One Turn War

[noni]

hi there,

ONE TURN WAR

Perhaps it is already posted or talked about it. Well anyway this is how the story goes.

the continent on which i (Japan) lived was talkin about 60% space from the whole Map and my neighbors were china and india. India were the weaker one but i dont wanted to build the needed units to destroy them. And it was the expanding time so i thought "how can i stop both from expanding at the same time and dont have war with both. And may be i will have war with one but dont really build units and attack. The soulution was that i asked china to declare war on India with me, so and while they were spending time and money on war i build settlers like a mad one and build cities and i took those from war weaked indien cities with a very low unit. After india was rubbered out there was only china left.


They were with their science equally with mine and also with their army. Peacefully we both traded and were good friends. And to persuade the chineese people who were living in those cities near to mine, to do a cultural flip and overthrow themselves to me, i build temples and cathedrals in my cities. So i have tooken 6 cities very peacefully.

Now thinking about the future i knew that there is a big chance that china will may be soon declare war on me. My samurais were a very good defense. I started building tanks and mech.infantry and tried to build a good defense i every city. I was in demo and dont wanted to switch. So here is what i did. I asked for a ROP but china said no so i traded something like a tech and asked again and the were pleased. S0 this is the time when i sent about 6 M.infanties and 2 0r three tanks to every cit of them, if it had hills or mountain i placed them on it. but from positions that they can attack direct the city without moving any more. And if they had units outside i also placed them near them and if the moved i followed like a dog.

Placing units and ENOUGH, is the key to ONE TURN WAR so there will be no war wearness at all. So when the enemy is living on the next turn you failed. Keep in mind that although the enemy has railroad your units will move very slowly so this is a plus point for ONE TURN WAR. I had about 25 chineese cities to take so must build very much units. So when i thought that i will have a good chance to destroy him in one turn i waited till the ROP was retired and china said that there is no longer time to extend it. Then i declared war and destroyed him and that all in one turn.

DONT be impatiently and attack them although the ROP is running because the other left civs will not trade with you anymore or will do with you ROP´s. I dont know how many turns will this last, but maybe anyone else have or had expirience with that and could post here.

Pros for ONE TURN WAR:

1. NO War wearness
2.Long waiting time till the needed units arrived to take a city
3.No cultural flipping of already tooken enemy cities, this could be crazy because you loose all your units in this flipped city
4.Kill the whole civ or let them one city when they peace and gives you whatever
5.The enemy will have no chance to prepare or to adjust for a war
6.full control

Well this was my way, it must be customized on the need.

I am not that high experienced till yet so there may be some improvements too add to this task.


Enjoy
noni

 

[Shaitan]

It's a viable strategy but there's one error. Using this strategy you will still take a blemish on your reputation. You get the same rep hit any time you declare war when you have units on enemy soil, whether you have a ROP or not. If you want to avoid the backstabber label you have to declare war before moving troops onto enemy territory.

 

[Rain]

The penalty for the sneak attack is very high. You may find it will be a very long time indeed before any of the other civs trust you again.

 

[rdomarat]

Originally posted by Rain
The penalty for the sneak attack is very high. You may find it will be a very long time indeed before any of the other civs trust you again.

Does this hold true if the civ you are about to destroy doesn't have contact with any other civ yet? Let's say your start on an island with you and one other civ. If you're a total a**hole to this civ and do all kinds of nasty things that should kill your reputation, but this civ never builds a boat and is quickly wiped out, will your rep be tarnished?

 

[MrBiggBoy]

hmmm.... good question rdomarat... i wonder... does anyone out there know? i suspect that it'll still murder your peaceful rep... o well... just NUKE the suckers and get it over with!!!!

 

[dikwhit]

to my knowledge... ive seen it posted elsewhere several times but cant give credit where its due. If the other civ has no contact with any1 else then theres no penalty...... although the no contact with other civs and having a rop in place long enough to stack units outside all cities would be a very unusual event I would think.

 

[CivMonger]

having ROP with a civ with no knowledge of others happens more then you would think. At least, it does to me. I play large/huge maps with 6 or 7 civs, on archipialgos. My last game I had talked to germany but not given them ANYTHING. They had no knowledge of anyone else in the world. I was late industrial before they could build pikeman However, one of hte other civs found them and traded all contacts I should have utilized the thousand or so years to blast the crap outta him, but I waited. Oh well. An isolated civ with technology 1 age behind can't counter a nuke and tank attack. Dunno why....

 

[Strider]

Good stragey(can't spell) but sounds like it takes ALOT of gold.

 

[Rob Lindsey]

Yep, your strategy does work, except for the reputation issue. I've tried it before, and it's served me well. I've got another way, but it's VERY expensive and requires dozens of units at least.

Ideally, you must have the ability to build railroads, plenty of workers, Modern Armour and Mech. Infantry. The enemy civ must also have a fairly linked road system, if nothing else. Obviously, Modern Armour is for attack, and Mech. Infantry to garrison the captured cities.

At the outbreak of war (however it may happen), pour over the borders and aim straight for the cities. We're not besieging, we're crushing, so don't worry about what squares are occupied. It depends on the civ and city size, but let's say it'll take four Modern Armours to take the city. Now, garrison the city. Once it's taken, make your workers build a railroad up to the city and to the cultural border towards the next enemy city.

Repeat! Your new rail link brings up units to the front line, and the extent of your conquest relies solely on whether you have any units left to attack with, not on distance. This is also why Modern Armour (and not Tanks) are needed. With a movement value of 3, it's a good bet that you can enter the enemy's cultural borders and attack a city on the same turn. A Tank would probably take you to the city gates and stop there. Depending on the size of the enemy civ, you may have to take up to twelve cities to force peace on the same turn, but I've done it many times.

:soldier::soldier::soldier::tank::tank::tank: :tank::soldier::soldier::soldier:

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by Rob Lindsey
Repeat! Your new rail link brings up units to the front line, and the extent of your conquest relies solely on whether you have any units left to attack with, not on distance. This is also why Modern Armour (and not Tanks) are needed. With a movement value of 3, it's a good bet that you can enter the enemy's cultural borders and attack a city on the same turn. A Tank would probably take you to the city gates and stop there. Depending on the size of the enemy civ, you may have to take up to twelve cities to force peace on the same turn, but I've done it many times.

What version / level are you playing with?

In my current game (1.17, Monarch) I had two wars where I took 10-15 cities per turn and ended up destroying my opponents because they still refused to see my envoys

 

[Dralix]

Originally posted by Panda

In my current game (1.17, Monarch) I had two wars where I took 10-15 cities per turn and ended up destroying my opponents because they still refused to see my envoys

Just a guess, but maybe the had an alliance or MPP that they didn't want to break.

Then again, maybe they were just suicidal.

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by Dralix


Just a guess, but maybe the had an alliance or MPP that they didn't want to break.

Then again, maybe they were just suicidal.

Well they allready were at war with 3 other civs, and neither they nor I had MPPs.

I guess you're right and they were suicidal

 

[Sekandar]

I already posted this in another forum, but I think it is more relevent to this one. Please forgive any overlap....

I'm nearing the end of a game (on a normal-sized planet) where I've whittled the competing Civs down to two. I already met the victory conditions on the basis of culture, but there are a few things I learned along the way in the context of modern conquests:

You are all quite correct to point out the difficulties associated with the MPPs. I already complained in another forum that there appears to be no way to negotiate for peace alongside your allies, leaving them to fight a war even after you've achieved all of your military objectives. C'est la vie. The only thing you can really do is to placate your former allies with gold, luxuries, maps or towns.

On the other hand, MPPs don't always work very well for your enemies either. Keep checking with your foreign advisor to ascertain the status of your enemies' MPPs. They do eventually expire, and then it takes at least a turn for them to renew their alliance. If you successfully attack one of your opponents during the hiatus, the former allies will often stay out of the conflict (particularly if you are successful).

Once railroads come into play, you should do everything in your power to negotiate ROPs with the target of conquest civ. You can promise them 100s of gold per turn, and luxuries galore; just don't offer them towns, technology or outright payments of gold. That will convince even a furious civilization to reach agreement with you. As long as you attack them in the same turn you make the agreement, you won't have to pay them anything.

With the ROP in place, use espionage to ascertain the distribution of forces in the enemy cities. Ignore the troops outside the cities. You can send your troops in on the enemy rails and mass them in sufficient numbers outside the cities to conquer as many as you please (or have sufficient forces to do so). If you don't outright overwhelm the civilization, they are usually prepared to negotiate a peace in the same turn (they don't ignore your envoys when you've just conquered half or more of their cities).

 

[Rob Lindsey]

Originally posted by Panda


What version / level are you playing with?

In my current game (1.17, Monarch) I had two wars where I took 10-15 cities per turn and ended up destroying my opponents because they still refused to see my envoys

You make a good point, Panda. I generally used this strategy on Warlord level, so the enemy is pretty cowardly and not quite so stubborn. Even on Warlord, sometimes I've had to take up to 20 cities before the enemy gave my envoys an audience. My figure of twleve cities was based on attacking a civilisation on a Huge map contending with sixteen civilisations. Even then, 'natural selection' would reduce this number to ten or twelve by the modern age, resulting in fairly large civilisations, so your point is well taken.

As for the enemy's stubborness on your Monarch-level games, I'm not doing quite that well on this level so far, so I'll have to take your word for it! Considering the greater difficulty, though, their avoidance in making peace with you so quickly sounds right.

:soldier: :soldier: :soldier: :soldier: :soldier: :soldier: :soldier: :soldier: