LK168, Greece, Sid Attempt
- Thread starter LKendter
- Start date
Very good turn set. 
Looks to me that if Mongol had not declared on us you would have finished off India.
Also, nice to see you that counting the Steamrollers finishing this turn you more than doubled our Steamroller count. My goal is to have more than 50 Steamrollers in service by the end of my turn set. Maybe even an equal number of Tanks
In the southwest the Japanese town of Sapporo is bordering our city of Pharsalos. We do not have any trade deals with Japan. Any objection if I extend our border, by adding Japan to the list of nations at war with us, and annex Sapporo?
I got it.
Looks to me that if Mongol had not declared on us you would have finished off India.
Also, nice to see you that counting the Steamrollers finishing this turn you more than doubled our Steamroller count. My goal is to have more than 50 Steamrollers in service by the end of my turn set. Maybe even an equal number of Tanks
In the southwest the Japanese town of Sapporo is bordering our city of Pharsalos. We do not have any trade deals with Japan. Any objection if I extend our border, by adding Japan to the list of nations at war with us, and annex Sapporo?
I got it.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 19,157
We can't afford many more Steamrollers. I was almost out of cities with undeveloped tiles being used. We can't afford to many more. What ever you do please DON'T take away productive citizens working good tiles.
As for the tanks, I really don't want to head to all military production yet. One of the bad things with so many techs at once is that all cities still need buildings. I really want to finish the stray buildings before full blown war production.
Our science rate sucks, and I really want those last science multiplier buildings up. We can't afford to lose any citizens working good tiles.
Do we really want another potential distraction? Is one city worth another war?
Very early in the set tease
(actually my first turn)
For the next 2 turns I am going to concentrate on landscaping while letting the Mongols get more involved with the Incas before I start annexing their cities.
(actually my first turn)
If the city was owned by someone on our landmass even one the more backward nations like Turkey I would not consider it. I don't see it as a big distraction and we could probably make peace about when my turn set ends. Actually, I am also considering annexing Chicago, so that our border is continuous from the east coast up to Brazil.
For the next 2 turns I am going to concentrate on landscaping while letting the Mongols get more involved with the Incas before I start annexing their cities.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 19,157
Hmmm....
Without combat settlers, I'm not sure how India died in one turn. I already had a good chunk of troops sitting in the ice city area. My only guess is the stack of elites I was using for leader finish all rushed the borders.
For the Mongolia war: If we can get rails a bit close to the borders, that would help.
Without combat settlers, I'm not sure how India died in one turn. I already had a good chunk of troops sitting in the ice city area. My only guess is the stack of elites I was using for leader finish all rushed the borders.
For the Mongolia war: If we can get rails a bit close to the borders, that would help.
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
I'm on board with taking Sapporo. As for Chicago...eh, IMO it's not worth the worker turns to connect the rails.
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
I mean, we'll want to take it eventually, yes. But...taking Chicago will require 6 roading crews and 6 rail crews -- more than enough to connect Tsetserleg, Erdenet, and Arequipa as we conquer them. Is it worth delaying the Mongolian conquest? We can drop 2-3 "space-filler" cities near end-of-game if we don't quite get that third border expansion. We'll need to conquer part of the other continent either way, so maybe it means we hit domination 1 turn earlier?
Edit: But I bet this is academic and we'll find that @Jersey Joe has already annexed it!
Edit: But I bet this is academic and we'll find that @Jersey Joe has already annexed it!
Last edited:
Actual, Elephantium's comment about how many worker turns it would take to capture Chicago made me put that plan aside. We have so many unroaded tiles being worked that I could not justify to myself diverting landscaping teams to the capture of Chicago. There is a road that covers most of the distance to Chicago. I am landscaping our cities instead.
I volunteered some Infantry to guard the approaches to Bengal and Lahore and set the elites up to attack those 2 cities on the next turn.
I wonder why that stack of elite troops was hanging around by Athens playing cards and drinking.
I volunteered some Infantry to guard the approaches to Bengal and Lahore and set the elites up to attack those 2 cities on the next turn.
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
JJ, did you ever read Glen Cook's Black Company series?
They played SOOO many hands of Tonk!
I wonder why that stack of elite troops was hanging around by Athens playing cards and drinking.
They played SOOO many hands of Tonk!
Actually, I do not recall every hearing about the series or seeing it in a bookstore. I did a quick on-line check and it looks like something I might like to read.
If my library is accommodating, I should be reading it next week and finishing the series in short order.
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
Just a little past mid set teaser and question to follow:
I Chicago's reprieve is over. It is guarded by a Spearman, looks like a chance for the lawyers to go fishing.
Question is who is our next target?
None of the potential targets has much gold so we will not get rich off them.
Turkey is out of consideration since we have no direct route to reach them.
Israel is easy to reach and we have no current trades with them.
Inca and Spain are also easy to reach, our Trade deals end in 5 turns with them.
I traded with Scandinavia and Brazil early in my turn set not realizing how quickly Mongolia was going to collapse.
I have no real preference between Israel or waiting and going for the Inca followed by Spain.
I will need 2-3 turns to pacify all the resistors in Mongols cities.
Also, waiting 5 turns gives us a chance to add more troops.
I have not seen any Inca mounted troops and the best infantry I saw was a Villista.
I Chicago's reprieve is over. It is guarded by a Spearman, looks like a chance for the lawyers to go fishing.
Question is who is our next target?
None of the potential targets has much gold so we will not get rich off them.
Turkey is out of consideration since we have no direct route to reach them.
Israel is easy to reach and we have no current trades with them.
Inca and Spain are also easy to reach, our Trade deals end in 5 turns with them.
I traded with Scandinavia and Brazil early in my turn set not realizing how quickly Mongolia was going to collapse.
I have no real preference between Israel or waiting and going for the Inca followed by Spain.
I will need 2-3 turns to pacify all the resistors in Mongols cities.
Also, waiting 5 turns gives us a chance to add more troops.
I have not seen any Inca mounted troops and the best infantry I saw was a Villista.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 19,157
Interesting the the picture shows radio being researched. Looks like we traded / stole Atomic Theory. One good thing is combat settlers / new cities can come from Mongolian population. Cash is lower, but from my set, but still plenty of rush setters with.
I was already planning on Israel next. There was a reason I wasn't trading with them.
At this point I would avoid trading with another nearby civ in case it takes < 20 turns for a kill. Whoever is to the left of Israel is the 2nd target.
Breaks between wars also give us time to concentrate workers on tile development. Athens was the ONLY city I had at 100% railed at the end of my turn. Worker turns to drop a few new cities in is also good. We want to fill in gaps where ever we can toward domination status. You mention military, but our cities also need time for the last buildings to get up. I still had a lot of cities that didn't even get cheap barracks / farms built. I *really* want hospitals before we start peeling settlers from the core.
Sadly, all the money is on the other continent. Only with playing games with Maghreb can we steal some of that.
I'm shocked Mongolia collapsed so fast. I saw a LOT of troops from them. There was a reason I played the MPP game with the Inca. I guess the Inca burned up a lot more troops than expected.
I was already planning on Israel next. There was a reason I wasn't trading with them.
At this point I would avoid trading with another nearby civ in case it takes < 20 turns for a kill. Whoever is to the left of Israel is the 2nd target.
Breaks between wars also give us time to concentrate workers on tile development. Athens was the ONLY city I had at 100% railed at the end of my turn. Worker turns to drop a few new cities in is also good. We want to fill in gaps where ever we can toward domination status. You mention military, but our cities also need time for the last buildings to get up. I still had a lot of cities that didn't even get cheap barracks / farms built. I *really* want hospitals before we start peeling settlers from the core.
Last edited:
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
Great progress! I'm happy with Israel next, then Inca, then Spain. Egypt is NW of Israel, mostly on their island. I'd be inclined to wait on taking that island; we'll need to build an invasion fleet in Lisht and grind through large stacks of defenders.
We should def stop all trades on our continent. There aren't actually that many AI civs left to absorb: Scandinavia, Turkey, and Brazil own most of the south -- once we have them, all that remain are a few one-off cities from the other continent.
I think it's worth starting our invasion fleet for the other continent, too. 20 turns of prep starting now means we don't have an awkward pause where we own our continent and have a large army sitting idle, waiting on transports.
Who do we want to target for our initial landings? Japan? Persia?
We should def stop all trades on our continent. There aren't actually that many AI civs left to absorb: Scandinavia, Turkey, and Brazil own most of the south -- once we have them, all that remain are a few one-off cities from the other continent.
I think it's worth starting our invasion fleet for the other continent, too. 20 turns of prep starting now means we don't have an awkward pause where we own our continent and have a large army sitting idle, waiting on transports.
Who do we want to target for our initial landings? Japan? Persia?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 19,157
A backwards civ close to Athens would be the best choice.
Elephantium
Malcolm was a very good cat.
Closest to Athens would be Japan. Are they backwards enough?
We could maybe drop a landing city between Japan and Britain to use as a staging point...hmm...
Edit: From position, we could stage landings against the following:
Japan,Arabia, Korea, or China
Or, if we set up boats on the western shore:
Maghreb, Australia, Poland, or South Africa.
From the 1864 save, thestruck civs are in the Industrial age, so they're poor targets. The others range from Napoleonic to Imperialism as the top tech they lack. China will have the weakest defenders, but that would mean staging the invasion from Dacca or Chicago (or Philly, if we take USA's dry island).
But Japan shouldn't be too bad, probably the 7.7.1 Riflemen as defenders.
We could maybe drop a landing city between Japan and Britain to use as a staging point...hmm...
Edit: From position, we could stage landings against the following:
Japan,
Or, if we set up boats on the western shore:
From the 1864 save, the
But Japan shouldn't be too bad, probably the 7.7.1 Riflemen as defenders.
Last edited:
Japan does sound reasonable. Try planting a spy so we can know what troops they have.
I don't think we will want to go for islands with only one civ on them. The amount of junk units will be very high. Doable but take too long to be worth the space.
I don't think we will want to go for islands with only one civ on them. The amount of junk units will be very high. Doable but take too long to be worth the space.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 19,157
I agree 100% this game. We will need a lot of territory from the other land mass. Even if the islands have a badly needed luxury, we can't afford the time this game. The heavy conquest phase started later than normal.
In addition, a lot of our cities still needed multiple buildings. We are working from a smaller than normal military base. The time, and build up of troops for the island is going to be to long.
One thing I would do is put Athens 100% ships once buildings are done. We will need a decent navy with escorts to get overseas. Workers are in such shortage, I don't know how many airfields we can afford.
