attrack TNT's attention and allow for the possiblility of (relatively) unmolested exploration/settlement further south.
Cut the deal with MIA. Give them a 50 - 75 turn peace if this is the desired course of action. Peace is in their benefit, they would honor it.
Beorn-eL-Feared
Idiot riding pedals
If it is peace, Might I make a point for 2 settler factories at least, with a 3rd city considering strongly to make workers/settlers?
Tubby Rower
Chronic Slacker
b, we could just tell them that if they come on our side of the jungle that we would consider that a declaration of war and get it both ways.
While I hadn't looked at it in a while d'head and Ig'mus are the only two that I would consider pumping out settlers, but I can look at it more tomorrow. I still think that we need a ton of GS. those guys upgrade to MDI for 0G. you can't beat that upgrade cost. I think that we could expand at our current rate and tell MIA to stay on their side of the fence.
While I hadn't looked at it in a while d'head and Ig'mus are the only two that I would consider pumping out settlers, but I can look at it more tomorrow. I still think that we need a ton of GS. those guys upgrade to MDI for 0G. you can't beat that upgrade cost. I think that we could expand at our current rate and tell MIA to stay on their side of the fence.
Beorn-eL-Feared
Idiot riding pedals
Sounds good, although I don't really see why not make more and more settlers, overkill-style 
Pentium
Digital Matter
Because they'll come over and kill us.Beorn-eL-Feared said:
Edit: And they won't do it in style.
Tubby Rower
Chronic Slacker
We're still weak compared with the guys accross the pond. If anything is going to happen over there then we need more troops. We barely have enough to take on MIA so that's my reasoning behind nor more settler pumps, but I could be wrong and unit support costs might dictate that you are correct.
Let's bear in mind the majority of our unit support cost is going to workers. We are coming to a point where some of those can be merged back into cities.
In a human vs. human game I'd rather have too much military and reasonable growth than overgrowth and no military to defend it.
In a human vs. human game I'd rather have too much military and reasonable growth than overgrowth and no military to defend it.
barbslinger
Gun blast'n shot drinker
Wow! Looks like that since war was averted no one has much interest any more.
Similar threads
