Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik

[Brucha]

Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik - The People and the State

After my first real win at Civ3 recently, I have decided on another game but this time at Monarch. This will be the first time at this level, and I’ve also chosen some fun limits to the new game.

I will play Russia with the goal of becoming Communist as soon as possible - once in the Industrial Age, I must research Nationalism and them Communism before any other tech in that age. Once Communism is learned, I must switch immediately over to Communism as a new government. I decided ahead of time to forgo using Republic and go for Monarch instead (Russia never really was a republic anyways).

The second limit, or rule, is one I will call life-time ally. One other civ in the game will be my game-long ally no matter what happens. Once Nationalism is learned, I must maintain an on-going MPP with that civ for the rest of the game. As China is the only other civ that favors Communism as a government, I have chosen China to be this ally.

So, here’s the game set-up:

Map: Kal-El’s 140 x 140 resource earth map with all 31 civs in play, all with historical beginning locations.
Victory Conditions: Domination, Cultural and Conquest enabled, but I am only going for a Histographic victory, that being to have the highest score at the end of the game.
Difficulty Level: Monarch
Settings: Re-spawn AI players, AI is set at More Aggressive, Barbarians are Restless.

Thus the title, The People and the State. This will probably end up being a long game, and I am anticipating war early on in the game. With 12 civs starting in Eurpope alone (with at least 6 more just to the south f my start position), the Ancient Times will be bloody.

Chapter Guide

Spoiler :

Founding of the Rus
Middle Ages - War with the English and Dutch
Expansion to the East and the Russo-Finnish War
Expansion to the East - Part Two
Expansion to the East - Part Three
Expansion to the East - Part Four
Expansion to the East - Part Five
Peace - For Now
Alliances and Pacts
Октябрьская революция - The October Revolution
War with Scandinavia
Uneasy Peace
The Push South
The Persian War
The Destruction of Babylon
War Spreads
War with Sumeria
German-Russo Alliance
Russo-French War
Battle for London
Sunrise of the French and the Destruction of Delhi
World at War
Fall of America
Prelude to War
Oперация буран - Operation Blizzard
Oперация буран - Operation Blizzard - Phase Two
Oперация буран - Operation Blizzard - Final Phase

 

[Brucha]

In 4000 BC, here is my capitol at the start:

So, a lot of cattle, wheat and game abounds, with a river right near by. However, there seems to be a lot of marshland also.

With 11 civs starting out to the west of me in Europe, this is going to be a tight race for space and city settlement. I am expecting a flood of settlers from the west as soon as the lands in Europe are used up - which should not take long.

So, my early objective is to settler rush as many settlers as I can. However, being an Expansionist civ, I want to also take advantage of expansionist civ’s better gifts from goody huts. Though I start with a scout, I decide to start off my builds with another one to explore and hit as many goody huts as possible.

My starting scout takes off right away for the goody hut northwest of Moscow…and give me Pottery. This is what I hope to have happen. I want to fill up my Ancient Times tech tree with as many free techs from goody huts as I can. From there, I send my scout heads southeast from there while my newly-built scout heads east.

Within several turns, my scouts discover two more goody huts, one giving me Ceremonial Burial and the other gives me a free city in 3650 BC- St. Petersburg! You’ve got to love the Expansionist trait!

Using my capitol for settler building, I quickly send out several settlers right away, founding the cities of Smolensk, Rostov, Novgorod and Yakaterinburg. Meanwhile, my scout have discovered several more goody huts, giving me Masonry, Warrior Code and Mysticism. That should give me a good lead on the tech tree over the AI.

My plan for the Ancient Times is to go right after Alphabet, Writing, then Philosophy. However, I am not going for Republic but rather Monarchy as a government until I can get Communism. I am also only targeting a select group of Wonders. I think that I can easily get the Mausoleum of Mausollos and the Great Library before any one else. The Mausoleum will give me some good Culture points, while the Great Library will give me two free techs. I want to stay as far ahead of the AI in techs that I can.

By the time I settle my first four cities (plus my free one), the AI begins sending waves of settlers across my western-most territory. I can force most to turn around by using the WITHDRAW OR DECLARE WAR; others I block with a combination of warriors and workers. However, some get through, though most settle their cities on the eastern side of the mountain chain, the Urals.

In 1650 BC, I finish Philosophy, of course being the first to do so, and receive Code of Laws for it:

I had made a mistake right here, as I am always so used to using the Philosophy slingshot to get Republic early that I researched Code of Laws when I meant to research Literature and Polytheism. Oh well. The next turn, I received Literature for free.

Now, as soon as I finished Philosophy, I was given a Scientific Great Leader, so I used the leader to rush building of the Great Library, which was finished in 1650 BC also. Everything is going according to my plans as I end the Ancient Times and enter the Middle Ages in 150 BC.

Amazingly, the first age passes without the war I had anticipated happening. All the Europe civs seems to be prepared to accept their fate as having very few cities and no room to expand - except through me.

 

[Quintillus]

Wow. That's amazing luck with the goody huts.

Great start. I love playing the Soviets in Civ3, not to mention listening to/memorizing the Soviet anthem. Next year I'm planning to learn Russian so I can know what the words I'm singing actually mean !

I'd thought of the Communist variant as being a possible Story thread myself. Communism is a good government anyways, and it's all the better to play it with Russia. I couldn't think of any real good variant for it, though, beyond starting with Communism, which isn't that realistic.

Were you going for conquest, I'd ask if you were planning to backstab China eventually, reflecting the Sino-Soviet split. But it looks like you're planning to be a faithful ally.

Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik translates directly as Union of Soviet Socialist Repulics. I'm no Russian expert, but does this really equate to The People and The State?

btw, you have the same picture twice in the second post. Might want to change that.

I'll certainly be following this, Soviet type stuff always interests me, even in CivIII.

 

[Brucha]

With the start of the Middle Ages, I get Feudalism for free, and start building the Art of War right away in Moscow. I anticipation of this, I had been building the Hanging Gardens, which was to finish in 170 BC, but I was beaten out with 1 turn left to completion. So, I naturally switched it over to the Art of War, allowing me to finish it in 150 BC in a single turn. Now, all my cities one the continent will have free barracks. I also get Monotheism for free from the Great Library ( at least that’s why I got it for free)

Here’s my territory at 150 BC:

I have settled 12 cities in all, not a bad start considering the problems with room. The mountain range on the eastern edge of the map is the Urals. The Germans managed to settle Hamburg to the north of me in Scandinavia, while the French settled Orleans just east of Smolensk on my side of the Urals. On the other side of the Urals, the civs of Europe have settled a number of cities in a random arrangement, which are basically fragmented at best. Other than that, I’ve got a nice compact core in which to build (and conquer) from. However, I am still short of the requisite number of cities in order to build my Forbidden Palace.

I had thought about expanding to the east some more, but I would have had to go a good distance further east to do so, and so I opted to stop expanding peacefully at this point. I certainly outnumber all my neighbors, in fact all the civs of Europe for that matter.

Here’s my standings as of 150 BC at the start of the Middle Ages:

My stats look good though it s too early in the game to really treat them with more than a passing glance.

My big problem is this, however:

I have plenty of iron and horses, but I only have one luxury. I was able to trade Monarchy to Babylon for some spices, but that is the only luxury I can get right now in trade. I think that most luxuries I need I am going to have to either trade for them or go to war and take them by force. Thankfully, Europe has plenty of luxuries for me…

As I entered the Middle Ages, I kept expecting to be attacked from Europe as the other civs tried to expand further east. I expected the Celts or the Germans to do this. No, it was the sneaky English that decide to be the first to try to expand by war in 70 AD:

Amazingly, the English decide to declare war and invade right next to Vladivostok with a single swordsman and warrior - both regulars. Within the city, I have a veteran archer, a veteran pikeman, and a regular pikeman. I decide not to wait, and I attack the invading units, killing both of them with no losses for me. Good, now I have a war with a non-contact civ and that should give me some war happiness.

I have built up my military quite a bit, garrisoning my border cities with at least 3 units each, in anticipation of an attack, so I am not the least bit worried. However, at this point, I am not ready to go to all-out war with Europe just yet. I want time to build up my cities.

At first, my money situation was pretty bad - Monarch is not really suited for commercial reasons, but finally my money starts to finally get better by this point. Even with 2-3 units per city, I am having some unhappy citizen problems with the lack of money (as well as having only two lux‘s), and I was forced to build temples in most of my cities. At least that should boost my culture score and prevent any culture flips.

After the 70 AD invasion, I don’t see the English for a awhile. But the Dutch decide to declare war on me after I order them to remove their forces or declare war (they were trying to send two warriors across my territory from their capitol to the west to another city to the east of the Urals).

However, I don’t see any invading Dutch units for some time after the declaration of war. So, now I am at war with two civs that are a considerable distance from me, and so I should get even more war happiness from this. I am loving it.

As I was researching Chivalry, I started building a palace in Novgorod in anticipation of building the Knights Templar (if for no other reason to keep it out of any of my neighbors’ hands). On turn before Novgorod was to finish its palace, I finished researching Chivalry, giving me the Knights Templar in one turn in 170 AD:

Here’s my standings as of 190 AD:

It looks like I am still going strong in most categories, but I have a long way to go from here.

In 260 AD, England once again invades my territory by sea, with a total of…you guessed it, two units. For some reason, I decide to repel the invaders with three veteran pikemen pulled out of Yaroslavl and Vladivostok. I end up losing one pikeman but kill both warriors - not a good trade off IMO.

The next turn, the Dutch finally invade me from across the Urals:

Should be no problem, right? Apparently not for me. I attack the invaders with a crusader, an archer and 2 pikemen for support. My crusader kills the warrior, while the Dutch archer kills my archer, who has to be finished off by one of my pikemen.

On a better note, my trade is getting slowly better:

For a gpt amount, I have traded off some iron to Persia, traded Furs for Wine to Spain. Lastly, I got Silks from China, my ally. It’s not the best but that’s 3 lux’s so far by trade.

Back to the war with England, they try another invasion , this time next to Khabarovsk:

Well, at least this invasion is a little stronger…I should have waited, but I attack first, starting with my garrisoned crusader, who kills the English spearman, I lose a veteran pikeman to the swordsman, and kill the warrior with another pikeman. That leaves the spearman left. I have to say that I need to stop attacking these invaders when they are in such a position which are forced to attack my cities in order to even move. In both English invasions, I have lost two of my own units to inferior enemy units.

 

[Brucha]

Wow. That's amazing luck with the goody huts.

Great start. I love playing the Soviets in Civ3, not to mention listening to/memorizing the Soviet anthem. Next year I'm planning to learn Russian so I can know what the words I'm singing actually mean !

I'd thought of the Communist variant as being a possible Story thread myself. Communism is a good government anyways, and it's all the better to play it with Russia. I couldn't think of any real good variant for it, though, beyond starting with Communism, which isn't that realistic.

Were you going for conquest, I'd ask if you were planning to backstab China eventually, reflecting the Sino-Soviet split. But it looks like you're planning to be a faithful ally.

Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik translates directly as Union of Soviet Socialist Repulics. I'm no Russian expert, but does this really equate to The People and The State?

btw, you have the same picture twice in the second post. Might want to change that.

I'll certainly be following this, Soviet type stuff always interests me, even in CivIII.

Oops, didn't notice the pic duplication. Thanks for pointing that out. As far as Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik, I realized that it was not a translation of the People and the State, it just sounded like a good title.

With China, who knows. I might not be able to continue an alliance with China through the entire game. I'll have to wait and see.

 

[Brucha]

Afte posting the game up to my latest save, I went back to the game just to look at the strategic situation around my territory. Here's some screen shots of my borders:

My border with Scandinavia:

My border to the south:

My eastern border with the Urals:

And lastly, my border with Europe:

After looking around, this is the conclusion I came to:

• 
  There really are not any lux's nearby to take by force except for furs in Scandinavia.

• 
  To the east across the Urals, there is no threat. The Cities are too fragmented to be a problem for now.

• 
  My choice for war and advancement seems to be either into Germany or Scandinavia.

Germany offers me no extra resources, but I can pick up 2 more horses and two city locations for excellent building. plus, I outnumber Germany right now, and they only have the Archer as their best unit.

Scandinavia has two more iron and furs, as well as lots of fish and whales. Attacking them would remove any threat on that front. However, the Vikings military is the same size as mine, and they have the swordsman.

Taking Berlin and Leipzig would be rather easy, whereas invading Scandinavia would be more difficult, as they have 4 cities and better troops than the Germans.

This is going to be a long game and I am worried that, being at war already with England and the Dutch, if I attack either Germany or Scandinavia it will bring in other neighboring civs against me. I really don't want war with all my neighbors right now in the game. Germany then would be the best best right now IMO because I could take both cities quickly, as I have Knights now.

What do you think?

 

[Brucha]

Sorry to post again but I had a thought. Whomever I decide to go to war with, would it not be better to have them declare war on me first? For instance, if I decided to go after Germany, planting a single unit in their territory, turn after turn, until they declare war would be the best way to go. Then I don't have to suffer the Rep hit for declaring war, thus preventing other civs from joining in the war.

 

[ChaosArbiter]

It probably would be better to go after Germany - the central and eastern territory in Europe has a lot of saltpetre and coal, IIRC. A question about your enemies: if you started them in the historical starting places, where are the Byzantines? Didn't the Turks invade from farther east anyway (by the Caspian Sea, I believe)?

Great story! Just don't treat the Cossacks the way the Soviets really did.

 

[Brucha]

It probably would be better to go after Germany - the central and eastern territory in Europe has a lot of saltpetre and coal, IIRC.

Yea, that's the conclusion that I came to also. The two German cities would be really easy to take I think.

A question about your enemies: if you started them in the historical starting places, where are the Byzantines? Didn't the Turks invade from farther east anyway (by the Caspian Sea, I believe)?

I guess Kal-El decided to leave the Byzantines out when he decided to make the map. The Ottomans' starting location is where Istanbul is located, just north of Greece.

 

[Lexicus]

Some ideas:

Expand eastward and a little south to reflect the actual territory of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.
Rename Yakutsk Leningrad.
Build a city on the Volga, and name that Stalingrad.
When you switch to Communism, do a lot of pop-rushing to represent Stalin's purges.
In the late Industrial Age, start a war with Germany. Let them have the first move. Make sure they have Panzers.

Be pissed at the West when you've finished gobbling up Germany.

 

[Quintillus]

^, great suggestions for making it more like the USSR. That would make for an interesting story, to actually encompass all the Soviet territory before moving in anywhere else.

Whenever I play Risk possible, I play as the Red Army, and try to control all the Soviet territory at once. I finally accomplished it this summer, though because there's no Soviet bonus like the continent bonuses, it didn't really help me in terms of winning.

You ought to at least expand east to the degree of capturing The Hague.

Well, at least this invasion is a little stronger…I should have waited, but I attack first, starting with my garrisoned crusader, who kills the English spearman, I lose a veteran pikeman to the swordsman, and kill the warrior with another pikeman.

Why are you attacking with Pikemen? I can see attacking a redlined Archer or Warrior with one, but why Swordsmen and full-health Warriors? Especially when they'd be forced to attack otherwise, you're much better off leaving your Pikes on defense.

 

[The Omega]

Sorry to post again but I had a thought. Whomever I decide to go to war with, would it not be better to have them declare war on me first? For instance, if I decided to go after Germany, planting a single unit in their territory, turn after turn, until they declare war would be the best way to go. Then I don't have to suffer the Rep hit for declaring war, thus preventing other civs from joining in the war.

Actually, you automatically get a rep hit if you have any units in another nations territory when war is declared.

 

[Brucha]

Why are you attacking with Pikemen? I can see attacking a redlined Archer or Warrior with one, but why Swordsmen and full-health Warriors? Especially when they'd be forced to attack otherwise, you're much better off leaving your Pikes on defense.

I have to admit that it was stupid to do so, but I had enjoyed a couple of beers by that point and was feeling a bit cocky I actually only had pikemen and nothign else to defend (or attack with for that matter) the city with. Still, a stupid thing to do, I admit. New rule in place then: NO DRINKING WHILE CONDUCTING COMBAT IN CIV3!

Some ideas:

Expand eastward and a little south to reflect the actual territory of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.
Rename Yakutsk Leningrad.
Build a city on the Volga, and name that Stalingrad.
When you switch to Communism, do a lot of pop-rushing to represent Stalin's purges.
In the late Industrial Age, start a war with Germany. Let them have the first move. Make sure they have Panzers.

Be pissed at the West when you've finished gobbling up Germany.

As far what Lexicus wrote above, I have to agree with Quintillus on trying to make my territory more like the actualy USSR before moving elsewhere. It seemed that the game agreed with all three of us, as you will see in my next post.

 

[Brucha]

After reading Lexicus' comment above about changing city names, I decided to jump back into the game long enough to do so and simply check out my city situation as far a micro-management. I figured that Smolensk was positioned approximately where Stalingrad should be, so Smolensk became Stalingrad. I also renamed Yakutsk to Leningrad. The renaming of Yakutsk proves to be prophetic...

I was having Novgorod building a Palace so I could could switch it over to Leonardo's Workshop when I researched Invention. Novgorod had 3 turns left on the Palace, but Invention had but one turn left as of 380 AD. I decided to finish the turn before saving to make sure I wouldn't forget to switch Novgorod over to building the Workshop. At this point, I was still undecided on whether to attack Scandinavia or Germany.

At the end of the turn (390 AD), I got this surprising message:

Not a particularly great city (only a barracks and 2 pop?), it was a bloodless free city!

With all my focus looking at Germany or Scandinavia for my upcoming attack, I didn't even notice that my boundary had crept right up to the city of Niveveh itself! After reading Lexucus' comment about trying to "Expand eastward and a little south to reflect the actual territory of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics" instead of attacking Germany or Scandinavia, my decision for my next move was made for me. time to expand to the east!

I was in the process of building a force of Knights for my invasion of Germany, but I switched plans. My 'good' neighbor the Dutch, had a city right on my border, the Hague that was just begging to be taken:

being completely isolated in its location, and garrisoned by only 2 spearmen, it would be an easy victory.

However, Scandinavia chose this moment to get intimate with Russia:

It doesn't look like much, but there is a stack just to the north of them and more across the channel in their territory who are obviously marching for my border.

Being quite sober this time for combat, I march 2 veteran pikemen from Leningrad to the hill just NW of the city to bait the Vikings into attacking that turn - they do so, and I end up losing 1 pikeman but kill 2 veteran swordsmen. Not too good.

However, in the next turn, 420 AD, the Vikings withdraw from my territory without any further attacks that turn.

At this point, China my "so-called" game-long ally decides to up the ante for her Silks:

With no chances of getting lux's anywhere else right now in the game, I am forced to pay up. Quintillus had commented earlier that:

Were you going for conquest, I'd ask if you were planning to backstab China eventually, reflecting the Sino-Soviet split. But it looks like you're planning to be a faithful ally.

That be the case later in the game if China keeps extorting me like this...

Back to the Winter War...the Vikings next move is to try to simply march past leningrad and head south, and so I am forced to attack from the city to eliminate two swordsmen with a veteran Knight, who survives.

This opts me to change tactics. I decide to form a defensive line along the border to prevent any further excursions into my territory:

The stack on the hill has a veteran crusader, veteran pike, and a regular pike, while the stack in the open has a veteran crusader, a veteran knight and a veteran pike. I don't like defending in the open like that, but the Vikings will just continue to march south past Leningrad, forcing me to attack instead of defending.

The plan works as the next turn the Vikings try to attack my defensive line. One of my vet pikes kills two swordsmen and one of my crusaders kills 2 swordsmen also. the Vikings withdraw completely from the border and for the next couple of turns there are no further attacks.

Now, at this point (480 AD), my forces were readyto capture the Hague. As I didn't want to worry about attacks in the north, I asked and got a peace treaty with Scandinavia. Their time will come soon enough once my expansion to the east and south is completed...

In 490 AD, I initiate my attack on the Hague with 4 veteran knights, a crusader and a veteran longbowman. One knight and the longbowman make mincemeat of the defending Dutch pair of spearmen and the Hague is mine:

The Hague is definitely not built in a place welcoming alot of growth...

So, as of 490 AD, my expansion is off and running. I have culturally flipped one city from the Baylonians and captured the Hague with little difficulty.The other cities to the east look like easy pickings also, as they are far from their cpaitols, and thus very hard to reinforce. All I will have to do is defend my western border with Europe and pick off the cities one by one in the east...

 

[Brucha]

Ok, time for some strategic planning and advice. The map below is my eastern border across the Urals where I am going to expand to actual Soviet Russia size and territory:

The three circled cities will be my first targets for conquest. The French city is Orleans, while the southern-most Celtic city is Alesia and the other is Lugdunum.

I have just captured the Hague from the Dutch, which is the city in the mountains at the center of the map. My plan is a three-pronged attack at the three target cities simultaneously. I don't anticipate each city to have more than 4 defenders each (and nothing better than spearmen as none of the cities have iron), and I am building a group of invaders for each city, bascially a combination of crusaders, longbowmen and knights in each group. I am hoping that these units will be in position by 600 AD or earlier. With luck, I will be able to capture each city in the first attack...or at least that's my plan. Those cities on the map are quite isolated and so cannot rely on any help from their homelands.

This brings me to my second consideration. Once I attack to the east, France and especially the Celts (who are closer to me than France) will probably invade me from the west. Therefore, I will have to maintain a strong garrison along my mutual European border to repel attackers.

With success of this conquest, I plan on then shifting these attacking forces to move against the remaining cities on the map: the German city, the two Spanish cities and the remaining Celtic city. Hopefully, the second phase can be completed by the mid 700's AD.

With the capture of the hague, I can now build my Forbidden Palace. however, I am waiting to build it until I capture the Celtic city, Lugdunum, as this would be a perfect place to do so.

One question for you all though. I am continuing my war with England for war happiness. But what about when I go to war with the Celts and France? Would it be in my benefit to get peace right after taking the french city, but stay at war with the Celts (as I will be attacking another Celt city soon afterwards)? I really don't want to be at war with most of Europe right now...

My Current Standings and Trade Situation

My trade situation really sucks. I have three extra horses that no one will trade me anything for - beyond 20 or 30 gold in a lump sum. I am exporting iron to Persia for 5 gpt, and I am trading furs for wines with Spain. Lastly, I am getting silks from China in exchange for giving them Engineering. The only civ I have contact with that has any lux's to trade is Egypt and right now we don't seem to have a trade route...

My overall standings are good so far:

My ally China has matched me in area and it looks like India is my cultural rival for now. Some time in the future I might have to go to war with India just to remove her as a cultural rival...

So, at this point, any advice for the moment, or about my strategic idea of the expansion?

Or does everyone just want to kick back and share a bottle of good Kroleweska vodka? (Sorry, I couldn't help that. I'm from Poland myself and Krole is my absolute favorite vodka)

 

[ChaosArbiter]

Well, I can't drink, so that's out
I would go to war with France and the Celts, and stay at war with both of them; once you've taken Entremont, the Celts should be out of cities (at least, I hope), so you'll be able to garrison it against the French storm. Afterwards, I'd make peace with them, and then declare against Germany.

 

[Brucha]

Well, I can't drink, so that's out
I would go to war with France and the Celts, and stay at war with both of them; once you've taken Entremont, the Celts should be out of cities (at least, I hope), so you'll be able to garrison it against the French storm. Afterwards, I'd make peace with them, and then declare against Germany.

Right now, I am still at war with England and the Dutch, so I am geting war happiness due to that - and I have no plans on ending the war with either of them any time soon. I am unsure if staying at war with France is necessary once I capture Orleans. Or course, I will have to remain at war with the Celts because I plan on going after their other city in the area soon. If I don't get some peace treaties by the time of my second round of attacks, I will be at war with:

England, the Dutch, France, Spain, the Celts, and Germany.

That could mean alot of activity along my European border while I'm expanding further east. I plan on expanding all the way to the Pacific Ocean, which is alot of territory to conquer and so perhaps being at war with only a couple of European civs at a time might be beneficial.

 

[Brucha]

As of my last game post, I had conquered the Hague from my friends the Dutch. In addition, events in the game convinced me that expanding east was my best strategy.

From 490 AD, I began to build up a large invasion force, with the objective of beginning my real push to the east. My initial targets are Orleans (owned by the French) and Lugdunum and Alesia (owed by the Celts).

While I was preparing my invasion forces, I finished building Leonardo's Workshop in Novgorod:

I decided not to target most Wonders in the game. I did want the Workshop because it truly reduces the cost for unit upgrades, however...

Back to my invasion of the east...I began with a seperate force to capture each city, having moved them to each city border, and then declared war on both France and the Celts in 590 AD...

Against Orleans, I sent 1 crusader, 3 knights, and 3 longbowmen (all vets). Although I ended up losing 1 longbowman, I killed 4 French spearmen and an elite warrior, and captured the city in one turn (as well as 7 French workers in the city:

In 600 AD, my second invading force reached Lugdunum (3 knights, 2 longbowmen, 1 medieval infantry and 1 pikeman). At the cost of losing my medieval infantry, I killed all four defending Celtic spearmen and captured the city (and 4 Celtic workers) in the same turn as attacking:

Lastly, my third invasion force reached Alesia in 620 AD, numbering 1 crusader, 3 knights and 2 longbowmen. Though I lose 1 longbowman, I kill 3 defending spearmen and 1 archer of the Celts, capturing the city and 4 Celtic workers after one turn of attacking:

While I was marching and attacking east, the French and Celts sent some units from the west across my western border, though it really amounted to no more than 3 gallic warriors in one stack, then there was no more enemy units to be seen after they were destroyed.

As soon as I captured Alesia, I asked and got a peace treaty with France. Though I do not share a common border with the French, my next attacks to the east will target a Celtic, German and Spanish city. I am still at war with England, so that would be 4 civs on my western border that I would be at war with. I am not ready yet for a major war with all of Europe, so I am willing to play peaceful with the French for now (especially as there are no other French cities to the east.

So, as of 660 AD, here's the situation in the east:

Just to the south of the map is Alesia. The dark blue circled city is Konigsburg owned by Germany. The green-circled city is owned by the Celts and the last two circled cities are Spanish. These three cities are to be my next targets for conquest. With my small losses in the first attack (as well as needing to garrison my newly-captured cites and having to move my forces to their new targets), it won't be until 700 AD until I can continue my advance.

On another note, my trade is looking a little better:

As of 660 AD, I am trading Spain furs and Currency for wines, iron to Persia for 5 gpt, trading Egypt horses and the republic for gems, and silks from China for theology.The future Soviets seem not to have alot of home-grown lux's. On the other hand, I have a total of 4 horses and 3 saltpeter. Unfortunately, I am going to have to break my trade agreement with Spain in a couple of turn when I attack. That means I am going to lose my source of wines, but hopefully I can get them from someone else.

 

[Brucha]

I am not even half the way right now to expanding all the way to the Pacific to correctly obtain the actual Soviet territory. I hope that I can occupy all this territory by the 1000's. Right now, to do so, I have only 300 years to push all the way to the Pacific Ocean by 1000 AD.

Any suggestions?

 

[ChaosArbiter]

You have your own saltpetre! Cossacks, Cossacks, Cossacks!!

Sorry. Well, I wouldn't go for *Soviet* territory by the 1000's, I'd only be worried about Russian territory - I can't tell, but it looks like you're almost there. I would suggest consolidating your gains for now; I know drawn-out wars are generally bad, but attacking the Spanish and Germans might be enough to lose you more than you gain, unless you can gauge their power vis a vis yours accurately.

I'm too tired to give any better advice, but I hope you can weather the storm you're about to unleash - the Germans in particular give me trouble when I play against them. Viel Gluck!