Term 1 - Nominations for Commander of the Armed Forces

[Chieftess]

Commander of Armed Forces - Micromanages the military operations against
foreign countries. This is a tactical position.

This was sometimes a subset of the Military Advisor.

 

[ali]

I would like to nominate myself and accept this nomination regards ali

 

[GenMarshall]

I will Self-Nominate (and accept of course) my nomination.

 

[Nobody]

i second civ general and nominate provolution

 

[Provolution]

I support both Ali and CG, and really have to decline, I am intending to be Mr Nice Guy this game (showing my Dr Jekyll side), and hope to bury the hatchet with the ususal posse. I cannot run on some offices due to old animosities I want to end.

 

[Black_Hole]

Questions for the Candidates:
1. Should we use our beginning units as garrisions, explorers, or get them experiance by barb hunting.
2. If we get into an early war should we pump many swords and archers or just attack with what we have?
3. If we get into early wars do we play offensively or deffensively?

 

[Ashburnham]

Sure wish the candidates would respond...

 

[ravensfire]

Question:
4. Under what circumstances would you allow a settler to move to a site unescorted?

-- Ravensfire

 

[GenMarshall]

Questions for the Candidates:
1. Should we use our beginning units as garrisions, explorers, or get them experiance by barb hunting.
2. If we get into an early war should we pump many swords and archers or just attack with what we have?
3. If we get into early wars do we play offensively or deffensively?

1. We should use our units as both garrision and explorers. The type of mission depends mainly on the attack and defensive points. Since the warrior has 1 attack and defense points, This unit can be used both as a defensive and offensive unit untill archers and spearmen appear onto the field, But this will also have to depend on what civilization we chose. If we do go along as the Babylons, the bowmen will be used as explorers and as they explore, would also gain experiance by barb hunting.

2. This depends if we have access to a source of iron. If we do have iron, then I would convinse the governor(s) that we need swordsmen and pump out as much of them as possible.

3. This would also depend on two things, the distance between us and the offending civ and what resources the offending civ has. If the civ is close to us but does not have any stratigic resources, then we should play offensively. But if they have significant amount of stratigic resources, then defensive play would be better.

4. Under what circumstances would you allow a settler to move to a site unescorted?

I would not allow a settler to move to a site w/o an escort. On the topic of escourting settlers, I would make sure that it would be a vet defender that will escourt the settler and to be used as a garrison unit in the newly built city.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

1. Do you like two warriors rather than one spearman (both will cost 20 shields), or does it depend on the situation, in which case please explain it (ie; if the city is size 12, build a spearman, otherwise 2 warriors -- just an example).

2. This sort of applies to you, but also other offices (I'm still getting used to this government). Do you think expansion has more priority over war, or do you think we should attempt a war even when there is space left for cities?

 

[ali]

Questions for the Candidates:
1. Should we use our beginning units as garrisions, explorers, or get them experiance by barb hunting.
2. If we get into an early war should we pump many swords and archers or just attack with what we have?
3. If we get into early wars do we play offensively or deffensively?

My apolgises for not answering earlier I just left the hospital from a operation.

1. I would like to use our units to both explore and get experience by barb hunting I dont believe garrison duty is imperative at the beginning of a game. By doing both exploring and barb hunting we 1) improve our diplomatic situation when it comes to exchanging or selling maps 2) lesson the threat of barbs to our cities and help our economy (money bonus of destroying a barb encampment). In saying this I would like to guide the defence department into a cooperative branch of the government where it would benefit not just the defence dept. but other aspects of the government such as domestic and trade, which seems to be lacking in other past governments.
2. I feel it would be hard to defeat an enemy with an primative force i would like to mobilise the military and "pump" the army with swords and archers to quickly put a decisive victory in our hands. However after such a war I would like to demoblise such a force to managable levels for the economy, but would keep a group of units for emergancies. I have noticed that some past administrations in the defence dept. has always tried to built a large military at high costs however I on the other hand would like to keep it at a mediocre level only enlarging proportional to a population rise in which to minimise cost.
3. Im not too sure black hole it would depend on why we were fighting it. I would play it on a defensive at the beginning but perhaps go on the offensive once the military was ready. But once again I cannot give a 100% answer to that it would have to depend on the political atmosphere of the war that was being fought.
4. At all cost a settler will not move into a new site without a escort unit and a vangaurd unit