10-06-2002 09:04									#1
	Foreign Advisor Campaign Thread Tired of ads?

This thread is created solely for the campaigning of Foreign Advisor candidates. Feel free to post questions for the candidates.

	10-06-2002 09:09									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

What are your priorities in the early game?
How do you propose you achieve these?
What will these do for us?

	10-06-2002 09:09									#3
	Remove this text

Should we be warmongering (in general) or more peaceful (in general)? That's the central question, I wasn't there but I've heard there was a poll on it at the beginning of the civ2 game...

	10-06-2002 09:11									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Should we take out neigboring civs to get them out of our way/eliminate them if we dont have restarting, or should we just do that to one or two to get iron or hoses and a bit of space and leave the rest alone for awhile, or even have no early wars (not a real option IMHO)?

	10-06-2002 09:30									#5
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

(i found out people are posting before i could get this out, so please excuse me if i didnt adress anything asked with this post)
Good day fellow Apolytonians. Our nation is a strong one, and we must be represented well on an international level. I am presenting myself as a candidate for the role of Foreign Advisor to the President and head of the Ministry of International Diplomacy (MID) for yours to choose and aprove.

The Foreign Ministry should be first and foremost the window of our nation to the global community. And naturally, the MID should be our nation's tool to interact with this community. So, naturally, as Foreign Minister, I promiss to obey the wishes of our country's populace, and carry out the goals of our people.

As a civilized people, it should only be natural that we present ourselves accordingly. And for that point, I will state that if I should be elected as your Foreign Minister, I will do everything within my power to ensure we have propper and cordial relationships with our global neighbors.

However, if any other peoples of our world are in need of civilization, i whole heartily promiss that, with coordination with the Military Advisor and Science Advisor, I will ensure we have the propper means of taking care of those neighbors, and the propper aid as well, if neccesary.

But there is aid, and then there is subordination, which I will not allow beyond reasonability. If another nation does decide to make outrageous claims of our soverein nation, their requests will be denied while I am in power. Our nation will not be made to service others.

So if you were to vote for Ninot as your Forein Minister, you would be voting for a civilized way of international diplomacy, and a guarantee for diplomatic balance for my term in office.

Thank you for your time.

	10-06-2002 09:37									#6
	Got spare money?

IMHO, we should ensure some military prominance early on. I think it is vital that we ensure us becoming a superpower by the middle ages... and thus, getting rid of any obstacles to that in the early game. Honestly, i hope to death we start with a source of Iron and horses, but if we don't, i would make it a priority we gain them in trade by all means neccesary, and then ensure sources while we have them.

So, yeah, what I am saying is, we SHOULD be leaning more towards warmongering in the beginning. I would guess at the least having 1 war in the ancient age (or in my term.. depending).

I would advise war definately for resources, and less so for teritory. I would only advise teritory war if we were becoming a minor power with no place to go. If we were already the biggest on our block... then i would probably try and keep things peaceful.

Oh, and something i didn't think i made clear or even mentioned:

I will most definately advise heavily against all propositions of breaking treaties of trade or peace (like the kind ya get after a war, with the 20 turn limit on them). I dont want nations disliking us for the rest of time because we couldn't wait to conquer a city for spices.

	10-06-2002 09:41									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

What is your opinion on giving into the demands of other civs? I hate nothing more than to be insulted by another country as they ask for the toils of our empire to supply them! Should we crush them at such insolence, or have pity upon them and spare them until we can stamp them out on our own terms?

	10-06-2002 10:02									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Trip, in response, I would say to deny their terms, and if they do not like our response, then yes, to crush them and humiliate them. Demands must not be made on our sovereign nation. However, I would not crush them if they do not have the guts to actually back up their demands. In stead, i might return tribute as a reply. And if they don't like that, then i might consider war a viable option. We can't leave them thinking they can talk to us fouly and not let us return the favor if we wish.

	10-06-2002 18:43									#9
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Last night during chats, a question came up about tributes, and I had a slightly more extensive reply (ok, you got me, this is a bump.. but an informative one!)

If a nation demands a tribute of us, and we feel we must give into the request, or if they feel they should not prosecute us for remaining defiant.. then it would be my goal for some kind of revenge in any case. I would not have any nation able to say they took advantage of us without reprocussions.

	10-06-2002 23:08									#10
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Candidate Ninot,

Our interest group is pleased to see an early warmongering expansion in the plans, followed by reduced aggression once dominance is achieved. However, we still have a few questions:

What are your views on the use of MPPs?

What are your views on trade?

	11-06-2002 00:27									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I too wish to present myself as a candidate for the position of Foreign Advisor.

The position of Foreign Advisor is very important one for the success of our nation and therefore must be treated as such. If I am elected into office then I promise to work closely with my fellow ministers as co-operation within our nations ruling high council will be the key to our success. As this nation is a democratic one I also promise to listen to and carry out the wishes of the people.

I believe my most important role will be that of representing our nations best interests when dealing with foreign civilisations and to get what our nation wants and needs from them.

As to the question of whether we should be a warmongering or peaceful nation early on I think we should lean towards warmongering early on in order to gain any resources needed and to secure our nations position within the world. Any decision taken in this area will need to be taken with the advice of other ministers and of course the consent of the people.

If another civilisation demands a tribute from us and the pose a credible threat then I'd recommend giving in to demand (prviding it is within reason) because I'd rather we started war on our own terms than on that of someone else. Of course any nation we do give tribute will have to suffer in the end when we are prepared to do so.

I think we need to exploit foreign nations when possible to get what we need from them, and when we have no further need for them destroy them. I call this policy "You scratch my back I'll stab yours"

	11-06-2002 00:30									#12
	Got spare money?

quote: However, if any other peoples of our world are in need of civilization, i whole heartily promiss that, with coordination with the Military Advisor and Science Advisor, I will ensure we have the propper means of taking care of those neighbors, and the propper aid as well, if neccesary.

explain.

	11-06-2002 00:31									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ninot If a nation demands a tribute of us, and we feel we must give into the request, or if they feel they should not prosecute us for remaining defiant.. then it would be my goal for some kind of revenge in any case. I would not have any nation able to say they took advantage of us without reprocussions.

do you mean, if a nation demanded gold, and we assume we're in no position to immediately defned ourselves, you'll cave?

who's running against you?

	11-06-2002 01:05									#14
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I'm running against him. Read my last post .

	11-06-2002 02:05									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Ok, in response to Uber's "explain" question, what I am saying is i cant deny the fact that we will be going to war in the early years, unless we have a totally peaceful president, or something along those lines. But from what I have seen, the sentiment seems to lean towards an early war.

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX do you mean, if a nation demanded gold, and we assume we're in no position to immediately defned ourselves, you'll cave? who's running against you?

as my counterpart stated, i would only give into a request if we are in bad shape. But, what I intended to say here, and I'm not quite sure you caught it, was that no matter if we give in or not, any nation cocky enough to demand tribute from us will pay dearly.

	11-06-2002 02:11									#16
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Do you favor "sharing" our civilized nature with our neighbors .

	11-06-2002 05:11									#17
	Suffering from ads?

I favor keeping ourselves civilized, and to that point, always more civilized than our neighbors. I have no objections to civilizing our neihbors, as long as we can do it wihout the fuss afterwards. Basically, I don't prefer going to war if we can't completely conquer the enemy. A disgruntled neighbor is useless to us. A conquered neighbor isnt.

Now, i would like to state my opinion on what Turambar said about "You scratch my back, I'll stab yours".

I completely disagree with this sentiment. Our neihbors are not there to be abused, and I presume they understand that. I feel we need to keep a diplomatic stance in every case possible, untill we feel a war is on the horizon. It is not only dangerous, but short-sighted to abuse our neighbors needlessly. I believe it better that we keep cordial relations with all nations we do not wish to conquer immediately.

	11-06-2002 18:56									#18
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I favour Ninot over Turambar - he is more diplomatic but also making sure our rivals don't take advantage of us.

The foreign minister should be level-headed and cool.

If one wants to be a warmonger, run for military advisor. That is the one position where the job really is to always watch for military opportunities.

But, in the early game, warmongering is good. The ancient age is full of brutalities, so Turambar's policy is fine then.

I think I would support Ninot more as foreign advisor in the crucial middle ages/ industrial ages but I want to see how he does in the early game too.

	11-06-2002 19:07									#19
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

strong doesn't have to mean brutal and I find that the opening style of play, and diplomatic decisions made, will send their echoes rippling through our history. (wow!)

I'd love to see our democracy produce a nation of evil - but I suspect it won't. Winning on Emperor (or above ) with a morally upstanding code (some might say 'chivalrous') seems more challenging, fitting - and in keeping with this democratic contest of pop-civ.

I hope this makes sense. I... I'm not very good at drinking guiness at lunchtime.

	12-06-2002 00:33									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

By "You scratch my back I'll stab yours" I mean that we should get as much as we can from opposing civs through diplomacy and when there is no more to gain from them we should go about destroying them (assumeing we are in a position to do so).

If we are ahead of one of our neighbours in tech and military power then there isn't much point in them existing any more so we should destroy them.

	12-06-2002 01:13									#21
	Foreign Advisor Candidacy Tired of ads?

I too would like to run for Foreign Advisor.

Instead of a prolonged campaign speech, I would like to explain my unique perspective on this job and how I would handle it if chosen:

The job (as I see it) is to manipulate our neighbors in ways that benefit our nation.

I would only advise that we give into demands if we are facing certain defeat, but only once. Once is more than enough. We should always be ready to stand against an agressive neighbor.

To that end, I will endeavor to engage in agrements that favor our nation and will push our president to squeeze every last bit of benefit from our neighbors capitulations after we have defeated them in war.

I will urge our government to mass-trade the same (harmless) tech to as many parties as possible, so that we may reap multiple benefits from our labor.

I will encourage other nations to fight each other, break treaties and the like through bribes and hollow promises to aid in their defense.

I will resist any efforts to get us entanged in foreign wars through mutual defense pacts unless possible war would lead to new resources and prosperity for our nation.

I do not want foreign military units in our nation and will not thwart the efforts our of military advisor by signing a right-of-passage agreement.

I do not believe in world peace. I do not believe in sharing our glory with others. I will strive to push our nation to the top as the only super power.

-- Candidate Togas

	12-06-2002 01:18									#22
	Remove this text

Let me clarify: do you favor FORCEFULLY "sharing" our civilized nature?

	12-06-2002 01:40									#23
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by skywalker Let me clarify: do you favor FORCEFULLY "sharing" our civilized nature?

I certainly do.

But I'm not a proponent of taking on some backwards, corrupt, rebellious foreigners that are going to require us to spend the bulk of our treasury defending and rebuilding them. There is a limit to how large we should expand the empire ... but such decisions are ultimately made by other ministers.

--Candidate Togas

	12-06-2002 01:43									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Togas There is a limit to how large we should expand the empire ... but such decisions are ultimately made by other ministers. --Candidate Togas

What is your (and that of the other candidates) position on expansion? When do you want to start building up instead of building new city's?

	12-06-2002 01:48									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I would like to heartily thank Captain for his comments. I realise that my view may not be truly adapted for the early ages, where war is key, but I would like to think that other nations are not existant solely for abuse...

And to that point, I would like to state exactly where I differ from my (apparant) two opponents.

And I would like to start with quotes in a counter-chronological order, thus, starting with Togas.

quote: I will encourage other nations to fight each other, break treaties and the like through bribes and hollow promises to aid in their defense.

This is exactly the one thing I stand adamently against. I will never enter into any kind of treaties or pacts, and then ponder stepping out of them by choice. Because it will be early game, i cant use MPP's as example.. but if we enter into any ROP's or Mutual Agression pacts, or even simple trade agreements, I will do everything within my power to force the cabinet to realise that we should wait untill the 20 turn agreement ends, so that we may break off the deal with peaceful terms, even if it is to engage in war, or to disengage in one.

So what am I saying? I am saying that I will never pull a diplomatic maneuver that leaves us in a very bad diplomatic state with another nation, such as breaking an ROP agreement with a declaration of war.

But, to keep things clear, I am not anti-war. I realise war is vitally essential to the early era, and to that point, I say I will not fight any urges to declare war against a neighbor, AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT BREAKING ANY TREATIES OR AGREEMENTS

Now, I have one specific scenario I will state. If another nation is seen to be crossing our territory with settlers, or massive ammounts of forces, i think our only option is war. We can not allow nations to try to settle our nether regions, and we can not allow them to get military advantages through positioning. However, if it is just a warrior exploring, I think we can agree that is not so offensive for war.

This next part is Turambar's

quote: By "You scratch my back I'll stab yours" I mean that we should get as much as we can from opposing civs through diplomacy and when there is no more to gain from them we should go about destroying them (assumeing we are in a position to do so).

As i have always stated, other nations are not present to be abused. They are people too! (or sorta...) I believe we should keep plans for what we plan to do while in office, such as, which nations we can consider conquering. And I most definately suggest we always try for Polite relationships, unless we are planning for a war that may be immeadiate.

But, to keep things clear, I do believe we should get maximum profit from every deal. We must test our neighbors to see what kind of deals we may get that are best in our favor.

quote: To that end, I will endeavor to engage in agrements that favor our nation and will push our president to squeeze every last bit of benefit from our neighbors capitulations after we have defeated them in war.

This i very much disagree with. IF the nation is still around to have benefits extracted from threw trade, that means we didn't conquer them completely, or perhaps didn't conquer them much at all. That means they are still a threat to us. To that point, I think we should try to reastablish Polite relationships ASAP.

And, even though i admitt early war is essential, I leave you with this to think over. If we pick on everyone, who's gonna be our friends if a Massive World War breaks out in the Industry age?

	12-06-2002 01:54									#26
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I believe that any decision made to do with expansion and war needs to be decided with the ministers in charge of expansion and the military.

I'm in favour of early expansion in order to secure our position in the world early on but not beyond our ability to defend all of our empire.

I believe that all nations must eventually be destroyed until only we are left to rule the world, but this must be done over time and with careful planning to ensure its success.

	12-06-2002 02:01									#27
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by skywalker Let me clarify: do you favor FORCEFULLY "sharing" our civilized nature?

Sorry if i didn't answer this question as well as you wanted it to be answered.

In one context, yes, in another, no

I believe in expanding our empire through force if the way we are doing it is for reasons, and good ones.

I don't believe in gaining land that is not of much use. In the early age, there may not be such a thing for how little we have anyways. So, in the early age, I suppose my answer would be "Yes".. i do favor forcefully sharing our version of civilization. But as long we do it tastefully enough so that we aren't building rafters for ourselves to hang from in the future.

So, in short, Yes, but prudently.

And as for the latest question from Atawa

quote: What is your (and that of the other candidates) position on expansion? When do you want to start building up instead of building new city's?

I would favor getting as much land from our own settlers as possible. Its easier than trying to maintain other nations citizens who revolt. But as soon as we fill the land available to us, that is when i think the optimal time for military buildup would be.

so ya, early, i put settlers before war.. but when the settlers are running into borders.. lets replace them with swordsmen!

	12-06-2002 02:02									#28
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Turambar I believe that all nations must eventually be destroyed until only we are left to rule the world, but this must be done over time and with careful planning to ensure its success.

My thoughts exactly

quote: Originally posted by Ninot As i have always stated, other nations are not present to be abused. They are people too! (or sorta...) I believe we should keep plans for what we plan to do while in office, such as, which nations we can consider conquering. And I most definately suggest we always try for Polite relationships, unless we are planning for a war that may be immeadiate.

Kill them all

	12-06-2002 02:03									#29
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I would favor getting as much land from our own settlers as possible. Its easier than trying to maintain other nations citizens who revolt. But as soon as we fill the land available to us, that is when i think the optimal time for military buildup would be.

so ya, early, i put settlers before war.. but when the settlers are running into borders.. lets replace them with swordsmen!




I thought I'd made up my mind but I might reconsidder now.

	12-06-2002 02:03									#30
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I will support Ninot wholeheartedly.
He's the man of the situation : cool headed, and aware our reputation must remain spotless (obvious in the ancient era).
A foreign advisor must be pragmatical, and that's what Ninot is offering us.

Atawa : we can't afford to say "kill them" before we know the exact situation. A foreign advisor has to be wise in his decisions, and has to declare war at the good time. Deciding to make war at bad timing (ex : when we don't have money to bribe allies) could be destructive for our empire.

edit : added answer to Atawa

Last edited by Spiffor on 12-06-2002 at 02:09