 |
|
thecar
|
|
can we settle on the inland next to the inland with tory on it?
it could be good be to cut off greek war ships and allow transport on to the greek homeland
just thinking
yes or no
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoopy369

|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004 time: 23:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Modo44
Basically, Courthouses reduce corruption for the rest of the game. This can allow some better MM to shave off a turn from units for the rest of the game. Markets are the next best thing, giving additional cash for the rest of the game (we won't be researching much more). Not the best, because we have too few luxuries to make them push cities into WLTED (E for Emperor, of course ). Other builds don't do that. We have enough cash to make those rushes in approximately 3-4 turns (counting both Courthouses and Markets in most cities), and get back to units. Many cities have them already, which means no slowing down in unit production.
We don't need to rush Temples in captured cities, except on islands. We get them for free in most places. |
Temples don't appear on island cities, my friend, and that's most of what (at the time) we were conquering 
It's not as black and white as you see it, Modo. On Italy a courthouse will only benefit us a little - say 3gp and 1 shield per turn - and I could imagine a marketplace in a local city near Rome would gather a lot more than that. And combine that with the fact that are army (at the time) was very small compared to what we were asking it to do, and I simply feel (felt) that delaying a courthouse 10-20 turns is (was) worth it.
(I'm emphasizing that I didn't check the last save, so I am not 100% sure it still applies - but I think so.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
snoopy369

|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004 time: 23:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by joncnunn
Macedonia is a key ally against Carthiage, they took Southern Corscia from Carthigage during my adminstration. |
You say that as if it were a good thing. Southern Corsica is (was) one of the best (corruption-wise) areas we could have taken! Now that it's no longer possible to take (without warring with Macedon) we have lost one of the better areas to conquer!
(As you mention later,) Persia is indeed larger in population than we are -- in fact if they weren't I'd be shocked. Persia starts out far larger than any other civ, and it's only through eventual Roman growth to our north that we are able to grow faster than they are.
Persia however is never a serious military threat - our 6/5 legions can easily slaughter their units, and they can never have nearly as good a military.
Macedon has much better land to grow on and a much better ultimate chance of winning the game, at least militarily, than Persia. And Aqualung makes a very true point: Macedonian cities are useful to us, both in that Macedon no longer has them AND in that we have a city that can produce military units and gold. OTOH, even many carthaginian cities, not to mention Persian, are going to be worthless to us except in the taking away. I am definitely going to suggest razing the main carthaginian cities rather than keeping them - heck, we could just raze a city every couple of turns and pretty soon have no more Carthage. It's realistic AND strategically sound! 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
snoopy369

|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004 time: 23:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by joncnunn
A massive build of forces in Italy during my administartion wouldn't have helped the invasion of Spain during my own administartion due to distance.
|
To be honest, I think that's part of the problem with this game - and not your reign specifically, but more in general - the short turn play (5 turns) is simply not long enough for people to be able to directly affect their play by their builds. Thus, no major incentive to build units, as you can't use them yourself - you have to rely on what others have built.
Admittedly, it's one of the problems with Succession games in general, but exacerbated by the short number of turns in this game relative to the ability to deliver units. Compare it to games I'm currently in, where you play 15 turns at a time when you are in the middle ages (roughly comparable to this in military tech). Of course, we couldn't do it any other way, and still have many people play the game with only a bit over 100 turns available - but it shows a need to look to the long term, particularly when judging the results of a term played. If more players had built military units during their terms, I feel we'd have been in a better position by this point in the game.
Play the scenario out yourself and compare your military position to that of our empire. We're probably in a somewhat more improved position in terms of ... improvements, but our military is pretty small compared to what i've seen in other scenarios (at similar levels and lower). I feel that we should try to enhance that position significantly compared to where we are now, militarily.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
snoopy369

|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004 time: 23:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by joncnunn
For that matter, several Italian towns were found to have insufficent units present to maintiagn order and so many of the units built had to stay put.
|
That to me is a poor use of forces. If the builds are similar to what I was planning, it means you're using useful Legion IIIs and Heavy Cavs for what amounts to guard duty, saying 1 legion III is worth 1 or 2 gpt essentially (luxury maintenance). I doubt that is the case, at least in the short term, and in the long term we're going to have more money than we know what to do with; if 10 or so more Legion IIIs show up, and 20 less gpts, we'll probably gain more gold in the long run because of the faster conquest of cities. 10 legion IIIs is enough to take 3-4 small cities at minimum, and 2 large cities (with rest period if it's well defended). I'd much rather raise the luxury rate 10% and then assign the military to the offensive.
After all, with around 80 turns or less left in the game, 1 legion III will gain only 80 gp *the whole game* in recovered luxuries - while I'm pretty sure they cost more than 80gp to buy from scratch (or even from 1 shield completed) ...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Modo44
|
 |
in western Poland
Jul 2004 time: 06:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by snoopy369
To be honest, I think that's part of the problem with this game - and not your reign specifically, but more in general - the short turn play (5 turns) is simply not long enough for people to be able to directly affect their play by their builds. Thus, no major incentive to build units, as you can't use them yourself - you have to rely on what others have built. |
This is wrong. Emperor Joncunn built a lot of improvements, and their presence will be visible for the rest of the game. But remember, that the decision comes from the Senate. The Senators do have an understanding of the whole Empire, and that's why we make the major decisions, not the short-termed Emperor. He is the one to make proposals, and to follow set goals to his best ability. 5 turns showed to be enough to rush all planned structures, no? 
quote: Originally posted by snoopy369
Admittedly, it's one of the problems with Succession games in general, but exacerbated by the short number of turns in this game relative to the ability to deliver units. Compare it to games I'm currently in, where you play 15 turns at a time when you are in the middle ages (roughly comparable to this in military tech). Of course, we couldn't do it any other way, and still have many people play the game with only a bit over 100 turns available - but it shows a need to look to the long term, particularly when judging the results of a term played. If more players had built military units during their terms, I feel we'd have been in a better position by this point in the game. |
Perhaps yes, perhaps less so. Succession games with 15 turns are just as prone to this "too short reign" thing. I've had invasions called off, or stalled, by other players who didn't do as I planned. Plus, most games are not played with Accelerated Production turned on, so they are "slower". Still, a player can affect the course of things very much. Just imagine what you'd do without all "my" Workers in the Iroquis game. 
quote: Originally posted by snoopy369
Play the scenario out yourself and compare your military position to that of our empire. We're probably in a somewhat more improved position in terms of ... improvements, but our military is pretty small compared to what i've seen in other scenarios (at similar levels and lower). I feel that we should try to enhance that position significantly compared to where we are now, militarily. |
I agree totally. That's why it was necessary to rush structures, that will increase our income and shield output greatly. This way we are now able to train, and rush units much faster. And I think from now on we will be doing just that, followed closely by claiming territory (from others ).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoopy369

|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004 time: 23:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Modo44
This is wrong. Emperor Joncunn built a lot of improvements, and their presence will be visible for the rest of the game. But remember, that the decision comes from the Senate. The Senators do have an understanding of the whole Empire, and that's why we make the major decisions, not the short-termed Emperor. He is the one to make proposals, and to follow set goals to his best ability. 5 turns showed to be enough to rush all planned structures, no? 
|
I did not say he didn't - that was the point of saying that it wasn't directed at him specifically. And the Senate was not exactly asked if we should build military or marketplaces. Heck, I don't recall being asked much of anything in that area. For someone who's a big fan of telling other emperors what to do, he had fewer polls and fewer low-level directive posts than anyone ... so I'm not sure how you can say it was the will of the Senate.
quote:
Perhaps yes, perhaps less so. Succession games with 15 turns are just as prone to this "too short reign" thing. I've had invasions called off, or stalled, by other players who didn't do as I planned. Plus, most games are not played with Accelerated Production turned on, so they are "slower". Still, a player can affect the course of things very much. Just imagine what you'd do without all "my" Workers in the Iroquis game. 
|
That is quite true - but you have a lot longer to affect the game, and to be honest I think you're much better at the long term view than most. You also have a specific bent towards worker production, so I'd consider it a shock if you didn't build them 
quote:
I agree totally. That's why it was necessary to rush structures, that will increase our income and shield output greatly. This way we are now able to train, and rush units much faster. And I think from now on we will be doing just that, followed closely by claiming territory (from others ). |
We could have built more units during that build, however. You don't have to build all of the marketplaces right now - and the reduced amount we're gaining from capture cities and military prominence will hurt us in the longer run possibly more than the reduced amount of gold will.
No-one disagrees that we should have been building both marketplaces and military units. I simply feel that we should have had some more meaningful military production rather than the fairly small production we've seen so far...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Modo44
|
 |
in western Poland
Jul 2004 time: 06:19
|
|
quote: Originally posted by snoopy369
That is quite true - but you have a lot longer to affect the game, and to be honest I think you're much better at the long term view than most. You also have a specific bent towards worker production, so I'd consider it a shock if you didn't build them  |
Or Courthouses, or Temples, or Barracks, or city placing, ... There are many ways to affect the game in the long run, even if given a short period only. And it's even easier in this Roman succesion, because the Emperors' actions are coordinated by the Senate.
quote: Originally posted by snoopy369
We could have built more units during that build, however. You don't have to build all of the marketplaces right now - and the reduced amount we're gaining from capture cities and military prominence will hurt us in the longer run possibly more than the reduced amount of gold will. |
It's AP, remember? Meaning, each gold coin, and each shield count more. Trust me, we'll be doing much better now. Looking forward to lots of cash-rushes in the future. This will more than make up for a few turns of slower military training.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19. Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|