Plan discussion

[HUSch]

I think we need another fred to discuss our plans (not the Ama fred, I've moved some post from there). Now it's about breaking the ETT

Trystero
My/our goal is steam or as military tech rifling, steel is not an important military tech, cannons gives not enough advantage. It's wrong to say we want Taj/GA for increase of research. we shouldn't underrate their knowing of the game. Don't ask the other what they want we should dos, they should not decide for us. We want and they (can) want, and then we (can) decide/compromize, not the other way.

We want taj and Rep, for that we research now constitution (2990) (if this is CDZ goal, then we go at milTrad, 2990), with Quat researched pp we can and want research RP (2691), to get steam (4784) better than rifling (3588) or Steel (4186) with lib.

btw
When ended the ETT?

BLubmuz: I highly doubt Amazon will want to break up the ETTA. You might not have been active at the time, but Quatronia and CDZ were in a major dispute over settling the arm between them, and Amazon went to extraordinary lengths to negotiate a compromise between them. So I don't think they'll want to break up the ETTA now. Especially since they have a NAP with CDZ, as well. Keeping the ETTA is a big part of whatever plan Amazon has, I think.

If we leave, we will be on our own. Is that what you and HUSch are arguing we should do?

Probably you 're right.
But we must start to do something or this thing will drive us to a defeat. And maybe it's too late. We're giving away our Fin trait and our research capabilities with this ETT.

Now i see that we need at least 2 more members to agree for a 4th being excluded. And this excluded member would probably join M&M.

I see very difficult we can convince Amazon to exclude both CDZ and Quat.

There's some chance we can break it alone? can we resist to a dogpile if we have rifles?

I propose this:
1) let's see what Amazon think about restrict the ETT to at least 3 members, after we squeeze the most from the excluded one
2) let's see if there's a chance we can keep for ourselves RP, Lib and Rifling. I think this is doable if we research Lib to 1 turn to completion, then RP, finish Lib, choose Rifling. They can't react quickly enough at that point and they would need not only Rifling but also RP to catch us. We can build some mace in the meantime, then mass upgrade them to Rifles if we manage also to keep some gold.

Then Amazon is tied by the NAP with us, but they will suffer from the break of the ETT.

At this point we need an expert of multiplayer diplo. Anyone reading this is committed to carefullly evaluate pros and cons on the diplo side.

Now i PM to Irgy and LP to ask some opinion.

This is what i sent to them

What is the reason with rifling?
Do you think we can conquer somebody then? Or do you mean, we 've enough defense against an attack then? How long, we speak about a time with frigates/gallons for the other. Alone is very heavy and I would say we can't win it. Without Mav/Mer there would be a chance, I could see.
For your plan, we need at least pp, guilds and chem from the other teams, and I think we should spend some EsP against all.

 

[BLubmuz]

Good idea to open a new thread, HUSch!

The reason for rifling? As i said, we can wait 'til the last turn then we can take our decision depending by which prerequisites we have at that time, by how the diplo situation is developing since then and other factors we can't predict (or which are hard to predict).

Sure Rifling is an "insurance" and this is a big "pro", mainly if we have a pile of gold for immediate upgrades.

SP for Dikes is more expensive (pro), but the dikes need time to be built (cons).

Steel can be another option. In my last SG i has a great advantage on my AI opponents with stacks composed by cannons/muskets (good for mop-up after 10 cannons attacked and knights to take units in the field if needed - then back to the safety of the stack -). Cannons alone guarantee defense, no unit can counter them until Cavalry. BTW even some axe or LB can still make a respectable job after 10 cannons attacked.

 

[Trystero]

When we talk about leaving the ETTA, I presume that we really mean leaving Quatronia and CDZ. Since we just signed a NAP with Amazon, I assume we want them as a long term ally. As I explain in the quote above, the problem with this is that I doubt Amazon wants to do this, since they have a separate NAP with CDZ. I therefore see two options:

1. We stick with the ETTA until Mav/Merlot are gone and then see what happens.

2. We violate the terms of the ETTA and leave now.

As BLubmuz has pointed out, it makes little sense to wait until post-Rifling to take option 2. On the other hand, leaving ETTA risks us getting dogpiled. How well could we defend ourselves if we broke off from the ETTA right now? My feeling is "not very well", but I could be mistaken. It really depends on how Amazon reacts. If they nullify the NAP, we'd have problems.

Waiting until later to fight it out seems like a waste of our research advantage, but leaving the ETTA now entails several diplomatic and military complications.

In summary, I'm not sure what to do. I would have no problem if we were competing against AI, but I'm not sure what the ramifications would be with human opponents.

 

[BLubmuz]

I was afraid LP and Irgy would have said what they said.

My thoughts:
1- destroying M&M is taking too long and this will give to all the 4 teams in the ETT a field leveled too high, so to make it difficult to gain a decisive tech advantage.
2- We failed to destroy M&M also thanks to a non-coordinate effort, due to greed and/or poor communication (when we landed in Mavs Island there was a Quat stack around but we did not coordinated our actions, just to take an example).
3- If things keep moving at this pace we risk to have 4 teams with infantry by the time M&M is gone. And Infantry has no counters until MechInf or ModArm come in play.
4- Having Infantry will advantage the "Vikings" CDZ, since they are aggressive and surely they have a good number of berserker to upgrade
5- Leaving the ETT we won't break anything. The bonds are to exclude/accept a team, not to leave it.
6- I'm not saying we can conquer the world with rifles. Just that we can be safe for awhile with them.
7- We and Amazon are tied in a NAP and i'm not proposing to break it. I also hope that if we leave the ETT we can have some argument to convince Amazon to make a new one with us only.
8- I don't know the terms of the Amazon's NAP with CDZ. It would be interesting to ask them to let us know

If we want win this game and not just survive as we're doing we must think creatively.

 

[AlphaShard]

I also think that Husch may have been right and we should be burning cities, at least Mav ones. Had we burned Injya they would no longer have the Pyramids or Police State.

 

[HUSch]

Blub
We get never a so good popsition to win against all. In MP there is a good chance for ally against the big one. That is one great difference to SP, where there isn't an ally against the player. Tech lead only isn't enough, because 2 or 3 are better than 1 (I think allways, so long they 've a goal).

There is no reason why we aren't 4 teams at infantry or battleship.

Blub/Alpha There is no reason to remember what could be, we are now in the sit and must decide. Wait or break. But don't forget we play against people, who know this game and also know DG and diplo therein. The strategic layout is, that Ama and CDZ are better together than we and Ama. From the layout Ama is our natural enemy, but that is only one reason for ally, the bond between our players/dilomats can be good (is not).

We have an ally (and ETTT) we don't want and don't approve. Because the reason is we need an ally. That is the sit since autumn. Since summer (when I began more participate) we discuss a war against Quat not Mav, our EsP goes against them etc. Look at this from their lookout; they 'll be careful against us.

 

[Irgy]

Look, I agree that this 4-2 setup isn't putting us in a winning position on its own. What it's also not doing though is putting us in a losing position. Which is what I think the alternatives would do.

On the whole I don't think it matters that much which era we fight people in. At this stage I expect there'll be a space race endgame with 3 civilisations still in the running. I think that will be a good situation for us. We have a powerful modern age UB that's well suited to the map and will give us a significant production advantage, we'll likely still have our fast tech race for cleaning up the final few space techs, and I have some pretty good multiplayer space-race tricks up my sleeve that should give us a nice advantage.

Overall I think we're in a great position, and the last thing I want to do is spoil it by isolating ourselves.

 

[BLubmuz]

OK, can we at least try to kick Quat out of the ETT?
I think their galleons are aiming for Mavs but in case they attack us they will kick themselves out.

In any case, better start some diplo activity with our allies Amazon.

A 3/3 set up will favor our side at this point, provided M&M and Quat will find a common ground.

 

[AlphaShard]

I got us Marble back, MoM takes 9 turns to build in Sirius.

 

[Irgy]

I agree with kicking Quatronia out, it's just an issue of the timing. I don't think gaining an extra tech or two against Quatronia is going to help us more than losing our numbers advantage and the rest of our tech lead against M&M. I don't think we need to do anything much to help ourselves against Quatronia in fact, other than ensure that our NAP with Amazon remains and CDZ will go along with it. M&M are the ones we need a tech lead against because they're a well run, well prepared and war heavy empire. Quatronia are in quite a pathetic state by comparison.

 

[AlphaShard]

I think maybe that's what we need to do, decide what tech we should jump too as quickly as possible, even taking all our ETT allies with us so we can crush Mav/Mer and THEN dissolve ETT and jump up as much tech as possible.

I agree Quatronia is in shambles compared to Mav/Mer.

 

[BLubmuz]

OK, can we do something on that direction? Some message, anything?

 

[Trystero]

I think maybe that's what we need to do, decide what tech we should jump too as quickly as possible, even taking all our ETT allies with us so we can crush Mav/Mer and THEN dissolve ETT and jump up as much tech as possible.

OK, can we do something on that direction? Some message, anything?

I thought it would be clear that this was what I was trying to do with my proposal to the ETTA. That is why I suggested we tech to Rifling/Steel as quickly as possible. The problem recently has been that no one in the ETTA has fully committed to research. We are researching Constitution only because the key techs to get rifles and cannons are being researched/stolen by Amazon (Guilds/Gunpowder) and Quatronia (Printing Press). I have no idea what CDZ is doing, nor have they communicated since my message. If we really want to get those techs and nothing appears to be happening with the rest of the ETTA, we could always tech the relevant techs ourselves, but that defeats the point of the ETTA. At 100% research, Quat can get PP in 2 or 3 turns. We will finish Constitution in 6 turns. If they haven't finished PP by then, we can ask them why not.

 

[AlphaShard]

Yes I think this could better work our ETT if members are not communicating what they are doing. We at least know what Amazon and Quat are doing.

 

[HUSch]

When I read the last post correct, we want to push the ETT and give us (ETT) the chance to defeat M&M. Goal is the long race with dikes.


Then i would give Quat infos about Mav for better understand and communicate together.

 

[AlphaShard]

We could build Taj in Arc on Bode and MoM in Sirius. We could start on that this turn as well.

 

[Trystero]

Then i would give Quat infos about Mav for better understand and communicate together.

I could write to them and say we noticed their galleons and ask if they need any information about the dispensation of Mavericks forces, since we have a lot of espionage against them.

 

[AlphaShard]

If we wanted I still think we could attack Spot B, at the very least burn it and then retreat.

 

[BLubmuz]

We could build Taj in Arc on Bode and MoM in Sirius. We could start on that this turn as well.

Sirius will be polluted by Taj if we want GS from there. If we can find another city with slightly less production in our starting island better, otherwise, go on.

 

[BLubmuz]

If we wanted I still think we could attack Spot B, at the very least burn it and then retreat.

Do you mean Mavs' city NE corner S of Bode? We can try some action, but we need to coordinate with Quat. IIRC we still have a good number of siege and some decent unit. Stacking them with Quat's ones can almost guarantee victory. Then we can see if keep or burn, unless Quat will take it. But this can be discussed with them too. It's part of a coordinated effort, i think.