Stationing Troops overseas

How many workers do you want to take from working our lands to building these fortresses and railroads? Every worker gone is another tile underused.

According to the plan, the troops would be scattered. Do you plan to reinforce every position with just 8 units (I'm guessing divisions mean single units) every 6 turns? 6 turns is a rather long time, considering the advent of rails and the size of any sort of invasion army. Many of our soldiers would be dead by the time any trickle of reinforcements came.

General Provo's plan is considering that any enemy would even attack our position, instead of bypassing completely.

 

you seem to think our troops are il equiped and ill-trained (btw that is a fair assuption 1 division = 1 unit) they are capable for their mission. Arent u reading the plans properly, with invasion troops bypassing our positions will slow the pace of the invasion it will expose trhe invasion armies as they will be forced to bypass onto plains when our forts occupy the high ground our calvary will sally out and hit the flanks of the invading armies and fall back to the bases, hit and run, hit and un with outr artillery firing at passing units with the infantry defending against a attacks these will lead to huge enemy casualties compared to some damage to our divisions which will lick their wounds in our bases

 

No, I think our troops to be mighty fine and respect, but we wouldn't have enough to defeat an invasion force. Look at the size of the countries represented, they can field very large armies. I'm sure the AI would be dumb enough to leave themselves exposed to a cav attack and not counterattack . This is another case of assumption, where you are assuming that they won't have equally trained or equally modern troops. If our troops are evenly matched and we go toe to toe with a greater force, we will lose.

 

U forgot our forces will not be battling singlehandly we will be supprted by allied forces this has been placed into the equation and after some careful research i believe that the forces we will be facing no matter what other nation in the new world will mainly be regulars which will be less effective than our veterans and elite units iam with my utmost confidence that this operation will be a complete success I will resign my position as Grand Admiral in the MSAV and Iam prepared to take full responibility if it doesnt.

 

Careful research? What'd you do, play a few turns through? You do realize that the AI can build everything we can build. Which means they have barracks and such. I have utmost confidence that this plan hasn't been carefully planned, there is no plan on how to send reinforcements steadily and what to do incase an enemy navy blocks our reinforcements.

 

What "operation" are you talking about? We're not going to war! There are absolutely no threats to us now. What reason do we have to plan this kind of aggression against civilizations that have never sent so much as a worker to our continent? I'm extremely concerned that the MSAV is trying to steer our nation towards a war just because they want one.

 

Well, I have a very different proposal. Let us just dig in, micromanage and outproduce the other ones, and then see who wins the game. I really look forward to a more visionless game of sitting this out with longer turnchats and more builds. We should neither aid any nation being attacked, and maybe give them something from the trade office.

Let us do this, get longer turnchats with more turns and get this game over with.
Besides, there is less planning and writing for us to do.

 

I have a better idea, shead off the sarcasm, open up your eyes, and actually listen to the other side's argument instead of just shrugging it off as children's bull$h1t.

 

It was actually a real proposal

 

This is another idea the warhawks seem to have that is incorrect. We don't need wars to make the game "fun". If that were the case, we'd all be playing the Conquestgame instead of the Demogame. There are plenty of things to do other than pump out units and attack other nations. It is the idea that we need conquest and violence to keep the game interesting that is "visionless", not honest disagreement over a proposal.

 

Actually, I have not called for conquest at all lately, where did you get this from ?
Besides, we are not pumping out more units, we planned on using many of the same ones. Another point is, you guys wore me down, I do not feel for arguing overseas operations, and I rather wait for us to be dragged into a random conflict at a stage, or just produce improvements till then. I simply don't care anymore, I wait for the Epimethius
"Will of the People" (TM) to do its work and then improvize. I suggest we stop talking military planning, start over with a foreign affairs thread, and if there is war, let us improvize, if not, let us sit it out.

 

Ashburnham, challenge for you and your abolitionism. Please make Roman and Iroquois slaves free, if you can do that, with a quarter of the energy you spent on stopping MSAV proposals.

 

I certainly hope you don't think I'm doing this to be vindictive, Provo. There are many things you've done very well during your tenure as Defense Minister. Your doctrine-based planning has worked out very well, and has been implemented by most of the other Ministries as well; your handling of the Iroqouis situation was well done as well. I simply disagree with projecting our force onto nations who have done nothing to us, and who we have no reason to distrust.

That said, I agree we need to figure out what to do with the foreign workers we have working for us. But perhaps that's a topic for another thread, this one seems cluttered enough already.

 

Ashburnham, this was not vindictive, but a stretched arm out for cooperation on a non-conentious issue. I have been for liberating these time-hogs of lazy foreign workers.
I don't want foreign workers on the Japanatican Dole. Send them out and let them feed themselves.

 

blackheart, now you being purposefully misguiding, stupid or simply interested in making me look dumber than I am, or a combination of these.

These bases will allow us to decide (after stopping the turnchat when the war starts), whether we should intervene or not on a certain side. This will be discussed and polled, and there is no automation in that. Besides, Zone of control hinders any bypass, and you know that as well as I do.

 

I'm sorry, my intention was to not make myself or anyone else look stupid or be misguiding. Take a look at the proposed sites again, ZOC only covers one tile from the unit. Any stationary defense position can be passed unless it is on a land bridge, that was my point.

And I agree with Ashburnham, the MSAV has done some very good things this term, but ssending troops to other countries to fight against a nonexistant aggressor, no.

 

to Ashburn an operation does not mean war at all......to blackheart we will stop this blockade u are talking about by building a strong warship fleet rather tahn a large transport fleet

 

What blockade?...

I'm talking about that either plan requires us a strong naval force.