Instant War-Weariness

No before and after per se, but I suppose I could show the last anarchy turn and something of what I lost.

The red check marks indicate cities I lost to the English in 2 turns. This is six turns after the first rush, just before anarchy ended.
Spoiler :
LostCities.jpg


I may still lose this, the Maya have now pulled a sneak attack which hasn't succeeded yet, but 50+ Mech Infantry are hard to get rid of with tanks. Maybe I should work toward Modern Armor next.

Edit: Found a before pic:
Spoiler :
BeforeTheWar.jpg
 
They have about twice my culture, but that's unusual for me, a big chunk of my culture came from grabbing the ToA about 5 turns after it was built. The map is standard continents, and I single handedly eliminated 3 civs and helped with 2 others. It was a crowded start with Sumeria and the Hittites in my back pocket, and Germany pretty near. 5 civs on one standard continent is crowded, so somebody had to go. Eventually I will kill off the Maya and have a whole continent with 5 luxes.
 
The problem as I see it, is not the fact TheOverseer714 used republic/tight placement/few defenders.

But a wider, longer term, planning mistake.

Why take that, oversea, difficult to defend territory, while you don't have control of your home continent yet? If you had control of your own continent, you could have used the majority of your troops on the other continent.

Don't take what you can't be sure to keep, unless you don't plan to keep it.
 
It was actually just a sneak attack, and the crust crumbled fast. I guess undefended cities are just too tempting. The RoP was implied, not actual. There was an MPP in place, and there were gettig 3 luxes from me. Just shows to trust no one.

a) You were doing rather well, weren't you, so why are you surprised when the AI decided to challenge you and at odd results? :D :smug:

b) A defender in every town is a Good Thing. Bit of insurance + reserves for combat losses

c) It is you vs the AI and the AI wants to win (sorry, "challenge the human player", cognitive bias on my part ;) ), so you should really think of it as player 1 vs player 2 + player 3... ... + player xy

;)

PS. MAS got it right as usual. Another point - avoid entering MPP and RoP with neighbours. MPP and RoP are fine things if your partners are at least a continent away from you...
 
MPP and RoP are fine things if your partners are at least a continent away from you...
Probably correct about RoP if you follow your point (b) but as I don't agree with you on that one I'll stick to my views of not having RoPs with any civ except in very specific situations that are few and far between.

Why does it matter where the civs are with regard to MPPs? My major issues with them are that I am not in full control over who I fight or when I fight them. They take me into wars where I do not get the benefit of War Fever and yet I could be many turns away from being in a position to take soemthing useful from my new enemy. They can also cause me to declare on my 'friends' when I might have nothing to gain and it may well lead to my trading rep being ruined as well as an instant drop in happiness, loss of income or even the loss of a key strategic resource due to lost trades. MPPs are very rarely anything but Bad News IMO.
 
I'll stick to my views of not having RoPs with any civ except in very specific situations that are few and far between.

Why does it matter where the civs are with regard to MPPs? My major issues with them are that I am not in full control over who I fight or when I fight them. They take me into wars where I do not get the benefit of War Fever and yet I could be many turns away from being in a position to take soemthing useful from my new enemy. They can also cause me to declare on my 'friends' when I might have nothing to gain and it may well lead to my trading rep being ruined as well as an instant drop in happiness, loss of income or even the loss of a key strategic resource due to lost trades. MPPs are very rarely anything but Bad News IMO.

Very good points. Usually, it's no more than the AI's way of getting gpt from you. For that and the reasons you point out, my usual response to an MPP plus RoP proposal is a counterproposal and then the "never mind" option. So far, I haven't noticed any change in AI attitude because of this whereas a flat refusal to their proposal does.
 
Opportunity. I grabbed what I could, not really paying attention to the risks. Besides, the Maya were too tough to go after, it's suicide to attack someone who can swat you like a fly. They had a massive military and I didn't. I'm still not used to Emperor level enemies with their huge troop levels. A 20 city empire with 100+ Mech Infantry, plus bombers and 60+ TOW Infantry is what they have right now and I'm whittling away at them, but it takes 3 tanks per MI to take a city, and that makes slow going. I should have taken them earlier, but I didn't. As far as the MPP, I was hoping that it was a deterrent to the Maya, which I agree was a mistake. I'm still learning at this level, I'm comfortable at Monarch, but have only won a few Emperor-level games. I am playing to learn Emperor tactics, and they are considerably different from Monarch.
 
I have plenty, and I used it well, the Maya are on the brink of extinction. When bombarding cities, I'm getting about 1 hit in 5, so it's taking a bunch of shots to get the armies in there to take it. Civil defenses are giving red-lined Mech Infantries a decent shot against my Tank armies, so I keep having to stop and heal my armies before grabbing another city. The English are being a pain, attacking at random with their bombers. I did sink one carrier group, but they have others. I'm wondering, is a tactical nuke fatal to ships, or does it just damage them?
 
I have plenty, and I used it well, the Maya are on the brink of extinction. When bombarding cities, I'm getting about 1 hit in 5, so it's taking a bunch of shots to get the armies in there to take it. Civil defenses are giving red-lined Mech Infantries a decent shot against my Tank armies, so I keep having to stop and heal my armies before grabbing another city. The English are being a pain, attacking at random with their bombers. I did sink one carrier group, but they have others. I'm wondering, is a tactical nuke fatal to ships, or does it just damage them?

Guess I should have known better than to ask. :)

Another (obvious) question: do you use your Arty before sending in the Bombers?

I'm wondering, is a tactical nuke fatal to ships, or does it just damage them?

I imagine that it's the same as when you use them against ground units - half will be destroyed instantly, the remainder will receive damage, so you would probably need to use a couple to sink a stack.
 
My bombers kept getting shot down, so I invested in more artillery. My bombers are mostly anti-shipping, but even that is difficult as the AI knows where they are and bomb them immediately. What realy gets me is my fighters refuse to intercept them, and my Mobile SAMS never fire. Why don't these things do what they are supposed to do?
 
What realy gets me is my fighters refuse to intercept them, and my Mobile SAMS never fire. Why don't these things do what they are supposed to do?

In my experience they do, although it sounds like your fighters are being bombed before you can set them to intercept; they are always vulnerable for a turn when they have just been built or re-based.

One tactic which you might try, is to leave a stack of units in the open and within bomber range, making sure you have a few SAM's in the stack; I had a similar problem in my last game, and this tactic worked well.
 
I can see why you got attacked here. I don't know about the part about getting attacked because you had cities in between enemy lands. I certainly would have put some defense in my city, but probably a lot less than you think. Case-in-point... perhaps this doesn't apply due to some other patch of the game... although I doubt it... I downloaded a patch for the latest COTM in conquests..., I just completed an emperor-level game with the Maya where I basically had two warriors... yes *warriors* in every town *from basically the beginning until I discovered replaceable parts* (most aggressive setting for AIs). Yes, basically any intelligent player would have regarded my entire civlization as a sitting duck for centuries. I didn't get attacked and had NO wars throughout the whole game (no reloads for this... though I did reload once or twice in the ancient era due to not watching Chichen Itza closely enough). I probably would have upgraded to swordsman or medieval infantry, but didn't found a town with iron or could trade for it until the high middle ages.. then my iron source depleted a turn or two later. I did trade for it, but still didn't upgrade and didn't get attacked.

I did this basically through some strategies I've read around here about keeping the AI happy and using some tips I picked up from Drakan's "how to win on deity, builder style" article. I played my emperor game on a standard sized map. I had RoPs with EVERYONE, and traded for gpt as much as I could (and traded for luxuries, of course)... sometimes selling technology. I rarely gave gold away to keep AIs happy, except at the very beginning when no AI could afford a gpt. You had no RoP... it could have actually helped though... for the situation with the English. Although, perhaps not all too much, especially looking at your game. A RoP will improve your reputation as long as it stays in effect. Of course, the downside of such comes as that an AI might easily war with and defeat someone you don't want them to, and that you would severely damage your reputation if you attacked someone while it stays in effect. From the looks of your game though it seems like you had quite a few wars throughout the earlier game, long before you know where your resources lied, along with some genocides. So, even though I don't really play this way... I ask... why didn't you just keep going and go for domination or conquest?

You also said that you wanted a space race victory. Perhaps you didn't decide this from the beginning, so perhaps I say the following in vain. From what I've read, for that type of victory you want to have a high tech rate, and slow down the AI. I don't know how to provoke two AIs to fight with each other, but if you want to have a high tech rate, I certainly don't see a need to conquer more land and increase corruption... at least in most cases. With a space race victory goal, personally, I wouldn't even start a war for coal or oil. I'd only start a war for aluminum, uranium, or rubber to build those SS parts... and then *only* fight offensively to take those resources. The rest of the time I'd fight defensively. Although, maybe one would need coal in some games. Maybe you just started playing without a victory condition in mind. Nice game... and thanks for posting.
 
Since I'm not up in any SG's, I can probably post a more recent save tonight and maybe by then the Maya extinction will be confirmed. I am also nearly there with my spaceship, just need 4 more techs and 5 more parts and maybe I'll be launching around 1900AD. Revenge on England might just be build a bunch of ICBM's and blast them to pieces:evil:
 
Here are 3 representative saves from this game, I think. Here are 2 pics, I will put more in tomorrow evening.

Great news!
Spoiler :
MayaDestroyed.jpg


Someone is nuts!
Spoiler :
MilitariesCompared.jpg
 
Someone is nuts!
Spoiler :
MilitariesCompared.jpg

I would be interested in hearing what your Adviser is thinking about. he appears to be giving major points for those defensive units which I have always heard that they don't 'really' count.

I'm pulling for you to come through on this one.
 
If I were still Republic, I might scrap them, but as a commie I can build 200 more units before paying upkeep. Plus, I'm a sentimental fool:p I still have some Dromons...
 
Top Bottom