19-02-2002 06:01									#1
	Underestimating AI alliances Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I must say that the way the AI makes alliances when you attack one of them is astounding...

I had , at least what I thought was a strong civilization, just to the south of the Egyptians. Persia was on an island Southwest of me.

The Persians had oil, and I had none, so I decided to attack to get theirs.

And, I was doing pretty well...until Persia signed an alliance with Egypt.........and then France.

Before I knew it, I had Egyptian units pouring over my borders ...They killed me after a while.

To be honest, I would have had not too much of a problem with Persia if Egypt had not gotten involved.

My point is to make sure you can withstand or repel an attack from any neighbor....regardless of how friendly you are with them before you make your move on another civ. Perhaps make an alliance before your attack..This may seem elementary to some, but it is essential I think.

I made an alliance with China and Greece after the Persia/Egypt alliance....just to make sure the AI didn't get them on their side too!

They were of no help, but at least I kept them from attacking me.



The AI's strongpoint in combat is in the alliances they make with each other.

	19-02-2002 08:12									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Better yet if you ally them with you immediately upon starting a war (or just before if you plan to sneak attack). If they have an alliance with you, they aren't going to invade you. Well worth even a very high price if you have strong neighbors.

Once a civ is beaten down, civs that wouldn't join the fray earlier will now do so. They want a portion of the spoils, too!

	19-02-2002 08:30									#3
	What is strategy? Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Civ3 is a strategy game, not a war game.

It doesn't really matter how the combat is designed, or how cities grow, or which buildings to make, or if spearmen occassionally beat tanks. In the long run, the only thing that matters is who will stand with you and who will betray you.

Attachment: bismarkx.jpg
This has been downloaded 490 time(s).

	19-02-2002 16:25									#4
	Easier way to get allies Tired of ads?

Sign a MPP (mutual protection pact) with another civ (in this example the Egyptians), preferably before declaring war on someone. Once the MPP is secured, declare war on the third party - in this case the Persians. Then end your turn.

Now on the Persians turn, they will attack you on your soil. This will force Egypt to declare war on Persia (even if they have a MPP with Persia also) and now Persia will be fighting a 2-front war. After you have weathered their first attack wave, counter-attack, knowing that Persia will only be sending half its army towards you now.

And remember, no permanent friends, no permanent enemies.

	19-02-2002 16:32									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

A good way to start a war is with MPP.

Looking at the diplomatic advisor screen, click on your (prospective) enemy's picture. Determine whom he is fighting a war with. Then make an MPP with that civilization. As soon as your enemy attacks that Civ, you will be drawn into the war without a diplomatic penalty.

For instance, you are England neighboring Germany. Germany is at war with Egypt. Make an MPP with Egypt. You will soon be at war with Germany.

	19-02-2002 20:39									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Be sure to keep in mind your government type and the effects of the war. Your alliance or MPP will last 20 turns. Making peace before then will hurt your reputation, making later treaties more expensive or impossible.

I like to form an MPP, wait a few turns, then start the war.
It decreases my war weariness (democracy).

	19-02-2002 20:46									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I almost always try to form an alliance/MPP with other civs whenever a war breaks out. This also helps in getting the enemy civ to sign a peace treaty as well. If he has to fight on 3 fronts, he's going to be a lot more inclined to negotiate with you. I've had a couple of games where I was able to pretty much get all the other civs on my side, and my enemy would approach me for peace within a few turns of war. Plus it means that I can expect him to send a lot less units my way.

	19-02-2002 23:07									#8
	Got spare money?

I detest MPPs. It seems like almost every time I have ever been in one my partner keeps dragging me into wars. I like to conduct wars on my own terms as much as possible.

As such, if I go to war, I use a sort of San Pellegrino rogue state strategy. I go to the others civs and make alliances, with the aim of making it the whole world versus my enemy. In my latest game, when I saw that England had landed some units on my territory and I demanded their removal, Liz declared war. I immediately went to all the other civs remaining and negotiated an alliance. 15 turns or so later, England, which had been the second leading power after me, was wiped from the map.

This morning, Greece just sneak attacked me. I got America and Rome to ally with me, but couldn't get France to do so, probably because they have an MPP with Greece. So I'm going to see if I can get MPP with France, not attack Greece this coming turn, and let Greece attack my forces. That should draw France into the war on my side, and it'll be the world versus Greece.

The only problem now is that this may lead to a domination victory, when I've been angling to get my first spaceship victory.

So:

1--Make allies, or perhaps better put, make an absence of enemies.

2--Always look to conduct war on your terms as much as possible. Control the game, don't let it control you.

	20-02-2002 00:01									#9
	The Art of War Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

It would seem whoever was working on the military system of this game has been studying some of Sun Tzu.

According to him the best thing is to:

1. Attack the enemy's plans
2. Attack the enemy's alliances (in this game it is almost essential)
3. Attack their armies
4. Attack their fortified cities

They are listed in order of importance, and I would say this is fairly accurate to their importance in the game. Of course, the objectives in Civilization is often times capturing those fortified cities, but the system still works.

I translate attacking the enemy's plans to several things:

1. Cutting off supplies. In the Ancient Era, its got to be Iron and Horses. Curse them! There is nothing worse than laying siege to an enemy capital and having those Swordsmen and Horsemen poking at your invasion troops.

2. Destroy enemy roads. Always a plus to slow down an advance of defenders.

3. Set up road blocks to foil AI attempts to move troops through certain paths, which includes putting units on the coast to block invasions by sea.

Anyway, that's the way it seems to me.

	20-02-2002 01:53									#10
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by randommushroom I detest MPPs. It seems like almost every time I have ever been in one my partner keeps dragging me into wars. I like to conduct wars on my own terms as much as possible.

Me too. The thing is, more often than not, the AI civs have MPP's with eachother when I want to go to war.
In these cases it is impossible for me to persuade them to an alliance against my target civ.
I usually then give them anything for a MPP, declare war against hte target, do nothing, and then laugh when the AI attacks me, triggering the MPP reaction from the other civ.
If I'm lucky, this will cause a chain-reaction, throwing the world into a world war, for which I am always prepared (would be stupid otherwise, since it was me who started it in the first place)

Ïf I am not able to make these alliance, usually because the russians (curse them!) declares war on me in ancient times, I rather pay the ruskies off, and form an alliance against them later (later as in the moment I can afford to bribe the world)


In my latest game as the greeks(pangea,regent), I started isolated with england between me and the rest of the world.
england bordered to rome and china,and china to russia, russia to france and germany, which both were next to egypt in the other end.

Both the ruskies and romans declared war on me in ancient times before I was ready for battle.
Since none of them were my neighbours, I ignored them until they turned on on my doorstep just outside my weakest city, then I payed them off.

The next time the russians declared war, I got the chinese to join me in an aliance by giving them tech and gold (and my firstborn, IIRC). Luckily, they were best friends with the french, so good old Cathy found herself in a war she could not win.
I forgot all about the russians, as I later engaged myself in a long overdue payback war with the romans.

I may have to alter my playing style, when I eventually step up to monarch, since I do not think, I can expect to be the tech leader there, which was what I used for the aliane with the chinese.

ANyways, my point is: if you do not want to get dragged into MPP wars, then do not sign MPP's.
If you want to start MPP wars, sign them, declare war, and wait until you get attacked on your soil (putting a russian slave worker or a lone warrior on the border sometimes does the trick)
I do not know anything anout rep hits for declaring the war, is there someone who wishes to enlighten me?

	20-02-2002 02:00									#11
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by randommushroom This morning, Greece just sneak attacked me. I got America and Rome to ally with me, but couldn't get France to do so, probably because they have an MPP with Greece. So I'm going to see if I can get MPP with France, not attack Greece this coming turn, and let Greece attack my forces. That should draw France into the war on my side, and it'll be the world versus Greece. The only problem now is that this may lead to a domination victory, when I've been angling to get my first spaceship victory.

It is easy to avoid a domination victory. Raze the enemy cities you tak and don't refill the area with your settlers. Since domination is based on the total ground space occupied, this process avoids that issue.

	20-02-2002 02:05									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Blaupanzer It is easy to avoid a domination victory. Raze the enemy cities you tak and don't refill the area with your settlers. Since domination is based on the total ground space occupied, this process avoids that issue.

That's true, although I've been playing with a self-inflicted rule that I won't raze any cities this game.

	20-02-2002 17:19									#13
	difference between declarin war and attacking. Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I have just been reading this thread. I thought it was just about who declared the war who made the difference. not who made the first attack. So if I ask someone to remove their trops or declare war and they do who declares war.
In this war we have it makes a difference who attacks first as well as who declares war. Does the attacking thing matter if I am attacking on my land or his land or no mans land?

	20-02-2002 21:37									#14
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Declaring war in a republic or democracy causes war weariness more quickly than if someone declares war against you.

Now who attacks another nation's units can make a difference where mutual protection pacts are concerned. Say, for example, that France has MPPs with Greece and Japan. Now Greece declares war against Japan, but does not attack. France will remain neutral until Japan or Greece makes an attack against the other nation's forces.

In my last game, I did get that MPP with France, though it led to some unintended effects. Greece attacked me, and France declared on my side. But then Joan must have figured this gave her license to take on the rest of the world and she attacked America and Rome. So suddenly my allies were also my enemies. It was the world versus Greece; and Greece, Rome and America at war with France and Japan.

	20-02-2002 21:52									#15
	Re: difference between declarin war and attacking. Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by g_storrow I have just been reading this thread. I thought it was just about who declared the war who made the difference. not who made the first attack. So if I ask someone to remove their trops or declare war and they do who declares war. In this war we have it makes a difference who attacks first as well as who declares war. Does the attacking thing matter if I am attacking on my land or his land or no mans land?

This post causes me to ask this question: When you ask a civ to remove their troops or declare war, and they chose to declare war, does that declaration of war really count against them? Or me? I ask because my democracy immediately went into severe war-weariness after this happened. I had to put so many citizens on entertainer duty that my income went from about 100/turn to worse than -200/turn. Just ridiculous. My disgust with civIII's democracies continues to rise. (Ok, stopping rant now before I start foaming at the mouth.)

Thanks,

	21-02-2002 02:02									#16
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by randommushroom ... Now who attacks another nation's units can make a difference where mutual protection pacts are concerned. Say, for example, that France has MPPs with Greece and Japan. Now Greece declares war against Japan, but does not attack. France will remain neutral until Japan or Greece makes an attack against the other nation's forces. ...

Clarification: "France will remain neutral until Japan or Greece makes an attack or bombardment within the other nation's borders."

	21-02-2002 03:09									#17
	Re: Re: difference between declarin war and attacking. Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Unregistered This post causes me to ask this question: When you ask a civ to remove their troops or declare war, and they chose to declare war, does that declaration of war really count against them? Or me?

Answer: it counts against the declarer. If you attacked them on your soil, you would be the declarer, but not trigger any MPPs. War weariness acts fast if you don't have courthouses, police stations, or the Sufferage Wonder. It accumulates more slowly if you are attacked, but that first hit is a big shocker to cities not covered by the above in a democracy.

	21-02-2002 05:32									#18
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Also, if you were at war previously with a massive war weariness, go to peace for a few turns, and then are back at war again (regardless whether you declared war or were declared against), your war weariness will be instantly back up to the previous war weariness levels.

So either cut your losses and change to a war government (anything other than Democracy or Republic) OR make peace with everyone ASAP and stay at peace.

Or a third choice, suffer extreme war weariness

	21-02-2002 14:41									#19
	Support Apolyton

War weariness seems to be related to a certain opponent. The game counts your war years separately for each opponent. And it doesn't matter much who attacked. That is my experience. And the Universal Suffrage wonder has little effect under Democracy(maybe 5? years war for free).

	21-02-2002 21:58									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Pius Popprasch War weariness seems to be related to a certain opponent. The game counts your war years separately for each opponent. And it doesn't matter much who attacked. That is my experience. And the Universal Suffrage wonder has little effect under Democracy(maybe 5? years war for free).

You people remember previous wars with other civs, so if your opponenet has become an ancestral enemy, war weariness is reduced.

	22-02-2002 04:28									#21
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Skanky Burns Also, if you were at war previously with a massive war weariness, go to peace for a few turns, and then are back at war again (regardless whether you declared war or were declared against), your war weariness will be instantly back up to the previous war weariness levels. So either cut your losses and change to a war government (anything other than Democracy or Republic) OR make peace with everyone ASAP and stay at peace. Or a third choice, suffer extreme war weariness

Thanks all, for the replies. Clearly I don't understand all the mechanisms that fuel war-weariness. You've all shown me things I hadn't really considered.

They (the Chinese) did declare war on me, after I asked them for the upteenth time to remove their bloody troops from my soil. (Really, this still remains as one of my biggest bones of contention) So I suppose that counts in my favor.

Other things I can think of that should be helping me out: Universal Sufferage, police stations almost everywhere, the Oracle & the Cure for Cancer.

Some other things: I don't think I'd been at war with them within the twenty turns prior to their declaration of war. I *think* I'd been at peace with pretty much everybody for at least twenty turns prior, but I could be wrong. (I've been playing pretty sporadically over the last couple of months) But I have been at war with them in the past.

Things that probably count against me: We're pretty evenly matched militarily, each with around 100 modern armor & about the same for mech infantry. (And since the bulk of the Chinese Armor has been wandering around in isolated mountainous terrain for the duration, I haven't even been tempted to try to reduce them) I went through a phase of razing their cities after capturing them for several turns, this undoubtedly torqued them off.

Things that I'm not sure about : I've been taking about 5 cities a turn & giving them away to the Japanese. I originally figured that this would count in my favor & force them to the truce table early, but it isn't working out that way. The Japanese were getting creamed by the Americans & were down to about 8 cities when I started this little war. Now they've got 30 some cities again. (& are still at war with the Americans. The two of them have been fighting for quite some time, at least 30 turns, probably more. Not sure why that's dragging on so long either) When the war started the Chinese had a little more than 90 cities and are now they are down to around 30. That alone you'd think would be a red flag forcing them to think about a truce, but...

Anyway, we've been fighting for more than 10, but less than 20 turns. & they still won't see my envoy. The intent of the war was just to take them down a peg & ensure that I'd end up winning the game on score (I've turned all the other victory types off, except for domination I think), not to eliminate them. They seem bent on suicide though.

I must admit that the war-weariness has remained fairly steady since the start. It has only gone up significantly once since the start of this fun. I was afraid that the patch would really increase it (the first one seemed to increase unhappiness anyway) but that hasn't been the case.

Playing as a democracy certainly doesn't help. It's definately not a very useful govt type imo as implemented in civ3. (Unless you're willing to settle for being #3 or less) I'd be better off as a Republic. After the second or third turn, I thought about biting the bullet & switching govs, but it gave me an estimate of eight turns of anarchy & I figured that the war would be over before then. My bad there I suppose, since its now been 15 or so turns.

I wish some of this was better documented somewhere. Anyway, now that I've throughly jacked this thread, thanks again all, for your insight.

Cheers,

The reluctant genocidist.