Black_Hole
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 3,424
or we could wait for our uu and smush theminvy said:I wouldn't go vs their UU without swordsmen army.
Ministry of War: Exploration
- Thread starter Sarevok
- Start date
In the light of the new situation; I repeat my question and hope the Military will answer this time.
Rik Meleet said:
Falcon02
General
Rik Meleet said:
I did address this earlier, there is a short period where we have no fears of Barbarians (this period is soon ending, and as I said earlier, I intend no future settlers to go undefended). Having the Babylonians stumble upon our city undefeneded this early seemed unlikely. Obviously that was a wrong assumption.
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Sarevok said:
Good choice..
Sir Donald III
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,074
In Defense of the Noble Deputy, I personally would not have expected Contact by an "offensive" unit before 3000 b.c. Then again, my experience is primarily Regent and nothing higher.
As a side note, this early contact along with the sighting of coastline to the North with us being South of the Equator, leads me to believe that we are on either a large peninsula or a bonafide island. If the former, then the Barbs, er... Babs, are either in the way now or will be shortly. If the latter, then they either are our only neighbors or else have 1 other.
Like I said, I have no personal experience with Monarch or Higher. So if any of you guys know otherwise, that is Contact usually made at Demigod or lower before 3000 BC, then just junk this ill-informed opinion.
As a side note, this early contact along with the sighting of coastline to the North with us being South of the Equator, leads me to believe that we are on either a large peninsula or a bonafide island. If the former, then the Barbs, er... Babs, are either in the way now or will be shortly. If the latter, then they either are our only neighbors or else have 1 other.
Like I said, I have no personal experience with Monarch or Higher. So if any of you guys know otherwise, that is Contact usually made at Demigod or lower before 3000 BC, then just junk this ill-informed opinion.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I also already answered the question, but Falcon has already said what I would have said...Rik Meleet said:
Donovan Zoi
The Return
OK, so now that we have admitted that we have no plan for this unprecedented meeting, how do we protect our undefended Settler and city?
One of our Warriors is too far away to help, while the other is not due for 4 turns IIRC. Do we:
1. Bunker the Settler?
2. Send the undefended Settler elsewhere?
3. Rejoin the Settler so that we can poprush a defender? (of course not!)
Most likely, a gpt deal for Bronze Working will appease our new friends and keep them away from our capital. However, I believe that we should try to keep our Settler safe until the threat has been abated. And not knowing from where the Warrior came, it may not be safe to head out east alone. So I would suggest to just bunker down for the moment.
What do our commanders think?
One of our Warriors is too far away to help, while the other is not due for 4 turns IIRC. Do we:
1. Bunker the Settler?
2. Send the undefended Settler elsewhere?
3. Rejoin the Settler so that we can poprush a defender? (of course not!)
Most likely, a gpt deal for Bronze Working will appease our new friends and keep them away from our capital. However, I believe that we should try to keep our Settler safe until the threat has been abated. And not knowing from where the Warrior came, it may not be safe to head out east alone. So I would suggest to just bunker down for the moment.
What do our commanders think?
blackheart
unenlightened
I think a bigger question here is how close is the Babylonian capital to ours? We really need to explore their borders and block their expansion path.
Der Sensenmann
Lasombra Stalker
IMHO, I think our current exploring Warrior should be left exploring to the East, like Sarevok has said, but the next unit should be kept as defence for our capital. First unit in the new city should also be for defence. This strikes some level of compromise with the exploration vs. defence arguments.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I am thinking that Babylon will not attack us, and if they do... well it was a nice DG while it lasted as at this stage I cant mount a defense. The Next warrior WILL garrison the capital however. I personally think that our Settler will not get killed by barbarians, but do not send it into an area where we have not explored first.
Civman2004
Something goes here...
Sir Don makes an interesting point which I believe warrants elaboration:
We have coastline to the west, coastline to the east, and a rather large inhospitable looking mountain range to the south. We appear to be on a young world, possibly cold as well. To find good land anywhere nearby I think we're going to have to go to the North-east, east or possibly south.
The Babs aren't to the North, one can assume, given where their warrior appeared. They can't be to the south or the south west, or our warrior would have seen them on the way up, or we would have seen their borders by now. It is remotely possible they could be near the forested plain in the south-east, but the most likely option seems to be that they're east, and a little bit south.
These two assumptions aren't a great deal on their own, but together they lead to some worrying conclusions.
We are going to have to expand to the east if we want good cities. We can build cities in the hills for the horses, and probably iron, a port to the North, but to really expand quickly we're going to have to go east IMHO. Guess what's to the east! The babylonians!
So, to expand with any sort of speed and size, we're going to have to at least limit the Babylonian presense, if not eliminate it. This is worrying given their very early UU, probably trigering a GA.
This merely raises the problem. I am not sure what we should do to solve it.
On option to combat this is to cluster our cities around the capital, get IW, and then launch a speedy attack into their heartland. We could then expand more freely hopefully.
Another is to try and 'outflank' the Babylonians by expanding around them. We could hope for some culture flips to gain more productive territory, but since they are religious this could be tough - in my experience they Babs usually come pretty high in the culture stakes.
As far as exploration goes, I think we really need to find out where they are, and find out where the good land is. From there we can make our decision.
We have coastline to the west, coastline to the east, and a rather large inhospitable looking mountain range to the south. We appear to be on a young world, possibly cold as well. To find good land anywhere nearby I think we're going to have to go to the North-east, east or possibly south.
The Babs aren't to the North, one can assume, given where their warrior appeared. They can't be to the south or the south west, or our warrior would have seen them on the way up, or we would have seen their borders by now. It is remotely possible they could be near the forested plain in the south-east, but the most likely option seems to be that they're east, and a little bit south.
These two assumptions aren't a great deal on their own, but together they lead to some worrying conclusions.
We are going to have to expand to the east if we want good cities. We can build cities in the hills for the horses, and probably iron, a port to the North, but to really expand quickly we're going to have to go east IMHO. Guess what's to the east! The babylonians!
So, to expand with any sort of speed and size, we're going to have to at least limit the Babylonian presense, if not eliminate it. This is worrying given their very early UU, probably trigering a GA.
This merely raises the problem. I am not sure what we should do to solve it.
On option to combat this is to cluster our cities around the capital, get IW, and then launch a speedy attack into their heartland. We could then expand more freely hopefully.
Another is to try and 'outflank' the Babylonians by expanding around them. We could hope for some culture flips to gain more productive territory, but since they are religious this could be tough - in my experience they Babs usually come pretty high in the culture stakes.
As far as exploration goes, I think we really need to find out where they are, and find out where the good land is. From there we can make our decision.
Falcon02
General
A.) I'm not sure we can come to any conclusion as to the origins of the Babylonians without one vital peice of information, which hill did the warrior appear from? Trace that back would give us a "semi-accurate" estimation of the direction of the Babs. Of course one reason this is "semi-accurate" is because the Bab Warrior could have just backtracked or what not.
B.) Cultural flips with the Babylonians is more about them being Religious. the Babs are netorious for their often Cultural superiourity because they are Religious AND SCIENTIFIC, so nearly all the main culture buildings are cheaper for them, not just the religious ones. In fact I think the only things they don't get discounts on and gives Culture are Wonders, and maybe Colloseums.
Anyway, it seems the Hill/Mountain area isn't gonna stop soon to the South west, and even when it does it won't matter till later in our expansion. So there's no reall open but to head back east and then curve up north again.
About the Babs again, I think our best option to "deter" them from attacking is gpt. However, as the Egyptians proved DG1 this is no garentee. But without it I fear we may find ourselves back on Turn 1 with just a wandering Settler, with the AI having a far lead, AND a war to deal with, or just restarting entirely.
B.) Cultural flips with the Babylonians is more about them being Religious. the Babs are netorious for their often Cultural superiourity because they are Religious AND SCIENTIFIC, so nearly all the main culture buildings are cheaper for them, not just the religious ones. In fact I think the only things they don't get discounts on and gives Culture are Wonders, and maybe Colloseums.
Anyway, it seems the Hill/Mountain area isn't gonna stop soon to the South west, and even when it does it won't matter till later in our expansion. So there's no reall open but to head back east and then curve up north again.
About the Babs again, I think our best option to "deter" them from attacking is gpt. However, as the Egyptians proved DG1 this is no garentee. But without it I fear we may find ourselves back on Turn 1 with just a wandering Settler, with the AI having a far lead, AND a war to deal with, or just restarting entirely.
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I think we should Ignore the Babylonians, build up and then attack when we are completetely ready. I personally will need to know where they are first though.
Similar threads
