10-06-2002 20:57									#1
	Military Advisor Campaign Thread Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

i am in favor of early war, and will push the science minister, city planner, and the president to allow me to do this.

Last edited by Inverse Icarus on 05-07-2002 at 23:52

	10-06-2002 21:08									#2
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

do you believe more in rushing with just one kind of unit, or with a complex and detailed army?

also, what will be your plans if we are left without all of the resources we would want? Would you fight with inferior forces, against the odds, or would you wait untill another era were we might be able to have a strategic advantage?

	10-06-2002 23:02									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Would Candidate Uberkrux be willing to share with the public what his ideal units-to-cities ratio would be?

What would be your ratio of defenders-to-cities and how large of an offensive "expeditionary" force would you aim to achieve?

Do you station troops inside cities for extra defense, or on borderlands to prevent pillaging?

Do you condone pillaging or razing of cities?

Are your offensive tactics centred on the goal of capturing cities and resources (denying production) or of destroying armies (targeting dangerous units)?

What percentage of our GNP would you suggest for military maintenance?

Are you a barracks or a walls proponent?

	10-06-2002 23:48									#4
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

although i am not the city planner, which would handle nuit PRODUCTION, i would like to see at least a 2:1 unit:city ratio once we acquire the appropiate techs.

if we are unlucky, and have no iron or horses, i shall request that the other ministers (public works, trade) acquire them.

if i am FORCED to fight without resources, i would fight a war with inferior weapons, especially if there is a chance to acquire the resources we lack.

if we are babylon (tied with egypt right now for our civ), our archers shall do well even without petty resources!

	10-06-2002 23:57									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Captain Would Candidate Uberkrux be willing to share with the public what his ideal units-to-cities ratio would be? What would be your ratio of defenders-to-cities and how large of an offensive "expeditionary" force would you aim to achieve? Do you station troops inside cities for extra defense, or on borderlands to prevent pillaging? Do you condone pillaging or razing of cities? Are your offensive tactics centred on the goal of capturing cities and resources (denying production) or of destroying armies (targeting dangerous units)? What percentage of our GNP would you suggest for military maintenance? Are you a barracks or a walls proponent?

2:1 at least (offensive). larger cities should build more units because fo increased production.

i usually station 2 defenders in important / border cities (spearman + warrior will due for a while).

in the beginning of the game (my term) i station units IN cities, because movement is often restirced.

i not only CONDONE pillaging, i order it. pillaging roads to resources and key irigation / mines is essential to fighting any war.

i am for the razing of cities if the cities are either:
IN OUR BORDERS or IN A "WRONG" SPOT

the imperial expansion minister shall aid me in determing if the AI has build a city in a bad spot

i am for total emilination of enemies, especially those on our home continent. i will often engage in "pillage wars", but they will only be small teams in addition to the main army taking out the cities.

GNP in a Despotism or monarchy early in the game shouldnt exceed 20% because you ge "free" units.

in a democracy or republic, the military should comprise anywhere from 30% to 60% of our GNP.

i have to choose between walls and barracks? i choose barracks.

hopefully our city planner will make the cities reach 7 real quick

	11-06-2002 02:09									#6
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

manifest destiny = indeed. I favour early war and agree with your strategies posted thus far. Good luck on the campaign trail... but... although it's a long way off...

Do you favour the use of Nuclear weapons?

	11-06-2002 02:20									#7
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by beno Do you favour the use of Nuclear weapons?

Nuclear weapons have global consequences. before i use them i usually would try to get the world to back me up in the war (they dont get mad if you nuke someone they're fighting).

if another civ we are fighting uses a nuke (even if its not on us) i will use nukes. nuclear weapons are a shield until someone uses them, then the hammer falls.

i am very much for nuclear stockpiling, both ICBMs and tactical nukes in nuclear subs on other civs borders.

although i dont think we'll be saying many nukes in the ancient eras

	11-06-2002 02:21									#8
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

These are why you should vote for me in the upcoming elections:

1) I have participated in the Civ2 Demo Game, and therefore probably have more experience than UberKruX.

2) I support an early war to secure a defensible border and good city sites.

3) I support a Middle Ages lull to let us build infrastructure and a large military,

4) followed by a large late Industrial Ages war with tanks and planes,

5) after which we would build up our army and our strategic rocket forces (nukes), and then use Modern Armor and nukes to clean up the remaining civs.

One minor thing I disagree with Uber on: I think we should conquer and then ABANDON cities that are in the wrong spot or in our territory. Razing them will just get the AI angrier.

Otherwise, I pretty much agree with Uber.

	11-06-2002 02:35									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by skywalker These are why you should vote for me in the upcoming elections: 1) I have participated in the Civ2 Demo Game, and therefore probably have more experience than UberKruX. 2) I support an early war to secure a defensible border and good city sites. 3) I support a Middle Ages lull to let us build infrastructure and a large military, 4) followed by a large late Industrial Ages war with tanks and planes, 5) after which we would build up our army and our strategic rocket forces (nukes), and then use Modern Armor and nukes to clean up the remaining civs. One minor thing I disagree with Uber on: I think we should conquer and then ABANDON cities that are in the wrong spot or in our territory. Razing them will just get the AI angrier. Otherwise, I pretty much agree with Uber.

Hmm...I'm leaning towards Uber here because it looks as if he has a plan, but I see no such a thing from you. Nuking civilizations gets them very angry, and if even one of our nukes misses....Also, nuclear bombs are an 'atrocity' in Civilization III, and should only be used in defense, say if a nuclear bomb hits us first.

Yes, you may have been in the Civ 2 Democracy Game, but again it looks like Uber is the candidate of choice. At least to me.

	11-06-2002 02:40									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

My unit policy is about 1.5:1 (units:cities). We need to build lots of settlers, so we should cut back a little on unit production but maintain an outer shell of defenders (and attackers) to protect our interior.

	11-06-2002 02:53									#11
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I also support limited defensive units, as quick outward expansion (read: big offensive war) to secure either an easily defended region or (preferably) our entire continent will lessen their utility.

	11-06-2002 15:21									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

would the two canditates please answer this for me and the public:

do u carry ne grudges over from previous games or have ne civs that u particulary hate as i feel we cannot have a military advisor that will cloud his objectivness with anger. a military advisor has to be able to stay distant.
also i would like to know ur perfered type of government in civ3 (in general not in a specific circumstance) as to find out whether u r warmongers plain and simple or a hybrid or whatever.

thank u in advance.

	11-06-2002 15:28									#13
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Flip McWho would the two canditates please answer this for me and the public: do u carry ne grudges over from previous games or have ne civs that u particulary hate as i feel we cannot have a military advisor that will cloud his objectivness with anger. a military advisor has to be able to stay distant. also i would like to know ur perfered type of government in civ3 (in general not in a specific circumstance) as to find out whether u r warmongers plain and simple or a hybrid or whatever. thank u in advance.

not going to lie, i don't trust the germans for anything. if we start next to them, i will be ranting and pleading for their destruction, because they ALWAYS seem to sneak attack me.

my perfered type of government is Communism, because of the war capabilities, low weariness, and the corruption system. I have also fought wars in a democracy, but i like communism a lot more

	11-06-2002 15:58									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

you'll be getting my vote comrade

	11-06-2002 16:22									#15
	Inflate your Upload Space

I have a few questions to the candidates:

Which state of the game do you consider more crucial to crush enemies with military means, the early, mid or late game? Do you favor flexible fastmovers, sturdy slowmovers or combinations of both, and how do you think about the value of bombardements?

	11-06-2002 16:41									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph I have a few questions to the candidates: Which state of the game do you consider more crucial to crush enemies with military means, the early, mid or late game? Do you favor flexible fastmovers, sturdy slowmovers or combinations of both, and how do you think about the value of bombardements?

early / mid war. we must defend what territories we plan to colonize, and defend imperial expansions to other islands.

i'm in favor of flexible fastmovers for the most part, especially in the early age. horsemen are superior to swordsmen, in my opinion.

bombardments in the early ages (catapults) is worthless. once we get to cannons/artillery and ships, bombardment becomes useful.

	11-06-2002 19:27									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Considering the first term probably won't go past the ancient age, I think we should stick to that for military strategy/policy.

So we're talking about despotism and monarchy. protracted wars are possible, but are they preferable?

In the ancient age, we're also unlikely to have any culture flips (mainly because I expect to have swordsmen before temples) so is there a point to razing cities in the ancient age while settler costs remain proportionally high?

Capture or destroy? (ancient age).

Maintain infrastructure or pillage? (ancient age).

Ratio offensive to defensive? (ancient age)

Preferred "local odds" (ancient age so towns<7) - that is to say, if there's a town with 2 spears, what is your ideal attack force? 3 spears? 4 spears? 2 spears, 2 archers? 3 spears, 2 horse? 2 spears, 3 swords? etc...

Capture workers a priority?

	11-06-2002 22:29									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Hmm... Very general questions here, and it could not be different, considering we don't know what kind of world we'll have to deal with. But one thing worries me: what is your opinion about human rights?

	12-06-2002 00:25									#19
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Alexnm Hmm... Very general questions here, and it could not be different, considering we don't know what kind of world we'll have to deal with. But one thing worries me: what is your opinion about human rights?

i suppose you mean pop rush, not my personal view. if you mean my personal view, that'll be a longer (off-topic) thread of its own

personally, i am in favor of pop rushing to an extent, but in the democratic game i have no say in that. i just work with what you give me.

	12-06-2002 00:56									#20
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I've a question:

If one of our aircraft is shot down and crashes on the border between two foreign civs (civ B and civ C) and the pilot who was born in Civ D is the only survivor, on which side of the border should he be buried?

	12-06-2002 01:09									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

EVERYONE knows that joke.

You don't bury survivors.

Anyway, I favor early war to secure territory, Middle/Early Industrial peace to build infrastructure (both military and civilian), and then a big Late Industrial/Modern war to conquer all.

	12-06-2002 01:22									#22
	Support Apolyton

Uber, I meant in the game (yes, pop-rushing). I was also thinking about conscription, since it is a major font of unhappiness.

	12-06-2002 01:39									#23
	Inflate your Upload Space

How do you consider yourself ?
- The defender of our culture and industry
- The expander of our riches
- The guide to our consuest victory

	12-06-2002 02:57									#24
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

All three at once.

	12-06-2002 03:06									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Alexnm Uber, I meant in the game (yes, pop-rushing). I was also thinking about conscription, since it is a major font of unhappiness.

i dont usualy conscript, as i usualy have a large standing army.

around the age of nationalism, we should have railroads fairly soon after. a few calvary (or tanks) stationed on our borders will provide an "offensive defense" as i call it, a defense with a first srtike capability.

but then again, i wont last until the modern age, and theres no conscripting until nationalism.

	12-06-2002 03:08									#26
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor How do you consider yourself ? - The defender of our culture and industry - The expander of our riches - The guide to our consuest victory

if i had to choose one, i would say the expander of our riches.

my views on the miliraty aspect of civ are mostly offensive for the purpose of "manifest destiny" and resource aquisation. if we need horses, i dont mind smacking around the chinese to get them.

	12-06-2002 03:10									#27
	Got spare money?

We use the Middle/Early Industrial to bulk up our military infrastructure (read: army) to the point where drafting would be counter-productive. If we secure our continent, we won't even need much in the way of defenders, as a strong navy (which wouldn't be difficult, as the AI has no grasp of naval strategy) and lots of transports loaded with offensive troops will keep us safe and allow us to project power.

	12-06-2002 04:40									#28
	Put an end to popups!

I am also in favor in signing Military Alliances with AI civs, so long as they aren't in my plans for domination .

if an AI civ isnt on our main continent, and is close enough to an enemy to annoy them, i'd be HAPPY to sign an military alliance, which not only helps the war front a little, it makes our two nations bond closer

i do NOT condone mutual protection pacts. again, it's not my final call, but i should have a decent say in this area. i dont want to commit troops to defend our neighbors unless the neighbor has provided us with a service (techs, resources) for a long time (trustworthy), bows before our might, and the diplo people wont let me crush them.

	13-06-2002 00:01									#29
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Would you support a war in the early game?