"PLAN A" - Accept or Denounce? II

[Cyc]

Do you support the proposed plan stated in this informational post and would you make the changes needed to facilitate the plan?

Plan A
I've put together a plan for Military Production that will give us a good idea of how long this build up should take. I made this plan with the assumption that we would connect the Saltpeter immediately if not sooner. I based our border defense on the Musketman. I've based the offensive force as Knights.

By using 28% of our cities for strictly Military Production, we will (if we use the cities listed below...) dedicate 52% of our shields to the cause. At the end of 32 turns we will have 17 Muskets and 24 Knights.

First thing we have to do is make these changes during pre-turn:
Leningrado to Barracks
Nara to Barracks
Valhalla to Barracks
Tlaxcala to Knights
Octavinium to Knights
Tokyo to Temple (not part of the plan, just common sense.)

Then let everything run its present course, completing what is queued up. As the cities listed below complete their current task, switch them to the following queue:

Bremershaven--->musket, musket, musket, musket, musket,
.............................musket, knight, knight
Kyoto-------------->musket, musket, knight
Naerva------------> " " "
The Burrows-----> " " "
Kells---------------> " " "
Valhalla-----------> " " "
Bavaria-----------> " " "
Kuhkaff------------>knight, knight, knight
Nara----------------> " " "
Tlaxcala------------> " " "
Octavinium--------> " " "
New Falcon's N.--> " " "
Morgana-----------> " " "

We have 16 border towns. This plan will give us a musket in each of those and one to send with the front troops in the attack. This is with no upgrades, so the approximate 2600g we earn during this time would not be affected. But we must re-connect the Saltpeter immediately.

20 turns would be enough for a city with 6 shields to build a Colosseum. In 32 turns you could build a Temple in the same city. These 32 turns, again, would give us 17 Musketmen and 24 Knights. This should be enough power to take pretty much all of America OR begin our attack on Babylon. The quick surgical strike on the two Russian hamlets shouldn't even slow us up or put a dent in our current armor.

As a side note, some of the break points are:
14 turns.........9 muskets, 5 knights
22 turns........17 muskets, 10 knights
32 turns........17 muskets, 24 Knights


__________________

This plan is being polled for eventual enactment. Governors are encouraged to post their opinion of this plan below.

It appears to be too late to use this as a binding poll for the t/c tomorrow, but it it receives a favorable response, maybe the DP can utilize some of the directives if deemed appropriate.

This poll is Informational. It will run until approximately until 1830GMT tomorrow, Saturday, Jan. 4th.

A discussion thread can be found in this thread.

 

[trader/warrior]

YES because we are #1 on land mass and #12 on military service. this is not good. we need more military!

 

[Immortal]

It makes sense, we must ensure the bulk of our military production is done on the frontier cities to ensure they can reach the fronts quickly if we go to war soon.

 

[amirsan]

I agree to this great plan, but we don't have support to free military units. Unless we all agree to cutting down our gpt to like 50 gpt.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

lets just build up our military and screw the internal problems the nations is having

According to the in game domestic report, which is the only thing that concerns me as domestic advisor, nearly all of our cities are GROWING SLOWLY. we dont need baracks and musket after musket, we need libraries, universities, marketplaces, courthouses, workers, roads, mines and later rails so we can transport this military buildup that we will get when each city is growing to its fullest potential.

 

[Plexus]

I cannot support this plan, it doesn't leave room for cultural and other improvements.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by FionnMcCumhall
lets just build up our military and screw the internal problems the nations is having

According to the in game domestic report, which is the only thing that concerns me as domestic advisor, nearly all of our cities are GROWING SLOWLY. we dont need baracks and musket after musket, we need libraries, universities, marketplaces, courthouses, workers, roads, mines and later rails so we can transport this military buildup that we will get when each city is growing to its fullest potential.

Ummm..., doesn't growing slowly have to do with food production? If you're lobbying for workers to build irrigation projects and roads and mines then by all means I support you - especially since that can be accomplished without restricting the growth of our military.

 

[Strider]

I don't like this plan.... We do not need more military.... Even if it is 28%. We need to use about all of are cities into building up are culture, treasury, and science. 5% for military would be fine by me and that 5% should be defender's only.

 

[GenMarshall]

I dont like the plan. We have enough Military units to defend ourselves. We should consider on building Places of Culture and Learning.
Even Though I am a Militaristic player. I am also a Scientific and Industrious Player.

 

[Goonie]

Nah!

 

[Chieftess]

Time for Plan B!

No, I don't support this plan. There's far too many military units being produced, and no room for culture, growth (markets and banks), and WORKERS! The one thing that we need to HELP mobilize our troops is roads. We need more workers for that (also because of rails probably coming online this term).

 

[Cyc]

OK, I'm back.

@CT - If it's workers you want, it doesn't make sense to produce them from your larger cities. Get them from your very small cities. The population loss is much less that way.

@Strider - Are you aware that 5% Military production would mean that we would have only two cities producing Military units?

@Plexus - With this plan 72% of our cities would be building Cultural and other improvements. You're making this personal.

@Fionn - donsig is right. The only thing that will help a slowly growing city is more food. Either your micro-management is off or you don't have enough irrigation.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Cyc
OK, I'm back.

@CT - If it's workers you want, it doesn't make sense to produce them from your larger cities. Get them from your very small cities. The population loss is much less that way.

@Strider - Are you aware that 5% Military production would mean that we would have only two cities producing Military units?

@Plexus - With this plan 72% of our cities would be building Cultural and other improvements. You're making this personal.

@Fionn - donsig is right. The only thing that will help a slowly growing city is more food. Either your micro-management is off or you don't have enough irrigation.

Yes.... I am fully aware of that.... Also it does not depend if we build workers from the large or small cities. The population loss is the exact same.... 1. It will never change.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Chieftess
Time for Plan B!

No, I don't support this plan. There's far too many military units being produced, and no room for culture, growth (markets and banks), and WORKERS! The one thing that we need to HELP mobilize our troops is roads. We need more workers for that (also because of rails probably coming online this term).

Didn't you wisely point out how many foreign units are inside our borders? I'm not so sure we have enough defense to deal with a problem should it arise suddenly.

Plan A does not call for us to build only military units at the expense of city improvements and workers. It also does not call for the use of any gold by the military, It is a well thought out and balanced plan that can only benefit Fanatika greatly.

 

[eyrei]

So far, we have done well to not get involved in any wars we didn't want since the bizarre declaration of war by the Persians. This is because of our military might. The AI constantly builds military units, and will catch up to us quickly if we do not do the same. We do not need all of our cities building military, but building improvements in all of them would be suicide.

 

[Immortal]

A lot of things can benefite Fanatika greatly, building lots of workers gets infrastructure going at the cost of growth. Building military units is good for war and defense at the cost of infrastructure, growth, and progress. Building improvements benefits the nation through growth and progress, but is time consuming and expensive. Its all in how you weigh the benefits against the costs.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by eyrei
So far, we have done well to not get involved in any wars we didn't want since the bizarre declaration of war by the Persians. This is because of our military might. The AI constantly builds military units, and will catch up to us quickly if we do not do the same. We do not need all of our cities building military, but building improvements in all of them would be suicide.

The AI also builds large amounts of culture and science improvements. Leading in techs help them greatly..... Leading in culture could make a war that are units can not fight.

With evenn 28% of are cities producing military units... It is still 28% that won't get any new improvements.

 

[Cyc]

@Strider - As soon as our Governors and Domestic Leaders get our cities irrigated and growing and building the improvements that will allow them to grow in a healthy, happy manner, then these little cities (now grown large) can switch out with the Military producers. That way the Military producers, who have suffered to protect the little cities, can then build things like Cathedrals and Marketplaces. 72% of our cities will be building these improvements to finally get them equal to our proud Military producers. Can't you see that? Get them to grow, so they can relieve the larger cities. Target some of the smaller cities that have a lot of food (I've laid all this out in previous posts), such as Zorgonzolia, to build workers. Have them irrigate the plains. Get our little cities growing with the food they need and the improvements they need. Build our Military with our self-sufficient cities, that can catch up later.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Strider

With evenn 28% of are cities producing military units... It is still 28% that won't get any new improvements.

Plan A does not mean a city will get no improvements. The plan is for a fixed duration of 30 turns or so. During that period certian cities will be devoted to military production and in that regard they will get no improvements for the duration of the plan. Once the plan is complete we can reward these cities buy rushing some improvements. On the other hand, 72% of our cities will be building nothing but workers and improvements for 30 turns. Also since the plan calls for zero military spending there will be plenty of gold in the treasury to help our less productive cities get the improvements they need.

It is very sad that the debate over a good and sensible plan has been twisted and turned into a debate about total military production versus improving our cities!

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

i still dont see the merit in this proposal