Inlightened Imperialist Party

[Man'O'Action]

I think the current goals are stellar, and that is why I was pleased to join this party.

My only comment is that our platform should contain a strong pro-growth, pro-food statement to encourage our population to rise quickly and take full advantage of the property that we control as soon as possible.

Goal:
10. To make our nation the dominate body of population through promotion of explosive population growth.

Explanation:
10. For our stated goals of controlling the U.N. as well as quickly taking full advantage of the territories we already possess.


Thoughts anyone?

 

[Piparoo]

Excellent points Man 'O' Action and welcome to the party!

Cheers!

PS
Pip is a boy! and he likes to hang around and watch while we're playing Civ

 

[Slim_Chance]

I don't know why it wouldn't let me post earlier, trying again.

Mike I think you got some good ideas here, this is what the Convention is supposed to be for. My comments in blue

1a. We expand as fast as possible to gather as many resources as possible.
1b. If we are at war, we destroy their military resources (horses, copper, oil) first. good as a rule but somtimes we might not be in a position to do that.
2a. We research religions first. that depends on where we start
2b. We want a leader that starts with Mysticism. I think random is the current consensus
2c. If we are at war, we capture their holy cities first. Good idea, but only if feasible and we don't start Wars with our allies just for Holy Cities
3a. We do not convert to any other civilization's religion.
3b. We convert other civilizations to our religion through missionaries .
4a. We expand to control chokepoints whenever there's no resource-rich alternatives.
4b. If we are at war, we capture chokepoints second (after holy cities).I think that should depend on their locations
5a. If a war between rival civilizations does not benefit us, we stop it. agree
5b. We ensure no civilization lags too far behind the others in tech or military force. Weak prey invites jackals. I could argue either side
6a. We do not initiate wars with other civilizations unless they actively stop our expansion or our missionaries. we are imperial so there could be other reasons
6b. We do not stop wars until the rival civilization will give us something to stop it. that should be on a war by war basis
7a. We will research and build the U.N.
7b. We will have enough allies to be elected Secretary General of the U.N.
8a. We will not ask a civilization to go to war with our enemy unless we already are. We will not have other civilizations do our dirty work.Piparoo is right I think we should be opportunistic
8b. We will not use nukes.
8c. We will not send spies into rival civilizations' territory unless we are at war with them.we should use them to gain knowledge but not to steal or break things.
9a. If we are not at war, our forces will scour the countryside for barbarians, kill them and conquer their towns.

These opinions are my own as a member not official policy as an Elder

the Old One

 

[Slim_Chance]

Goal:
10. To make our nation the dominate body of population through promotion of explosive population growth.

Explanation:
10. For our stated goals of controlling the U.N. as well as quickly taking full advantage of the territories we already possess.

This is definitely going on the ballot.

 

[Slim_Chance]

just keep in mind that narrowing down our goals also narrows our range of different tactics.

We do need to watch out for that.

I totally disagree on the idee of sharing knowledge to such an extend that everybody has the same power.

We don't want them to be equal with all other civs or us, but we do not want them so weak that other nations start attacking them, unless that is to our advantage.

That also stands in contradiction to our imperialistic goals
We should stop wars when the necessity is givin, which means when we have aquired our goals or war are not affordable anymore in terms of economy or diplomatic backset

Also. We are not necessarily a religious party. Therefore we should not just lean our strategies towards the goal of aquirering ALL holy cities. Maybe in the Long run but keep in mind that we need Allies, Allies that a strong and helpful. What happends if they have accidently decided to choose a different religion due to the fact that they dumb

It depends entirely who has the Holy Cities and where they are.

an Old Man

 

[Pegasus_wings]

I would like to nominate Mike Lemmer for Elder.

 

[Alphawolf]

Welcome to the Party Man'O'Action. Slim will be handling all of the Convention items. I will rarely check on the thread for the next couple of days so if anyone needs me to look at something or update a post to include a new member, just PM me. Happy posting.

-the Wolf

 

[Man'O'Action]

I agree that the sub-points are beneficial for the sake of clarity similar to the code of laws clarifying the main points of the constitution.

What do people think of the sub-points being amendable at a later date in case they prove to be restrictive?


Slim's comments in blue
Man'O'Action's comments in red


1a. We expand as fast as possible to gather as many resources as possible. ; Amen
1b. If we are at war, we destroy their military resources (horses, copper, oil) first. good as a rule but somtimes we might not be in a position to do that.; I agree with Slim
2a. We research religions first. that depends on where we start; I agree with Slim
2b. We want a leader that starts with Mysticism. I think random is the current consensus; Random I say.
2c. If we are at war, we capture their holy cities first. Good idea, but only if feasible and we don't start Wars with our allies just for Holy CitiesI agree with Slim
3a. We do not convert to any other civilization's religion. ; Amen
3b. We convert other civilizations to our religion through missionaries .; Amen
4a. We expand to control chokepoints whenever there's no resource-rich alternatives. ; Amen
4b. If we are at war, we capture chokepoints second (after holy cities).I think that should depend on their locations; I believe this is an opportunity based decision.
5a. If a war between rival civilizations does not benefit us, we stop it. agree; Amen
5b. We ensure no civilization lags too far behind the others in tech or military force. Weak prey invites jackals. I could argue either side; I fail to see that value of this. If a nation is incapable of keeping up with the world and is mismanaging it's land. We have not only the right, but the responsibility to assume control of it's assests as quickly as can be reasonably accomplished.
6a. We do not initiate wars with other civilizations unless they actively stop our expansion or our missionaries. we are imperial so there could be other reasons ; I agree with Slim. Wars are much too individual to lay down constricting bylaws.
6b. We do not stop wars until the rival civilization will give us something to stop it. that should be on a war by war basis; Once again, I'm with Slim here.
7a. We will research and build the U.N. ; Amen
7b. We will have enough allies to be elected Secretary General of the U.N. ; Amen
8a. We will not ask a civilization to go to war with our enemy unless we already are. We will not have other civilizations do our dirty work.Piparoo is right I think we should be opportunistic; Agreeing with Slip and Pip
8b. We will not use nukes. I do not think we should rule out these sorts of options. Nukes can be used responsibly and I think they should be a valid part of our strategy. Not used on a regular basis naturally, but not ruled out in the party platform.
8c. We will not send spies into rival civilizations' territory unless we are at war with them.we should use them to gain knowledge but not to steal or break things.; I think that all aspects of spies have their uses, and like nukes should not be ruled out.
9a. If we are not at war, our forces will scour the countryside for barbarians, kill them and conquer their towns. ; Amen to that for certain. Heh, sorta like the global war on terror, only without the stinging public backlash.

 

[Alphawolf]

What do people think of the sub-points being amendable at a later date in case they prove to be restrictive?

I think it goes without saying, modifying goals is in the first post, and I'll change it to include sub-points, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

-the Wolf

 

[Tboy]

Nominating self as elder. I would like to help this party to go forward.

A few of my main points I will push for:

Spies should be an option to use always when we are at war, and only in peace if they are an enemy (gone to war in past, bad relations, e.t.c.).

Only use nukes in war if the enemy is particularly troublesome and is difficult, if not virtually impossible, to beat without them.

Try to found at least one religion minimum and spread it to at least one city per faction, in order to plant a seed for the religion so it can grow.

Do not betray our allies on grounds of just wanting short term gain, have a reason, for example they are not of our state religion.

Place cities for important resources first, productivity second, as our survival and growth will depend on grabbing valuable resources first.

There they are. If you have any questions for me, please post. Goodbye for now, and PAX BRITANNIA!

 

[Gloriana]

I think Mike put in some pretty good, and some pretty obvious points. I mean, if we want to be elected Secretary-General of the UN it is in your best of interests to actually build it of course

Other than that I think we should keep our goals pretty broad, so we can indeed adopt different strategies, tuned to whatever situation we find ourselves in. I like being pragmatic, and being flexible is what allows for the best opportunity to be just that.

Especially in war we should be careful. If we say we will not end war under any circumstance unless offered something, that could be our doom if we feel we might not be able to beat our opponent(s). Rather than that, I'm in favour of judging each situation separately. If we are at war for example, and both parties have quite a number of troops that could do considerable damage, perhaps it is wiser to accept peace on an equal basis (peace for peace, nothing else on the table) so as to prevent the damage that could be done.

I do believe in honour though and I do believe we should not use nukes. In absence of embassies I think we are allowed to send spies into enemy territory to gather information but not to sabotage. We could call it an official 'state visit'

In short, my idea for our party is: pragmatism in acquiring our goals.

 

[Mike Lemmer]

Perhaps some guidelines for war would be an acceptable compromise.

 

[Alphawolf]

Perhaps some guidelines for war would be an acceptable compromise.

Great idea Mike.

pragmatism in acquiring our goals.

How true.

I don't Nukes will be that big of a deal, we have to get through the rest of the game to get them. We have lot's of time to discuss .

-the Wolf

 

[Slim_Chance]

Sorry for being so late getting back about I had to attend a college football game (American) on Saturday and being as old as I am I don't travel well and had to go to Knoxville on Friday. The game was great; Vanderbilt (Nashville) beat UT (Knoxville) for the first time in 22 years. Alpha your location says Nashville so were you as happy as I was that the Doors won.

Old Man

 

[Slim_Chance]

Perhaps some guidelines for war would be an acceptable compromise.

I think that that is the best I idea.

All Members need to see this:

I have decided to not close the discussion on Party rules until after we get our two new Elder.
The floor will be closed for nominations at 12:00PM (Noon) CST, that’s 6:00 PM GMT or 18:00 depending on your reckoning.

I will have a post of what so far has been brought up for the ballot by Monday.

An Old Man

 

[Knightlancer]

Slim it's great that we're finally getting this show on the road.

I am definitely for Piparoo's Pip to be the mascot, as Slim said the Basileus is a wolf (or thinks he is anyway ) so the dog's great and Pip the dog is just so d*mn great for a mascot.

-KL

 

[Alphawolf]

Alpha your location says Nashville so were you as happy as I was that the Doors won.

No, I attend UTK so I had mixed feelings on it especially that botched ref call in the 1st quarter.

-the Wolf

 

[Stilgar08]

Thanks for the welcome and sorry for not being around a lot lately... Have been too busy. Therefore I'm not running for a position as elder (this time ).
I agree on nukes-plenty of time to discuss it... (Personally I'm against it! )


Concerning the other stuff:

1a. We expand as fast as possible to gather as many resources as possible. ; Amen
1b. If we are at war, we destroy their military resources (horses, copper, oil) first. good as a rule but somtimes we might not be in a position to do that.; I agree with Slim

Agreed. We shouldn't be too strict about this issue. It would limit our flexibility, e.g. sometimes it might be better to hunt down wounded foe-units instead of using turns to get to that iron first...

2a. We research religions first. that depends on where we start; I agree with Slim

agreed

2b. We want a leader that starts with Mysticism. I think random is the current consensus.

I disagree. Let's play with what comes up.. Random would be ok but I like expansionistic and philosophical civs best. I take what comes!

2c. If we are at war, we capture their holy cities first. Good idea, but only if feasible and we don't start Wars with our allies just for Holy CitiesI agree with Slim

Wouldn't it be better to smash the enemy wherever we can??

3a. We do not convert to any other civilization's religion. ; Amen

This is also true if we don't have our own religion yet, but one or 2 of our cities convert to the religion of one of our neighbours? In that case we should agree to make this the state-religion until we have our own religion (=our own holy city - by tech or force )

3b. We convert other civilizations to our religion through missionaries .; Amen
4a. We expand to control chokepoints whenever there's no resource-rich alternatives. ; Amen
4b. If we are at war, we capture chokepoints second (after holy cities).I think that should depend on their locations; I believe this is an opportunity based decision.

AMen, but chokepoints first, I'd say...

5a. If a war between rival civilizations does not benefit us, we stop it. agree; Amen

Should we really? We should make that decision depending on how our relations towards the civs who are at war are, don't you think?? If no friends are involved let them bleed I say! How about: If we are in a position to do so and if the civ in question is not a declared,"direct" enemy we support the loosing side in a war in order to keep it around longer or to weaken the stronger civs engaged in this war. (was that understandable? Sorry for any confusion caused here )

5b. We ensure no civilization lags too far behind the others in tech or military force. Weak prey invites jackals. I could argue either side; I fail to see that value of this. If a nation is incapable of keeping up with the world and is mismanaging it's land. We have not only the right, but the responsibility to assume control of it's assests as quickly as can be reasonably accomplished.
6a. We do not initiate wars with other civilizations unless they actively stop our expansion or our missionaries. we are imperial so there could be other reasons ; I agree with Slim. Wars are much too individual to lay down constricting bylaws.
6b. We do not stop wars until the rival civilization will give us something to stop it. that should be on a war by war basis; Once again, I'm with Slim here.

agreed on all the comments!

7a. We will research and build the U.N. ; Amen

Yep!

7b. We will have enough allies to be elected Secretary General of the U.N. ; Amen
8a. We will not ask a civilization to go to war with our enemy unless we already are. We will not have other civilizations do our dirty work.Piparoo is right I think we should be opportunistic; Agreeing with Slip and Pip
8b. We will not use nukes. I do not think we should rule out these sorts of options. Nukes can be used responsibly and I think they should be a valid part of our strategy. Not used on a regular basis naturally, but not ruled out in the party platform.

agreed on the comments!

8c. We will not send spies into rival civilizations' territory unless we are at war with them.we should use them to gain knowledge but not to steal or break things.; I think that all aspects of spies have their uses, and like nukes should not be ruled out.
9a. If we are not at war, our forces will scour the countryside for barbarians, kill them and conquer their towns. ; Amen to that for certain. Heh, sorta like the global war on terror, only without the stinging public backlash.

Agreed!

Oh, btw, there should be a poll! Has this been decided yet?

Cheers, Stilgar

 

[uubry]

Aye, there should be a poll

 

[Alphawolf]

There will be polls; the first will be for Elders I'll put if up Wednesday, after the nominations are closed. It will run for 7 days. Slim who is in charge of the discussion will send me the list of what has been brought up and needs a poll Sunday night and I'll have those up on next Monday, they will also be up for a week. SLIM is in charge of the discussion so direct all questions to him.

-the Wolf