I gotta agree with Fargle here. The Vikings et al. are far more of a threat to us than the Irish... even if Ireland IS blocking my view of Iceland... There'll be time for the Irish later. The Vikings are a threat now.
Realpolitik CIV - An Interactive AAR
- Thread starter Lighthearter
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
That's not how Imperialism works.
Captain Fargle
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2009
- Messages
- 544
Heat to break it to you Grue but the Irish Mongols control Iceland as well....
Well, we just need Ireland. We can vassalize the rest.
---
Wait, there's a Poland now? This is World War I all over again...
---
We MUST move the capital. 13gpt would be HUGE for us. And don't give the "commerce-heavy, production-light" argument. We'll make it up with Beuro, Workshops, and Watermills later.
---
Our best bet right now would be detente, building basic infra, getting the economy back on track, then all-out military production.
And for the last time, we are NOT giving up any other cities besides Medio.
---
Wait, there's a Poland now? This is World War I all over again...
---
We MUST move the capital. 13gpt would be HUGE for us. And don't give the "commerce-heavy, production-light" argument. We'll make it up with Beuro, Workshops, and Watermills later.
---
Our best bet right now would be detente, building basic infra, getting the economy back on track, then all-out military production.
And for the last time, we are NOT giving up any other cities besides Medio.
I agree we shouldn't completely neglect Longbows, but neither should we focus on them. Maybe just station one or two in border cities or on some strategic hills.
That's the thing - yes, they are more powerful defending than crossbows (except for against melee), but WE DON'T WANT TO BE DEFENDING IN THE FIRST PLACE. Our units should be the ones attacking their units, even if it's in our territory.
And for attacking purposes, longbows and crossbows are exactly the same except crossbows are better vs. melee.
OK, I accept this reasoning.
No, I get it, and I'm not complaining, but I want to figure out a way to deal with it.
But we don't want to have our units getting attacked in the first place.
Ffffffff
Nekator
Master of Desaster
Is there any overview of the current worldmap etc.?
Twinkletoes89
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 174
I support the relocation of the capital in the short-term. Right now we need as much gold as we can so we can research high and get our economy back on track. The opportunity to gain a considerable amount of gold per turn should not be sniffed at.
To those who say that moving the capital will suck a long time in the future, all I will say is that we can move it back again when our economy is stronger and won't miss the gold as much!
To those who say that moving the capital will suck a long time in the future, all I will say is that we can move it back again when our economy is stronger and won't miss the gold as much!
arya126
Squad Leader
Nekator-Not sure. I would check the latest update on page 309. I think that had an overview of the known world.
WIM-Well we know russia initially hates us from the WBing incident with the irish mongols, then the baltic crisis, the hostages, and now our tense relations with the vikings are making it worse. If you mean in-game why should we care? Worry about IC. Thats the part that matters in this game, because of our WBing GM.
The vikings probably hate us because russia hates us, we took cumae, we took medio, and we basicly said your not getting our cities in negotiations, which pissed them off.
CF-What you just described isnt even Imperialism. Havent we already made clear WE NEED TWO TERMS OF PEACE? After that, we should have a sturdy defensive line on the viking/greek border, and a strike force ready to take down ireland. I dont see the big deal about it. Its a resource rich island right next to our homeland, and we can take out a minor late game threat by vassalizing the mongols in the process. It will be 2 terms away, and wont even be a major campaign. It will be a sideshow, mostly for experience and land.
Gruekiller- We dont even know where iceland is on the map yet, let alone know if the mongols have it. They probably do though. But thats one more point to go to war with them.
Spec- You should ALWAYS have a defensive force. ALWAYS. I am very against any offensive wars against the buddhist bloc until the industrial revolution time period. Really. We need a SOLID defensive border for a few centuries, while we expand into weaker countries, get some vassals, and rebuild the weak economy.
Will comment more later tonight.
WIM-Well we know russia initially hates us from the WBing incident with the irish mongols, then the baltic crisis, the hostages, and now our tense relations with the vikings are making it worse. If you mean in-game why should we care? Worry about IC. Thats the part that matters in this game, because of our WBing GM.
The vikings probably hate us because russia hates us, we took cumae, we took medio, and we basicly said your not getting our cities in negotiations, which pissed them off.
CF-What you just described isnt even Imperialism. Havent we already made clear WE NEED TWO TERMS OF PEACE? After that, we should have a sturdy defensive line on the viking/greek border, and a strike force ready to take down ireland. I dont see the big deal about it. Its a resource rich island right next to our homeland, and we can take out a minor late game threat by vassalizing the mongols in the process. It will be 2 terms away, and wont even be a major campaign. It will be a sideshow, mostly for experience and land.
Gruekiller- We dont even know where iceland is on the map yet, let alone know if the mongols have it. They probably do though. But thats one more point to go to war with them.
Spec- You should ALWAYS have a defensive force. ALWAYS. I am very against any offensive wars against the buddhist bloc until the industrial revolution time period. Really. We need a SOLID defensive border for a few centuries, while we expand into weaker countries, get some vassals, and rebuild the weak economy.
Will comment more later tonight.
Twinkletoes89
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 174
Also, to weigh in on the Crossbow vs Longbow argument:
On a border with an enemy with a Melee UU, Crossbows don't need promotions to be good offensively or defensively against it. Longbows need to be promoted to Shock to be as good and if they can be double promoted, then we can make the crossbows stronger with the same promotions.
Longbows are good for passive defense but if we are attacked, I would be very surprised if we defend passively! Crossbows are also better for a counter-offensive after absorbing the attack.
On a border with an enemy with a Melee UU, Crossbows don't need promotions to be good offensively or defensively against it. Longbows need to be promoted to Shock to be as good and if they can be double promoted, then we can make the crossbows stronger with the same promotions.
Longbows are good for passive defense but if we are attacked, I would be very surprised if we defend passively! Crossbows are also better for a counter-offensive after absorbing the attack.
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT OFFENSIVE WARRING. I am talking about using OFFENSIVE UNITS to fight a DEFENSIVE WAR.
When I say "offense," I don't mean invading enemy territory and capturing cities. I simply mean that our units are attacking theirs. And when I say "defense," I mean that their units are attacking our units. The best way to fight a DEFENSIVE war is to use OFFENSIVE units to attack the enemy stack, instead of waiting for the enemy stack to attack you. I can explain more if I need to, but I just wanted to get the basic concept across. I think the use of the terms "offense" and "defense" was confusing.
Deja'vu... I'm pretty sure the offensive units for a denfensive war topic was used... about three thousand posts ago. sheesh.
Anyway i agree with Spec mostly. But we shouldn't underestimate the power of city garrison 3 Longbows. Also getting those first strikes make you more immune to collateral damage if i remember right so thats useful.
-
euggghhhhh i'd forgotten how much spam occured during the Unity Administration.
Anyway i agree with Spec mostly. But we shouldn't underestimate the power of city garrison 3 Longbows. Also getting those first strikes make you more immune to collateral damage if i remember right so thats useful.
-
euggghhhhh i'd forgotten how much spam occured during the Unity Administration.
Whosit
Entropic Knight
Actually, it's not First Strikes, but the Drill Promotions that grant reduced collateral damage. It just so happens that the Drill Promotions also grant more First Strikes.
So, I suppose if you expect a lot of siege, having a couple City Garrison units, and the rest Drill might not be so bad, although Drill won't defend as well as CG. :shrug:
I hadn't joined the game back then, so I wouldn't know...
What power? For CG promotions to help, the enemy has to be attacking our city, and that's not a good position to be in. The enemy can either pillage whatever they want, or bombard/collateral/suicide their way to capturing the city. Also, IIRC, AI units won't attack under certain odds, so if our fortified unit is too strong, they won't attack it (instead deciding to pillage or target another city).
Which is why we should promote to Drill rather than CG. Drill is more useful both offensively and defensively.
Also, we should keep some mounted units around that are capable of flanking siege. Mounted units are especially good for defense because they can move around from city to city quickly, so they can enter the battle immediately even if built in a city not near the action.
Lighthearter
President of the United States
Here's a custom map of the political situation. It may not be entirely accurate, so don't kill me. Neutral is white and we are green.
- Lighthearter
Whosit
Entropic Knight
Agreed. I'm still hammering out the details (and waiting on some info, *wink wink*) on the whole Plan, but with the proper configuration, Birmingham can produce 2-turn Knights (important since it's far away from our eastern borders), and Antium can produce 2-turn Catapults. Other cities can produce the odd Crossbowman/Longbowman/Maceman/whatever. Assuming no interruptions, I'd say we should be able to build up at least a dozen Knights and a dozen Catapults, which would form a very nice core army. This build-up could and should continue into the next term.
Tactics are easy: Throw all the catapults at the enemy stack, then throw the Knights. Build more catapults. Rinse and repeat. Knights also flank all siege units of our age.
Oh, and "Poland" is Greece, which are some colonies that Ragnar turned into a vassal state.
- Status
