Now THIS is a bad start!

[BlackBetsy]

Tricky, say it isn't so! The battle for Chicago (my hometown ) was for naught? Five Roman knights died for Chicago and you just let them walk back in? You don't even risk a flip and make them expend a knight or a rifle against a fortified musketman?

No wonder Rome fell.

 

[Puppeteer]

Interesting choice with the Ivory and Chicago. If Chicago had revolted they'd get a free rifleman. Now they have to spread out their defense even more. And you sold all of Chicago's happiness buildings. I wonder if you could sell all the infrastructure in the other American cities to be safe...but if I recall you don't like starving people so you probably can't sell the happy buildings without starving them with entertainers.

Now that they can draft they'll be hurting even more happywise. I bet next turn sees Chicago and maybe even another city in disorder due to Chicago's lack of happy buildings and drafting riflemen.

I knew a citizen can't work a tile an enemy is on, but I never realized you could disrupt the resource that way! I thought you had to pillage. Come to think of it that makes sense because you can cut off trade by surrounding the capital with units, ergo standing on an enemy road disrupts trade through/on that road.

Been following the thread since mid-first page. I made a reference in another thread about your rushing a harbor with a leader but no one posted that they caught it. Here's the smiley I omitted there for extra humor:

I tried to post in this thread before but my work PC crashed. (Not surprising...long story.) A poster had suggested making peace with America and rebuilding and/or waiting for cavs. I disagreed and wanted to say you have him hurting with WW, happiness, economy and troop production so the only course of action is to keep the pressure on even if it hurts.

EDIT @BlackBetsy: I see your smileys, but I'll respond as if you meant it. Rome dealt a serious blow to Chicago, and it will drag down Abe's economy and defenses. Baiting him into retaking it is more damaging than if it had flipped with defenses, and it may turn out being better than keeping Chicago for now. In fact, tR1cKy may opt to leave retaking Chicago for last given the sorry state it's in--and it will be worse after Abe drafts a defender or two as I expect he will. By the way, I LOVE Giordano's. I keep thinking I'll make the 2.5 hour drive (each way) just for some of that pizza.

 

[Zelda's Man]

If the flip risk was not so high I would suggest to just walk around with a stack of muskets and cannons and just pillage Abe's land to nothing.

It would starve his cities and cut off what little production he has left. The cannons would add a bonus to the muskets if attacked. However, there is still a flip risk with the other captured American cities so I don't know if you have the luxury of time necessary for this maneuver.

I like the idea of leaving Chicago undefended to protect against the flip, but I would have probably sold the improvements and then gifted the city to either Monty or Alex. They have little culture or military might at this point and it gives you an ally. It would also keep the city out of Abe's hands for another turn or two at least.

 

[stachnie]

If you leave America on an island- still watch for culture flips. I had Washington flip (at peace) when their only city was on an island about 30 tiles away!

Once I had a culture flip even when the civ was reduced to a galley with a settler (and probably some other unit).


Best regards,

Slawomir Stachniewicz.

 

[Puppeteer]

I like the idea of leaving Chicago undefended to protect against the flip, but I would have probably sold the improvements and then gifted the city to either Monty or Alex. They have little culture or military might at this point and it gives you an ally. It would also keep the city out of Abe's hands for another turn or two at least.

Interesting idea, but the city is still likely to flip and Abe gets a free rifleman.

I used to be a fan of pillaging the enemy city's food, shield and commerce to starve it down to size 6 and no production, but it's a long process. Like you say there is a flip risk, but time is on Rome's side if Abe's cities start rioting. I'd still go with cannons and knights ASAP though.

 

[Zelda's Man]

Monty's capital is a whole lot closer so the flip risk would lessen.

If it did flip he would get a free rifleman and then a couple of drafted ones probably so it is a risk either way.

 

[tR1cKy]

Hi folks!

My last moves have caused some arguing... well it's clear that in such a situation there wasn't a "good" move, but only a "less bad" one. I thought about giving the city to Monty and rejected the idea, perhaps too hastly. Considering it now, after reading your posts, it doesn't look too bad, except for 1 thing: the "bait effect" on american troops would have been negated, and probably my knights sent to the ivory tile wouldn't have survived enough to pillage it, as i'm going to do once i load again the game.

Probably a "good" move was: giving the city to Monty and signing an alliance with him against America, supposing that Abe would bother to send a boat or two filled with troops to dispose of the last aztec city. But, if America choosed to snub it, i would have been stuck in that war for 20 turns more, or lose my rep.

At least, by leaving Chicago open for recapture i have minimized the uncertainity.

@BlackBetsy: i understand you... don't worry, in a few turns Chicago will shine again, this time under the benevolent rule of the Roman Crown.

@stachnie: ouch! not a lucky day...

@Puppeteer: good analysis - i would have replied to some objections and clarify some points, but you did the work for me. Thanks!

@kenScott: glad to see you again!

Once again, thanx to you all for reading my log and posting your opinions on it. Everyone who likes to share its views is welcome to post.

Next update this evening. Seeya!

 

[bonscott]

Giving back Chicago isn't a bad move at all. The long term strat here is to knock out all the American cities. Chicago with a couple conscripts in it ain't nothing and it makes it easier to take the heavily defended cities. Plus the pop will drop by 1 when Abe takes it back, it will drop again by 1 when Rome takes it back. Think of it as reducing resisters.

Now as for stationing troops back to help take back in case of a flip. Personally I wouldn't be wasting that many troops for that duty. All troops should be at the front. Just station a couple extra mustkets and maybe one Knight back at the old border with America to prevent any infestation south should a city flip. Any extra troops heading to the front could make a stop over to retake the flipped city if needed. Otherwise I wouldn't worry about it at all and invest the most units available to take the rest of the cities. Once that is done, taking back a flipped city is easy.

 

[Aegis Shield]

Now this war with Abe has brought up a question I've had in mind. I know your culture rating is all of the culture of your cities combined. If, in a war, you lose a city with culture, does your culture value drop accordingly or stay at the current culture rating because the city, and your cultural influence, still exist in it? What if the city was razed?

 

[Chazbagel]

Hm... this thread still hasn't been moved to stories and such. lol. I have been reading since the beggining Tricky!

 

[BlackBetsy]

Now this war with Abe has brought up a question I've had in mind. I know your culture rating is all of the culture of your cities combined. If, in a war, you lose a city with culture, does your culture value drop accordingly or stay at the current culture rating because the city, and your cultural influence, still exist in it? What if the city was razed?

Your total civilization culture remains the same. I recently played a game against a civ with a culture far exceeding my own and despite my razing core city after core city, its culture continued to increase. However, the civ will obviously not generate as much culture once the culture-producing improvements are destroyed.

 

[bonscott]

Your total civilization culture remains the same. I recently played a game against a civ with a culture far exceeding my own and despite my razing core city after core city, its culture continued to increase. However, the civ will obviously not generate as much culture once the culture-producing improvements are destroyed.

Correct, your overall culture score will never go down until you are eliminated. You just don't accumulate anymore for cities that have been captured/razed because they aren't yours.

Each city however "remembers" how much culture you had in it (which is part of what causes a flip). So if your city has 115 culture points and the AI captures it. If you take it back you'll still have 115 culture points in the city and it will start gaining points again per what improvement you have. Now lets say the AI got 8 culture points before you got it back. If the AI gets the city back again then it's 8 points are still there and will start gaining again.

So part of the long term goal to prevent flips is to get as much culture as possible in the city to overtake however much culture the AI had in that city. The more culture you have vs. the AI in that city the less the chances of a flip.

Obviously a razed city is destroyed.

 

[Aegis Shield]

Ahh lovely, then I guess I'll just have to engage the Arabs in scorched-earth warfare. They've got more than 5x my culture and mostly 10-12 sized cities. Genocide doesn't hurt your reputation, right?


Oh...And good story tricky! It is very informative.

 

[tR1cKy]

Hi people! So many posts, and so many folks! Before updating, i'll answer someone.

I think the question about culture posed by Aegis Shield has already received some good replies, and it's not necessary that i add anything.

@bonscott: you made a good point in exposing the 1 pop reduction that inflict a city every time is captured. Yes, probably the definitive capture of Chicago will be less troublesome. About the insurance troops, they are nothing more that some cannons, 1 musket each stack, a few elite legions and 2 knights. But it's essential that those cities, expecially Atlanta, are promptly recaptured should they flip. The communication line cannot be broken.

@AndrewH & Aegis: thanx a lot for appreciating this game log! I'm honoured to see how much this story has become popular. Be assured that it will go on, regardless of the result.

-----------------------------------------------------

1170AD - Operation Dillinger

The phase 3 of operation Jessie James should have led to the annexation of Washington and Chicago. Although some serious damage has been delivered to America, no new territory has been conquered. This marks phase 3 as a failure.

New battle plans are drawn, this time less temerarious. The wounded stack of knights is moved back in the safety of Forte Diavolo and set to heal. The harassing stack of muskets and cannons is moved in the mountain SE of Washington, where it can safely bombard the american capital. An elite, full-power knight join the party. The combat settler advance north. Next turn it will be in enemy territory, where it will found a fort and rush barracks immediately.

Once these preliminary deployments are done, troops from south can move quickly from Forte Diavolo, then reach the Washington mountains in only 1 turn. This would prevent America from skirmishing against incoming troops, and grant wounded knights the ability to retreat and fortify in a friendly barracks in only 1 turn.

If nothing goes wrong, the new fort will be operative 2 turns from now, in time to grant healed knight a path to reach the Washington mountain in the same turn. According to this timeline, the attack on Washington should begin in the year 1200AD.

The goal of operation Dillinger is the capture of Washington. No further objectives are given for sure now, although a successive attack on Seattle is the preferred continuation, in order to deny every source of furs to Abe. However, different paths are yet to be excluded. An alternative would be going for the "capital hunt" in order to minimize flips. Obviously, the immediate availability of full-healed troops will be taken into account.

The insurance troops around Atlanta are augmented. It is essential to keep intact the communications between the front and the rest of the empire, or else reinforcements could not arrive quickly. Controlling Atlanta is now paramount, and there must be enough troops around to ensure a quick recapture should that city flip. New York and Philadelphia are less important, but a flip in those cities would be troublesome as well, since Forte Diavolo would be put at risk of flipping itself.

In the meantime, new units are arriving in the combat zone. Two muskets are available, and knights are on the way. A knight is rushed in Forte Pizza. And slaves continue to clean up some mess in the former aztec territory.

This map shows the details of the operation Dillinger. The blue spot is where the new fort will be founded. The solid blue border is the territory it will claim, note that Chicago would be deprived of an important source of food and is likely to starve: in case it's reduced to size 6 a couquest would be easier. The red lines, in different tones to put in evidence the different turns, represent the choosen path for an attack on Washington and, maybe, Seattle. The solid red border is the claimed land once Washington is captured. From there, an attack on Chicago may be led in only 1 turn.

Another update is around the corner, i'm playing the game right now. Stay tuned folks!

 

[The Fjonis]

This "fort" tactic - I never tried it myself. Never knew it was possible to found cities wihtin enemy borders, even at war. Thought that was kind of the point of borders... Seems very helpful, though - perhaps not an entirely fair tactic when you think about it, as the AI is probably quite unlikely to use it against the human player, but still..

 

[dresdor]

I like the fort idea. I will use it when I pick up playing Civ 3 (I'm going back to Lords of the Realm 2 right now...now there's a trip through history ) Temporary bases for troops while invading will rapidly speed up healing time...almost as good as having a M*A*S*H unit out there

Anyway, my $0.02. Your main problem is Washington, of course, probably followed by Boston, the Chicago, and finally Seattle. Why do I say it like this? By looking at the culture area, most of the control in the area is from Washington. Chicago, and Boston have nice areas out there as well, so they have some decent culture as well, but Seattle's border doesn't extend that far out. You could probably wait to conquer it to last...if you're concerned about flipping at least.

Something else I'd like to mention. You're probably only going to use their cities to stage attacks on the remaining US cities. You have two good intact ports to the south (New York and Phillidelphia) one on either side of the isthmus. With those as your naval production cities, you can afford to bombard the **** out of the population of Washington, Chicago, Seattle, and Boston. You have the artillery, if you're waiting for buildup, just keep attacking. If you can get those cities below 6, the difficulty of your task is reduced quite a bit. You won't miss the production too dearly, and it reduces the number of unhappy resistors you'll have. (Pop 1 can only have 1 resistor). Of course, you do run the risk of destroying key improvements, but they could have been fire saled already, or by the time your troops grace their streets.


EDIT: BTW, this log is awesome. It almost makes me forget the fact that my Civ 3 playdisk is 30 miles away and locked in my dorm room, which won't be opened again until Sunday.

 

[llib_rm]

tR1cKy,
I've enjoyed reading your story line. Your colorful commentary is keeping the game log fresh and interesting.

Can you provide some insight into your infrastructure, build order, and use of the luxury slider in the future. I think my use of these things are hindering me past the Monarch level. Thnx!

 

[bonscott]

A quick note on the forts:

You can settle a new city in someone elses border. BUT, if you are not at war you will have to declare war to found the new city. Otherwise if at war you can settle anywhere no problem since it's no longer an act of war since you are already at war.

 

[mrtn]

...I know it. Actually, if they don't fortify they don't heal at all. What part of the log are you referring to? I may have been unclear somewhere...

The important thing is that they don't move that turn. This is regardless if they are fortified or not, you can just hit the space bar as well, if you want.
Hope that's a bit clearer (I've been drinking some wine earlier ).

 

[Chazbagel]

haha. I need more pictures Trick.