Grandmaster
Deity
FWWKYAF..... sounds good...... maybe an elite Special Force later in the game?
Discussion: A long term policy for Fanatika.
- Thread starter Eklektikos
- Start date
neutral leader
governor of bohemia
the "fwikyaf" pronounciation sounds good to me. its certainly easier to say than doing each letter individually. but that wasnt the point of my post! 
Myartar
Yeah, I'm back
That's what YOU want us to be and even tho that's the bonus we get in the game, it doesn't have to be who we are. I believe we should determine our own idenity by our actions, and to me, that's the point of this conversation. To say "We're militaristic, so lets attack" is just a lame arguement.
Now if the fact that we recieve a militaristic bonus means we MUST play that style, why are we even discussing this?
Shaitan
der Besucher
No, what I said was we picked Germany to be our representative civ because they are militaristic and scientific with an excellent UU. If we wanted a non-militaristic path a different civ would have been selected.
Myartar
Yeah, I'm back
Then I'm right in assuming that this discussion is pointless. If we have a clear cut long term policy of militarism, we're wasteing sever space w/ this thread, aren't we?
Eklektikos
Eponymous
Are you accusing the President with the lowest postcount in demogame history of spamming up the fora, Myartar?
Yes, I personally agree with Shaitan that the fact that we chose such a great warmongering Civ as the template for our nation, combined with the difficulty setting, should have implied that the majority of the citizenry were interested in using more aggressive & militaristic strategies than in the previous demogame. However, from the way things have been playing out so far it's obvious that we still have a very significant faction who want to make Fanatika a second Phoenatica by playing to the same formula as before, so I felt that this discussion was necessary to decide the issue once and for all.
Myartar, in your original post in this thread you pointed out that "as any experenced player will tell you that you can w/ with a peaceful or defensive strategy even with a militaristic civ". I agree with you, as I have agreed with Zur before, that yes it is possible for an individual to win with such an approach - but will again point out that this requires a decisiveness and accuracy which we cannot hope to achieve with a group that encompasses such a wide range of playing styles and levels of Civ3 experience. As such, I think that playing aggressively and weakening our enemies offer us the greatest chance for victory in this game.
Grandmaster
Deity
Ditto, Mr. President. That's where a dictatorship (or solo game) has an advantage over a demogame: with so many different kidns of people and the arguing that ensues, it is impossible for us to focus well enough to make the surgically precise decisions necessary to win at this level without going to war. Plus let's not forget that regardless of popular opinion, the President is still the one who makes the moves and slip-second decisions. When it comes down to (forgive the military analogy) small unit tactics as opposed to large unit strategics, we have to take into account the individual President's skills. If we have a President who is skilled in military action but has never won a Cultural Victory, we know that at least for a while Perfect Peace is impossible, much as a President who has never fought a war in his or her Civ career would have a better chance of successfully leading us through peace than through a world war. For now, it would seem that Ekelktikos is a warrior, and as such for now it would appear to me to make sense that we follow a warlike strategy. This may change later on, but for now I still advocate an agressive posture and startegy of bullying and militant expansion against our neighbors. Until somebody sets up a Despotism Game, I doubt we will have the clarity or unity to win against such strong AI with a peaceful demeanor.
Zarn
Le Républicain Catholique
Sometimes war is needed to bring prosperity to a nation. Peace won't get us anywhere on this level.
Myartar
Yeah, I'm back
First, I believe Eklektikos got my point. I wasn't arguing that we should be completely peaceful, I was arguing that the militaristic trait of the Germans doesn't HAVE TO be our trait. Guess that got lost in my arguements, but thank you Eklektikos and Grandmaster for stating points that have reasoning behind them.
Now as I said in my first post in this thread, I do believe we should take the offensive here early. If we can get ourselves a good power base, we can dig in while keeping up a defensive military. The doves will get what they want by us not taking offensive action, but the warmongers will get what they like b/c we know this AI will attack, hence the need for a good defensive military. We can achieve this balance and it's the best way to keep a majority of people happy and still hope to win.
Now as I said in my first post in this thread, I do believe we should take the offensive here early. If we can get ourselves a good power base, we can dig in while keeping up a defensive military. The doves will get what they want by us not taking offensive action, but the warmongers will get what they like b/c we know this AI will attack, hence the need for a good defensive military. We can achieve this balance and it's the best way to keep a majority of people happy and still hope to win.
Shaitan
der Besucher
That sounds emminently sensible to me.
Grandmaster
Deity
Yes, it does sound sensible. We go on the offensive against Azteca to cut out one possible rival later on, and to build our power base. I would also say that we should perhaps use the momentum of the victory to also launch not a full scale invasion but rather a crippling first strike against Japan beofre we reach the Middle Ages and they get their Samari. With 2 of our most aggressive enemies gone, we could back into a startegy of building ourselves up peacefully while stockpiling a huge defensive military. Personally, I would prefer to stockpile an offensive army and not use, so that we could launch a counterattack and follow-on offensive should an enemy attack be eminent, however, conventional wisdom would probably prefer a strong defensive force dug in with good fortifications. Either one would work.
neutral leader
governor of bohemia
this ravenous lust for aztec blood disturbs me.
Grandmaster
Deity
As it should. No war is ever a good war, but sometimes it is necessary to establish a powerful nation on the world stage. I feel that we have no choice to but to annex Azteca to our land, or else surrender now to being a second-class civilization. We can't hope to expand and grow as quickly as is necessary without taking Monte's territory at the tip of a sword. I no more wish to have Aztec blood on my hands than you do, but we have to do what we have to do. The Empire comes first before personal ideals.
neutral leader
governor of bohemia
does a nation whos life demands human sacrifice in an offensive strike deserve its survival? just a thought.
Eklektikos
Eponymous
In higher level Civ, survival is its own justification. If we survive and go on to victory then, no matter what strategy we used to achieve that, we will have deserved it.
Grandmaster
Deity
Eklek is right. The point of the game is to survive and win, not be Mr. Warm-Fuzzy-Lets-Hug-Our-Armed-Neighbors. We do not play to lose, we play to win. Like I said, the Empire comes first. Once we are sure of victory, we can fool around with any petty ideals we feel like. However, for now we live in a cutthroat world.
Shaitan
der Besucher
Interesting question. The Aztecs practice human sacrifice. We are required to destroy them, yes?
Eklektikos
Eponymous
I thought about bringing that up as well, but was feeling in a more Nietzschean mood when I posted
Anyway, since this discussion seems to have ceased going anywhere remotely new I think today is the day to post a poll proposal. One will therefore follow (relatively) shortly.
Eklektikos
Eponymous
Poll question: Which of the paths proposed in the first post should Fanatika follow?
Poll Options:
The Way of Peace
The Road to War
Abstain
Proposals:
1. The Way of Peace
We prioritise internal infrastructure such as libraries, temples, marketplaces, etc, and attempt to build any Wonders by using conventional pre-building techniques. We try to maintain friendly relations with our neighbours through trade and other peaceful agreements, and adopt an aggressive posture only when under threat of attack. Our prefered governments are Republic & Democracy, and our ultimate goal is a cultural, diplomatic or spaceship win.
2. The Road to War
We prioritise all things military such as units, barracks, etc, will attempt to rush any Great Wonders with Great Leaders or capture them from other civs. We will regularly declare war on our neighbours, and attempt to capture cities and extort as much research and gold from them as possible. We will not as a rule wipe them out, but leave them around so as to come back and repeat the process. Our prefered government is Monarchy, and our ultimate goal is to achieve any victory condition other than diplomatic, for all the other options may still be open to us for some time to come.
Poll duration: 72 hours or until quorum is reached - whichever is the later.
Poll Options:
The Way of Peace
The Road to War
Abstain
Proposals:
1. The Way of Peace
We prioritise internal infrastructure such as libraries, temples, marketplaces, etc, and attempt to build any Wonders by using conventional pre-building techniques. We try to maintain friendly relations with our neighbours through trade and other peaceful agreements, and adopt an aggressive posture only when under threat of attack. Our prefered governments are Republic & Democracy, and our ultimate goal is a cultural, diplomatic or spaceship win.
2. The Road to War
We prioritise all things military such as units, barracks, etc, will attempt to rush any Great Wonders with Great Leaders or capture them from other civs. We will regularly declare war on our neighbours, and attempt to capture cities and extort as much research and gold from them as possible. We will not as a rule wipe them out, but leave them around so as to come back and repeat the process. Our prefered government is Monarchy, and our ultimate goal is to achieve any victory condition other than diplomatic, for all the other options may still be open to us for some time to come.
Poll duration: 72 hours or until quorum is reached - whichever is the later.
Eklektikos
Eponymous
I'm sure a lot of you thought I'd forgotten all about this
I had originally wanted to get the poll up earlier in the term, but I also wanted it to go up around the time of the Aztec war. As the war kept getting pushed back so did this issue, but I think the time is right (if not a bit overdue) for the nation to make this decision. Feel free to post any comments, suggestions or criticisms you have relating to the above poll proposal.
I had originally wanted to get the poll up earlier in the term, but I also wanted it to go up around the time of the Aztec war. As the war kept getting pushed back so did this issue, but I think the time is right (if not a bit overdue) for the nation to make this decision. Feel free to post any comments, suggestions or criticisms you have relating to the above poll proposal.
