Realpolitik CIV - An Interactive AAR
- Thread starter Lighthearter
- Start date
- Status
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
No white peace. I personally don't like the option too much, and I don't think many others do either.
However, our economy should be our main focus. This war is wrapping up. Yes, we haven't made peace yet, and yes, the war isn't over, but we are succeeding.
However, our economy should be our main focus. This war is wrapping up. Yes, we haven't made peace yet, and yes, the war isn't over, but we are succeeding.
arya126
Squad Leader
We are barely succeeeding. As either whosit or ravus (or both, cant remember) have pointed out, we have only taken RY and antium in such short amounts of time (30 turns since RY was taken) because they were lightly defended. neapolis also appears lightly defended. This MIGHT be because they are running out of troops. OR it MIGHT be because they have shifted focus to the east and are preparing to send a deathstack back west towards us.
The point is, that the war is not over until peace is signed. Even if in the game we are winning (should that be true, which i doubt), LH is likley to give them WBed troops like he did right before they made the ukraine offensive. We cant FOCUS on the economy until the war is over. And by over i mean a peace treaty has been signed. i support effort going into the economy, but the war effort should get WAY more effort than the economy. What happens if our offensive is destroyed by a deathstack, and that stack continues to take amsterdam and RY? Then antium is surrounded, and we lose our 2 cities that have the most commerce potential.
What does everyone consider a white peace? Because technically, if you used the idea of white peace (ante bellum descibes it if i am correct) in conjunction with CIV diplomacy and warfare then a white peace right now would allow us to keep antium. A white peace after we take germany would allow us to keep germany. Now if we used it in the strictly ante bellum sense, then we would be giving up antium for a white peace at the moment. It would basicly mean going to the pre war borders.
pre war borders is what i disagree with. But a white peace (as in a white peace as we accept peace with rome keeping all that we have taken) should our economy collapse during a future part of the war, now that i cannot criticsize, but i would not support it either. A non-white peace in conjunction with CIV diplomacy would involve one side or the other giving up cities or techs in the PEACE DEAL.
I just wanted to clarify this as when Ilduce says white peace, im not sure which meaning he means here.
The point is, that the war is not over until peace is signed. Even if in the game we are winning (should that be true, which i doubt), LH is likley to give them WBed troops like he did right before they made the ukraine offensive. We cant FOCUS on the economy until the war is over. And by over i mean a peace treaty has been signed. i support effort going into the economy, but the war effort should get WAY more effort than the economy. What happens if our offensive is destroyed by a deathstack, and that stack continues to take amsterdam and RY? Then antium is surrounded, and we lose our 2 cities that have the most commerce potential.
What does everyone consider a white peace? Because technically, if you used the idea of white peace (ante bellum descibes it if i am correct) in conjunction with CIV diplomacy and warfare then a white peace right now would allow us to keep antium. A white peace after we take germany would allow us to keep germany. Now if we used it in the strictly ante bellum sense, then we would be giving up antium for a white peace at the moment. It would basicly mean going to the pre war borders.
pre war borders is what i disagree with. But a white peace (as in a white peace as we accept peace with rome keeping all that we have taken) should our economy collapse during a future part of the war, now that i cannot criticsize, but i would not support it either. A non-white peace in conjunction with CIV diplomacy would involve one side or the other giving up cities or techs in the PEACE DEAL.
I just wanted to clarify this as when Ilduce says white peace, im not sure which meaning he means here.
Whosit
Entropic Knight
So I have to vote. Lovely.
This is plan #1? http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9521384&postcount=5615
Where are the other plans? I haven't seen anything clearly labeled thus, but I'm trying to find them. So far, I haven't read anything that I like without modification, but I suppose that's the case for everyone.
Mathnerd, arya is right (I think this is the third Horseman): We can't be certain that the war is "wrapping up," especially with a capricious GM on the loose. Now, I agree that effort has to be made to sustain, and improve, the economy during wartime, but we have to act as though this war will go on indefinitely. There are two things that could kill us: Our front collapses, or our economy collapses.
Our front could collapse if we stop building troops because the going seems easy, and then a Roman Doom Stack appears and we can't scramble a defense in time. Our economy will collapse if we keep building more troops and capturing more cities without increasing our commerce base and taking steps to control costs (courthouses, mainly).
Also, the plan I linked to says "no whipping," which I vigorously disagree with, but I simply wish to make my thoughts on that known. I'm not going to fight a battle over it.
I also recall someone suggesting a trade with India, albeit minor (our cows for their Rice). I wouldn't do that, simply because assisting the score leaders in any fashion will probably hurt us, although the cow for rice trade is in our favor. *shrugs*
Oh, and Cull: The idiom "you cannot have your cake and eat it, too" is actually a corruption of the original. I believe that it originally went "you cannot eat your cake and have it, too," which really makes a lot more sense when you think about it.
So. I'll try to dig around for the other two plans, but any links would be appreciated.
This is plan #1? http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9521384&postcount=5615
Where are the other plans? I haven't seen anything clearly labeled thus, but I'm trying to find them. So far, I haven't read anything that I like without modification, but I suppose that's the case for everyone.
Mathnerd, arya is right (I think this is the third Horseman): We can't be certain that the war is "wrapping up," especially with a capricious GM on the loose. Now, I agree that effort has to be made to sustain, and improve, the economy during wartime, but we have to act as though this war will go on indefinitely. There are two things that could kill us: Our front collapses, or our economy collapses.
Our front could collapse if we stop building troops because the going seems easy, and then a Roman Doom Stack appears and we can't scramble a defense in time. Our economy will collapse if we keep building more troops and capturing more cities without increasing our commerce base and taking steps to control costs (courthouses, mainly).
Also, the plan I linked to says "no whipping," which I vigorously disagree with, but I simply wish to make my thoughts on that known. I'm not going to fight a battle over it.
I also recall someone suggesting a trade with India, albeit minor (our cows for their Rice). I wouldn't do that, simply because assisting the score leaders in any fashion will probably hurt us, although the cow for rice trade is in our favor. *shrugs*
Oh, and Cull: The idiom "you cannot have your cake and eat it, too" is actually a corruption of the original. I believe that it originally went "you cannot eat your cake and have it, too," which really makes a lot more sense when you think about it.
So. I'll try to dig around for the other two plans, but any links would be appreciated.
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
I think of "white peace" as being, on the Civ diplo screen, Peace Treaty | Peace Treaty.
When I talk of "making peace", I mean Rome gives us stuff and we get peace.
EDIT: X-post, and I'll find the links in a couple mins...
When I talk of "making peace", I mean Rome gives us stuff and we get peace.
EDIT: X-post, and I'll find the links in a couple mins...
Cull
Big Daddy
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,838
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
Darth Caesar
Might be a Wizard
I vote #2
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
Ooh!
I'd better start reading up on Ravus's Plan, in case Whosit and Cull don't get a chance to vote or something.
I'd better start reading up on Ravus's Plan, in case Whosit and Cull don't get a chance to vote or something.
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
I read over the Ravus plan 5 more times, and to my best judgment, it's exactly what Whosit's been saying from the start, correct? How is #2 any different than #1?
EDIT: I don't mean to make it sound like I'm swaying to #2, but I'm just wondering.
EDIT: I don't mean to make it sound like I'm swaying to #2, but I'm just wondering.
1 is taking Germany and making peace right there.
2 is taking Germany and the remainder of the Balkans while shuffling troops into Antium, taking Setia; then swinging the German troops into Rome; then considering our situation before advancing further.
2 is taking Germany and the remainder of the Balkans while shuffling troops into Antium, taking Setia; then swinging the German troops into Rome; then considering our situation before advancing further.
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
Got it. Thanks.
Lighthearter
President of the United States
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
After the Russian hostage situation, I don't exactly trust you...
Lighthearter
President of the United States
After the Russian hostage situation, I don't exactly trust you...
Wise decision
- Lighthearter
Yes, but as Ravus has stated, will Rome take peace? Very likely they'll demand Antium at the least. All we have inflicted is a flesh wound. If we throw peace, they'll either rebuild grow stronger and fight us, which is only less desirable than having them vassalize Russia.
It is impractical to place the economy as the top priority during wartime. What we need to do is to continue fighting until we get peace on OUR terms. Which is why I consider 2 the better option.
It is impractical to place the economy as the top priority during wartime. What we need to do is to continue fighting until we get peace on OUR terms. Which is why I consider 2 the better option.
Cull
Big Daddy
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,838
Antium is their second city. A core part of their empire. The AI I believe will make a complete white(by no concessions on either side) peace.
It is impractical to push for war when we can't. I believe our dead even is 50% RIGHT NOW. Somewhere around 30% after Germany would be realistic.
It is impractical to push for war when we can't. I believe our dead even is 50% RIGHT NOW. Somewhere around 30% after Germany would be realistic.
- Status
