RB1 - Cuban Isolationists

[tmarcl]

If nothing else, this thread should be put into the CIV War Academy.

Marc

 

[ZombiVoziKombi]

S&S, a question -- if your boats cannot leave your cultural borders, thus disallowing sea exploration, by which token can you use your planes for recon? Because they stay based at home? Nuclear missiles would be totally, uhm, fidelious to the character, satellites ok, but using an airforce outside your borders IMHO goes a little against the isolationist spirit...

Just curious.

 

[MinionJoe]

S&S, a question -- if your boats cannot leave your cultural borders, thus disallowing sea exploration, by which token can you use your planes for recon?

Because they fly OOoover their neighbors, thus proving the superiority of the isolationist mindset! Nothing says "you can't touch us" like a high-altitude recon. Whereas boats all sharing the same water is all, "Ew! We don't want to float around in YOUR water! It's icky!"

Or so I would think.

 

[Sirian]

The original Cuban Isolationists disallowed ANY shipbuilding. That doesn't fit in to Civ4 because of the sea-based resources. Also, Civ3 maps don't make any patches of tiny islands, and thus had no need to allow even "close to home" shipping. So I made a change.

Ironically, there are paratroops and helicopter drops in Civ3, so the original Cuban Isolationists could have invaded across water if need be. That did not happen, but it's an option. In Civ4, on release, there is no such option. There is no way to tranport troops via air that sends them in to combat. So we are actually a little bit more restricted here in the modern age.

This is also a smaller map. The original was a HUGE map with 12 civs and we were stuck on an icy rock of a small continent. Literally 3/4ths of it was Tundra and Hills and Mountains!

Because they fly OOoover their neighbors, thus proving the superiority of the isolationist mindset! Nothing says "you can't touch us" like a high-altitude recon. Whereas boats all sharing the same water is all, "Ew! We don't want to float around in YOUR water! It's icky!"

Or so I would think.

That sounds good. I like the way Joe thinks.

"The superiority of the Isolationist Mindset(TM)!"


- Sirian

 

[Mike Lemmer]

I have to ask why you're building so many airports. The last time I used airports, you could only airlift one unit to each city per turn. Even if you had five airports, you could only airlift one unit to a specific city per turn. Are you just preparing ahead of time?

 

[ZombiVoziKombi]

Because they fly OOoover their neighbors, thus proving the superiority of the isolationist mindset! Nothing says "you can't touch us" like a high-altitude recon. Whereas boats all sharing the same water is all, "Ew! We don't want to float around in YOUR water! It's icky!"

Yup, this works. Still rooting for a missile crisis down the road

I'll miss the paratroops

 

[Sullla]

A picture of the original Cuban Isolationists, for the (vast majority) of our audience that wasn't around at the time:

You can read the story of Sirian and Charis' game at the following link if interested:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15332

 

[ChrTh]

If nothing else, this thread should be put into the CIV War Academy.

Marc

I'll be doing something shortly ... keep an eye in the forum.

 

[Sirian]

I have to ask why you're building so many airports. The last time I used airports, you could only airlift one unit to each city per turn. Even if you had five airports, you could only airlift one unit to a specific city per turn. Are you just preparing ahead of time?

If you move a unit, you cannot airlift it on that turn. Thus if you want timely arrivals, you need to build an Airport in every major troop producer.

One might be able to save a few shields at the cost of extra micromanagement, but that's not really my style. I'm kind of LAZY. You wouldn't know it by looking at my reports but I'm not lazy about fun things, only drudgery, and trying to figure out which airport to send my newly built troop to, over and over and over? Um... No thanks!


- Sirian

 

[Double Stack]

Airports also increase trade routes by 1. So there an ecomonic bonus as well.

 

[Sirian]

Airports also increase trade routes by 1. So there an ecomonic bonus as well.

Yeah, but that's only worth pennies without Open Borders.

The reason for our game is to be able to airlift from more places, with less work.


- Sirian

 

[Tarkhan]

I like the "extraneous" posts, and the fact that you guys answer questions...good place to learn You only get better by observing those better than you...

 

[quail]

It'd be great to be able to access the classic SG threads easily, but how about just having a sticky thread at the top with a little explanation and link to them?

Maybe the mods could decide which ones should be highlighted. Number of views is a good easy indicator, but I would just choose any with either A) a cool unusual variant, B) notably good strategy or C) very well-written and entertaining.

I don't think it's elitist; there are a lot of pretty standard games with players having their first game on Noble and you can't read them all. The people playing them have fun and that's all that counts.

 

[Sirian]

I've played but I won't be able to do the report tonight. ... Sorry, guys.

- Sirian

 

[ChrTh]

I've played but I won't be able to do the report tonight. ... Sorry, guys.

- Sirian

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh well, might as well

This extraneous(tm) smiley post brought to you by ChrTh

 

[tmarcl]

I've played but I won't be able to do the report tonight. ... Sorry, guys.

- Sirian

NNNNNOOOOO!!!!! This thread is the only think keeping me sane until Saturday!!! You must post now!!!!!!!!!

 

[DisruptiveIdiot]

I've played but I won't be able to do the report tonight. ... Sorry, guys.

- Sirian

Why hast thee forsaken us?

 

[tmarcl]

Why hast thee forsaken us?

At the risk of being accused of spam, (and because I'm stuck on a giant sardine can in the middle of the ocean for the next 108 hours and 20 minutes with no CIV ), I must point out that it's "Why hast thou forsaken," not thee.

There's a long and confusing explanation for why this is so, but I don't know it. Just trust me..........

Marc

 

[DisruptiveIdiot]

At the risk of being accused of spam, (and because I'm stuck on a giant sardine can in the middle of the ocean for the next 108 hours and 20 minutes with no CIV ), I must point out that it's "Why hast thou forsaken," not thee.

There's a long and confusing explanation for why this is so, but I don't know it. Just trust me..........

Marc

Private message, I like learning about archaic English grammar. Those fools in schools don't teach us anything.

 

[Sound+Vision]

At the risk of being accused of spam, (and because I'm stuck on a giant sardine can in the middle of the ocean for the next 108 hours and 20 minutes with no CIV ), I must point out that it's "Why hast thou forsaken," not thee.

There's a long and confusing explanation for why this is so, but I don't know it. Just trust me..........

Marc

It's because the 2nd person singular in the nominative case in old english is "thou" -- "thee" is the accusative I believe.