30-10-2003 04:49									#1
	The Fate of CFC Suffering from ads?

It seems to me that this issue is what we're centering a lot of discussion around, so I thought it might be time to cut to the heart. The most important points to consider when voting, it seems to me:

What do we think the long-term intentions of CFC are?
Is CFC likely to attack us? Are they sensible enough to realize the folly of that act? Is pride likely to make them attack anyhow? Could they potentially ally with someone on the other continent to drive us under? Will they be able to contribute to an intercontinental invasion meaningfully, given their economic status now?

What are the benefits of keeping CFC around?
What, specifically, can we gain from having CFC around? Are these things that we can expect to gain on the other continent as well? Is the situation there too unstable to allow for tech trading there as a predictable thing? Would CFC be willing to trade luxuries if they found them?

What are the benefits of removing CFC?
How difficult would this be? How would we deal with the obvious corruption issues involved in controlling a continent? Could we expect to be able to defend an entire continent if the need arose? Can we be certain to get the resources we need on our half, given the number of players in the game? If we did decide to remove CFC, WHEN would such an action be appropriate? How quickly could we recover when we finished such a war - would the threat of an intercontinental invasion at this point be a real danger to us?

How would our actions be viewed by CGN and GWT?
Would they be likely to get involved on either our behalf or CFC's? Would this damage their relations with us for our warlike ways, or improve their relations with us out of respect for our great strength?

	30-10-2003 05:09									#2
	Tired of ads?

Isn't this extremely early? I know why you put it up, FP, but I don't feel comfortable with even trying to decide CFC's ultimate fate when the war is still far from won against GCA. CFC has been a very useful and friendly ally, and I would despise it were we to change tack on that so soon.


Things change fast in this game, and why take out CFC? All it will give us are some hopelessly corrupt cities and no lux that we don't already have. For tech purposes, if nothing else, they are valuable alive. In a 3-civ world one can easily be shut out, and there is no guarantee it will be us staying in the loop.

	30-10-2003 05:51									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I want CFC's help to get us to the Industrial era. After that, I would rather have them eliminated from the game.

So I voted "post-Cavalry, pre-Industrial". This is an ideal circumstance, and I think it would take some work to pull off: our relationship with CFC will probably turn sour the second they realize (for real) that they're our, uh...vassal.




Dominae

	30-10-2003 06:09									#4
	Got spare money?

What do we think the long-term intentions of CFC are?
If I was on their team....
I will still be throwing up every option available to us to win this game.
Sure we took a beating and made a few mistakes, but we have a GA and Riders up our sleeve.
Apolyton is our biggest threat. They need us now, but as soon as GCA is finished, we could be their next target. We need to play nice and make them our friends, agree to everything they say, and lull them into a sense of security. Meanwhile, we build cities & infastructure, and make horsemen ready for Rider upgrades. We get a nice invasion point like BoP....Then hit them with everything we got. Apolyton would of exhausted their GA already against GCA.

While we will have a fuel injected Rider producing GA enhanced economy. Surely we can take a large bite of them... at least cripple them so that we would be their equals and would no longer be their vassel.

Remember that Apolyton left us to fight GCA alone. They are getting prime GCA land while we lost territory. CFC blood was spilt so that Apolyton could come in and take the glory of destroying GCA. We owe them nothing, and an unexpected offensive may put us in a position of winning this game.

So in summary... If CFC are smart warmongerors (They did choose the Chinese) then they will attack. If they dont have the economy ready with Chivalry & Riders... then it will happen soon after. The point is, that it will happen.


What are the benefits of keeping CFC around?
Only under the assumption that CGN & GWT will suddenly realise that Apolyton is a threat and agree to embargo us, would it be worthwhile keeping CFC around as a tech alliance partner.


What are the benefits of removing CFC?
Owning our own continent while CGN & GWT fight it out is a huge bonus.
We build and become a super economy while the competition remain bitter enemies and at each others throat.
Better still... Lets military align with whoever is losing the war.
Send in the military (ie Gathering Storm strategy) and take a few choice cities ourselves. Surely the loser...when they finally realise they are losing, would be overjoyed with an offer of help. Let's say it's CGN...they will know that they will be handing Apolyton the game by allowing us to take cities on their continent... but thats better than letting GWT destroy them. And coming second to Apolyton is better than 3rd to GWT.


How would our actions be viewed by CGN and GWT?
If they are smart, they will embargo us when we take out CFC.
But if we are smarter, we will align with one and offer assistence in their war.
Only by playing both sides could we get ourselves in trouble, as we potentially make two enemies instead of one.
While we wait to see which team needs help, we should be as nuetral as possible. Openly trade with both at equal and fair prices. And only trade those non-military techs.


Other Points:
I have not talked about our actual ability to to the things I suggest.
Our war against GCA may go so bad, that we do not have the military to kill CFC until after Chivalry.
Also, I do not know if we will have the ability to launch a military invasion of the other continent as soon as we identify the loser.
These things are unknown until GCA & CFC are eliminated...however it should not stop me or others from throwing up similar wild strategies.

	30-10-2003 06:26									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Hot_Enamel Owning our own continent while CGN & GWT fight it out is a huge bonus.

It's a common misconception that owning our continent will make us very powerful. Sure our Score will go up, but Corruption will not make CFC's lands very useful to us. Surely not as useful as what CFC can currently do with them, which is why it's in our best interests to have them around for now (and convince them to give us all their Commerce, so to speak).

The only advantage to getting rid of CFC, then, is to remove the possibility of a (presumably strong) attack/backstab from them later on. This is why taking the chokepoints would be so useful for us: we could get by with a more or less skeleton army (i.e. a bunch of units at the two chokepoints), while focusing the rest of our attention on our economy.

The chokepoints let us have the best of bost worlds, in a sense: the safety of "our own" continent, and the opportunity to trade with CFC.


Dominae

	30-10-2003 07:13									#6
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Dominae The only advantage to getting rid of CFC, then, is to remove the possibility of a (presumably strong) attack/backstab from them later on. This is why taking the chokepoints would be so useful for us: we could get by with a more or less skeleton army (i.e. a bunch of units at the two chokepoints), while focusing the rest of our attention on our economy. Dominae

Regarding the skeleton army at chokepoints, I'm not sure that's such a good idea. Look at what GS did to Vox in that war by going around the strength of the army to attack from behind. I'm not saying CFC would do that, but they could. Like it or not, we have to leave enough defensive strength spaced around our front to prepare for an attack from the sea too. It will be even worse when astronomy/navigation are researched as CGN/GWT could also attack us from anywhere and we wouldn't be able to see it coming.

	30-10-2003 08:13									#7
	Support Apolyton

If we hit CFC around the start of the Industrial, couldn't we switch to Communism shortly thereafter and utilize their lands?

::is not knowledgeable on the benefits of Communism vs Democracy and the corruption thereof::

	30-10-2003 08:17									#8
	Put an end to popups!

Communism gives flat distance corruption, so it can help the hopelessly corrupt, yet cripples your core. Since we are planning on having a decent core around each of the FP and Palace, I hope we never have to resort to Communism, unless it's to finish off the game.

	30-10-2003 08:25									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Communism is for the AI.




Dominae

	30-10-2003 08:36									#10
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Rhothaerill Regarding the skeleton army at chokepoints, I'm not sure that's such a good idea. Look at what GS did to Vox in that war by going around the strength of the army to attack from behind. I'm not saying CFC would do that, but they could. Like it or not, we have to leave enough defensive strength spaced around our front to prepare for an attack from the sea too.

And dont forget the inland lake/sea.
CFC want to build a navy in there. Thats why they say they need one of the chokepoints - to get them out.

It is more likely they want to build a bunch of transport ships so they can land Riders on our side of the lake.

	30-10-2003 08:39									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Benifit of keeping CFC around:

Delaying our GA until we are more ready for it. THen both of us can trigger each other's GA's for a mutual and peaceful GA.

The other 2 civs will be at war and will hopefully waste their GA on war production.

After then, we can do what we want with CFC, but we can have a better benifit from it.

I voted to keep them around.

E_T

	30-10-2003 08:56									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by E_T Benifit of keeping CFC around: Delaying our GA until we are more ready for it. THen both of us can trigger each other's GA's for a mutual and peaceful GA. I voted to keep them around. E_T

Would your vote change if GCA does eventually lose a unit and starts our GA ?

We waste our GA on military destroying GCA, & CFC still have yet to use theirs ?
Would you still trust them as partners ?

	30-10-2003 09:03									#13
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I voted immediately ....

Although realistically, I would vote as soon as we have the military to do it.

If we lose most of our military against GCA, and a win against CFC cannot be assured until the industrial age, then so be it.

	30-10-2003 11:20									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Dominae Communism is for the AI. Dominae

Communism with a Couthouse and Police Station in each city isn't a bad situation, if we had the whole Continent settled. A Courhouse and a Police Station each reduce corruption/waste by 25% and Communism starts off at ~50% corruption/waste for each city.

Then you have this 50% getting bumped down to 37.5% by the Courthouse, then to 25% by the Police Station. If we had the whole Continent settled and the Island near CFC, that 25% rate would more than compensate for what we have planned as far as cities built.

Communism works well for very large sprawls. The more cities you have, the more commerce and production you have. The only thing I don't like about it is the rush technique; it's the same as in Despotism.

	30-10-2003 11:22									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by E_T Benifit of keeping CFC around: Delaying our GA until we are more ready for it. THen both of us can trigger each other's GA's for a mutual and peaceful GA. E_T

I'm against doing this, it seems like a cheat or an exploit.

	30-10-2003 11:30									#16
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by BigFree I'm against doing this, it seems like a cheat or an exploit.

It's definitely an exploit. I'd prefer to stay far away from it.

	30-10-2003 11:46									#17
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by BigFree Communism works well for very large sprawls. The more cities you have, the more commerce and production you have. The only thing I don't like about it is the rush technique; it's the same as in Despotism.

Republic with well-placed Palace and Forbidden Palace beats Communism. That extra +1 Commerce in every tile really makes a difference.

Sure, if you've got a sprawling ugly empire with bad FP placement, you might want to consider Communism. But then, as I said, you would be the AI.


Dominae

	30-10-2003 12:31									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Dominae Republic with well-placed Palace and Forbidden Palace beats Communism. That extra +1 Commerce in every tile really makes a difference. Sure, if you've got a sprawling ugly empire with bad FP placement, you might want to consider Communism. But then, as I said, you would be the AI. Dominae

It's not just the P and FP placement Dom. If you have a ton of cities and a ton of land, the Communism beats out any other Government as long as you have Courthouses and Police Stations. What the actual number of cities is, depending on World size, is something I don't know. But I know that there is a 'magic' number that makes Communism more productive in terms of commerce and shields. Look at an extreme example. If you had 500 cities, all able to work 12 tiles, under a Democracy, what would be your average corruption/waste for all the cities? The more cities you add, the worse it gets. In Communism, the more cities you add, the more commerce and shields you get; corruption/waste factors do not change with distance or number of cities. Will we have enough room to be able to put down enough cities to get to this 'magic' number? I dunno, I guess I have to sit down one day and come up with a formula...I really dread that though, it will be tough to figure out.

	30-10-2003 12:39									#19
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

What I fear from CFC is not CFC itself but the ability of CGN and/or GWT to land in their territory and attack us from there. That will be, especially in the Railroad area, much easier for them to pull off than landing on our shores.

I'm still inclined to keeping CFC around though, especially for trade purposes, and the fact that it's more beneficial to improve our own core cities than use their land for crappy cities.

	30-10-2003 12:48									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

BigFree, in the game we're currently playing, I would see very little reason in switching to Communism. It's great to understand what Communism is supposed to do in theory, but when it comes to practice let's not make the mistake of over-analyzing this. We're not Religious, and tech is everything in PBEM games: these are two very good reasons to stick with the old faithful Republic.


Dominae

	30-10-2003 19:47									#21
	Put an end to popups!

quote: It's definitely an exploit. I'd prefer to stay far away from it.

Now, that's interesting, because that's one thing I would definately consider not an exploit. I would say it falls under sound strategy. It requires having allies you trust enough to pull it off, as well as having avoided triggering your GA in some other way. It is known and understood by everyone, and abuses no game mechanics. Why would people consider it an exploit?

	30-10-2003 20:06									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I agree whole heartedly, it is not an exploit but diplomacy. Being able to say to your partner that we will do this if you do the same for us, at whatever point in time.

I imagine that it happens all of the time in PBEM and MP. There is nothing wrong with it if it's done properly. The game allows you to get a GA through building the right GW's OR from having a successful battle with your UU. Who is to really say how the UU trigger is to actually come about. In MP/PBEM, Diplomacy is key and diplamcy DOES allow for this kind of manuover.

E_T

	30-10-2003 20:14									#23
	Suffering from ads?

Are we really in a position to take CFC out? They are weak, yeah, but they are a loooooong way from our core, our armies will be depleted from our current war, and even though we ought to be able to beat them, what would we gain, exactly? Security, yes. If we kill them, they cannot hit us later.

But what would we lose?

- A trading partner to help us in the tech race and possibly military action on the other continent.
- Troops, and the production required to replenish our losses. Instead of building civilian improvements.

I don't see the benifits of taking them out any time soon as outweighing the costs. Maybe with Cavalry. But let's not be hasty here. The current war isn't over. GWT & CGN are just getting started.

-Arrian

p.s. No vote from me yet.

	30-10-2003 20:26									#24
	Increase Your PM Length

Phoney GA-triggering "wars" are not an exploit or cheating, IMHO, but a cheesy trick. I would not feel comfortable if we started our GA in this way.

	30-10-2003 20:49									#25
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Dominae It's great to understand what Communism is supposed to do in theory, but when it comes to practice...

Sounds remarkably like real life communism to me


I personally think we should at least keep CFC around until cavalry, allowing us to build infrastructure a bit and amass a large horseman army to upgrade. Any earlier time to attack would give area tactical advantage to their faster riders.

	30-10-2003 20:52									#26
	Re: The Fate of CFC Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon It seems to me that this issue is what we're centering a lot of discussion around, so I thought it might be time to cut to the heart. The most important points to consider when voting, it seems to me: What do we think the long-term intentions of CFC are? Is CFC likely to attack us? Are they sensible enough to realize the folly of that act? Is pride likely to make them attack anyhow? Could they potentially ally with someone on the other continent to drive us under? Will they be able to contribute to an intercontinental invasion meaningfully, given their economic status now?

Attack us, very possibly. Sensible, from past experiances, unlikely but you never know... Prideful, to the point of making sure that someone else besides themselves doesn't win, very possible. But then, we should make a diplomatic effort to make sure that that target is not us. Potenially, they could do a lot of things to ultimately hurt us, but only if they aren't hurting themselves in that process either (or that they perseive that they aren't, another diplomatic effort to keep from happening).

Contributing to an Invasion would be possible, but it all depends on the timing of it. If it was right after Nav, not too likely, but if before Industrial, very much possible.

quote: What are the benefits of keeping CFC around? What, specifically, can we gain from having CFC around? Are these things that we can expect to gain on the other continent as well? Is the situation there too unstable to allow for tech trading there as a predictable thing? Would CFC be willing to trade luxuries if they found them?

To help Prevent GWT/CGN from getting a foothold on our contenent. What happens if we were to attack them ASAP, they might pull a CDG move and gift the rest of their cities to GWT. What will we do then, Attack GWT and lose any hope of future trade with them??

We KNOW that GWT does not want us trading with their current enemy and the same might very well be true with CGN. How can we accomplish this if we don't have some form of middle man who can take some of at heat from us. If we trade with CGN and then to CFC, CFC then can trade to GWT and back to us. We Benifit (and so does CFC), while those other 2 are still at war.

quote: What are the benefits of removing CFC? How difficult would this be? How would we deal with the obvious corruption issues involved in controlling a continent? Could we expect to be able to defend an entire continent if the need arose? Can we be certain to get the resources we need on our half, given the number of players in the game? If we did decide to remove CFC, WHEN would such an action be appropriate? How quickly could we recover when we finished such a war - would the threat of an intercontinental invasion at this point be a real danger to us?

As for Resources/Luxuries, we will have all of the Luxuries (silks, dyes, Incense & Furs) that are available on our mutual contenent after we have laid claim to GCA lands. We will have a Monopoly on Dyes, we can both trade our Incense. CFC will have excess Silks and furs to trade. This makes for interesting combinations of Trade oppertunities.

As for getting the whole contenent whiped into shape, in a short period of time, is very hard to do. It's easier to consolidate what we now (and will have with GCA lands), than to try to do the whole thing. If at some future date, we do have problems with CFC towere we have to elimiate them, we will be in a better position to work on their area than we do now.

quote: How would our actions be viewed by CGN and GWT? Would they be likely to get involved on either our behalf or CFC's? Would this damage their relations with us for our warlike ways, or improve their relations with us out of respect for our great strength?

We know that GWT is somewhat involved with GCA, but they apparently didn't trade things with them, because GCA had nothing to offer them, theirby, GCA's building of the GL. If GWT was so interested in GCA's survival, they would hve traded them Construction and GCA could have instead built the Great Wall.

But don't discount the possiblity of GWT getting involed, IF GCA feels that they will lose. GCA might gift GWT a city or 2 to them, and then what will we do?? In the process, GWT might gift them a few of the old Firaxis sites in return for Help against CGN, especially after they get Chivalry.

And as for GWT/CGN getting involed with CFC, we have no idea, but it's best not to tempt fate...

E_T

	30-10-2003 20:55									#27
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by vondrack Phoney GA-triggering "wars" are not an exploit or cheating, IMHO, but a cheesy trick. I would not feel comfortable if we started our GA in this way.

(not that I'm above using a cheesy trick now and then)

	30-10-2003 20:57									#28
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by vondrack Phoney GA-triggering "wars" are not an exploit or cheating, IMHO, but a cheesy trick. I would not feel comfortable if we started our GA in this way.

It's Diplomacy at the heigth of it's art. Being able to trust that you neighbor/partner isn't using that extra production to get ready to stab you in the back (after teh GA is over) is the key. It might be cheesy to some, but it's a sound strategic move.

E_T

	30-10-2003 22:04									#29
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

...which reminds me of a remarkable thread in the Strat forum I read few days ago. Started by Dominae, it was a recap of a PBEM game played by several Strat forum folks (Dominae, Dave McW, jshelr, Sir Ralph, Nor Me, alexman - I think that was the six).

Very interesting reading... besides other things, I would like to recommend reading about how Sir Ralph sold his obsolete warrior for 40g, letting the Egyptians (Dave McW - later proclaimed the winner of the game) trigger their GA at the convenient moment...

I am not ok with this trick, since either you are abusing your vassal (who cannot tell you to stuff it), or you are trying to gamble - hoping you choose a "better" time for your GA than your "partner" and that you get more out of the "deal" than him.

As for the soundness of this strategic move... I could not agree to that. I actually consider it quite unsound. If you want your GA before your partner and you do use it wisely, you should become one of the top dogs. What use could your "partner" have for his GA other than getting ready to stab you, hoping to turn the tides? There is only one winner in Civ. And if it's him having the GA first? Then, either, he uses them wisely and becomes one of the top dogs, actually forcing you to use your own GA to get ready to cut him to size in order to prevent him from winning, or he wastes them - which, OTOH, puts you at the risk of having to face a broken promise, when the partner fails to fulfil his part of the deal, seeing it would actually mean giving the game up.

Either, you are relying on the "honour" of your partner, on his ability to consciously allow you gain an advantage over him in a moment he will least want it, or you are putting your own "honour" at stake, risking a situation which will force you to let someone else win. I would not call that a sound strategic move. I would call that a major gamble.

Because of this, it only is a sound strategic move, when you are (ab)using your vassal. Which I consider cheesy trick. But that's just me. I am not pushing it. It's just my opinion.

	30-10-2003 22:27									#30
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I suppose calling it an exploit wasn't the best term. Vondrack puts it better and I agree with him. It's my opinion that we should stay away from it. If we win this game I'd prefer it to be without the use of cheesy tricks...including the fortify galley trick. Just because we CAN use a trick that is known to all doesn't mean that we should use it.