 |
| |
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:21
|
|
Personally, I think we should send the remnants of our swordsmen army to finish off the Yanks already, in order to secure Fragant valley within our borders. This war should be the last we declare : we'll have a significant size, and the French will be a good stamp-state against the southern threats.
In the meantime, I say we produce workers like crazy in our former American cities, as soon as they have a temple. We have a jungle to clear, and we must do this as quickly as possible. To boost our worker production, I suggest we build granaries in these cities.
When we have enough Apolytonian workers, we should integrate our slaves in cities' population. They will be 2-4 times more efficient there than in the jungle. Since we'll have 3 luxuries at this time (and possibly 4, if we buy from Persia), population control will be less of a problem.
Del Monte is an exception : as soon as the temple is built, we should start building FP there, and mine the tiles around like crazy. Raising the entertainment slider is an option, if it means more people working on shields. Our chances to get a leader aren't very high (we can expect something like 6 fights during the French war, and I don't think any of our troops is elite already), so we must make shields the soonest possible.
In our core cities, we should build marketplaces as soon as we get currency, and libraries when Literacy has been discovered. Marketplaces will do great re our luxuries, as we'll get 4 happy faces instead of 3, and possibly 6 happy faces if we buy spices from the Persians. It will allow all our cities to grow to size 6 without problems. It will also allow us to raise our tech slider.
A harbor in BHQ would be more than nice, as it'll allow trade with neighbours.
On the international level, we should now try to appease our neighbours (who are almost all annoyed at us), while protecting our border cities with many upgradable defensive units.
We should give gifts to the AI, trade resources and luxuries to those who aren't an immediate threat. We should favor GPT deals. I also think (Many will probably disagree) we should give in to the AI's demands, to improve their stance towards us. Systematically giving better deals to the AI (ie, not haggling) will also slowly improve their stance towards us.
We should open embassies everywhere, and sign RoPs with everybody who wants, even if it means some money thrown in it.
The goal is to avoid war, and to find allies easily, should war happen.
The regime we should strive for is Republic, because of the science / money it allows. It will be at the expense of our military, but not too much. It will be a fabulous path to our economical and industrial superiority.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
I agree with you Spiffor that after we are done wth the French and Americans we need to build up, or we will fall sadly behind to the Greeks (whom even te warmongers refuse to fight for a lang time), the Aztecs, English, and Romans, who are simly to far away, and we have no clue about the 4 other 'missing' civs and what they are up to.
I think that SirRaplh is right that it will take about 2 more wars wth the American, and I don't think, uness the Americans take it very slowly, that we might ever just wipe them out, since they have the entire ivory coast to fil especially after they make a city in that 3 wheat on flooplains site and churn out population like crazy.Also, our first war plan will still leave france to refortify, so unless the second war is fast aftr the first, the French wll not be so simple. I also think that Germany will soon be our biggest threat, not Persia or Greece, and we have to develop internally to be strong enough.
We need more temples, I think we need harbors, to exploit the sea, and we need oto explore. The problem I see is that even with 2 wines, incense, and the dyes, we will still not have much of an export Market. Wines are all over the place and we will compete with Persia for the incense markets in the north. I also say we need more cities in mpty sace, to maximize population and production, and we need more workers to pick up the jungle clearing pace.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ninot
|
 |
Centre Bell
Nov 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
It's nice to see so many DIA mebers here : Uber, jdd, Unortho... Our party is really bigger than I thought .
Come on DIA members ! Will you allow only UFCs and INDs to discuss the future of our nation ? Will you allow them to say "further war are necessary" in a thread for OUR party ? Please express your views, the DIA needs you. |
Ya know, personally, I have stated I am against a war on France. Im not against war totally, just i dont think angering France is our ticket to the top. Id prefer Persia or just about anyone else.
And, well, im going along with what is public sentiment, but id like to just point out something
oh, and this IS a DIA thread, so I will post AS a DIA member...
We have a governmental majority, we CAN use it to make our own decisions, instead of nodding our heads to everything Uber says is wise. (no offense to Uber, but he IS POSTING IN OUR THREAD!!!  , that dumb war grunt!!!!)
I mean, not in an un-democratic way, but we do have quite a bit of power. And so far, us peace-whores (for a lack of a better word) are the only party to hold a majority, and the only party to head into a war (well.. they go together, but still...)
I mean, weve been accused of being wishy-washy in our goals... and so far weve been a tool of the UFC. we CAN make our own decisions. We are a builder party, and dare I say we were elected cuz of it. Where are our party principles?
I grow tired of seing half a dozen french war ideas on the threads every day. where is the builder-representation?
just my rant
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Donal Graeme
|
 |
California
Jul 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
When I played Civ 2, I was the quintessential Builder/Industrialist player. I found that it was far more effective to have 6 to 12 "super-cities" than 2 dozen mediocre ones. However, as I have been playing Civ 3, that strategy is simply not as effective. Culture has made city creation more difficult, and some other changes have led me to become a more expansionist player. Yet that does not mean that we have to expand super fast. We do need more space, but is France the right direction to look? If you ask me what we really need is to finish off the Americans and then the Greeks. That is all the territory we need, and most importantly, leaves a strong France to guard our south. Since France is fairly peaceful, they will make good neighbors. So if we do fight them this time, we should try to make up afterwards and curry their favor for the mid-game.
Ninot, you don't like the fact that UFC ppl are posting, and that is understandable. But what you should be angry about is the fact that only a few DIA ppl are posting. That should be a bigger concern.
edit: Also, Greece makes for a better location for a FP hub than France does. So we should only take a handful of the closer French cities, and not cripple them entirely.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ninot
|
|
Centre Bell
Nov 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Donal Graeme
When I played Civ 2, I was the quintessential Builder/Industrialist player. I found that it was far more effective to have 6 to 12 "super-cities" than 2 dozen mediocre ones. However, as I have been playing Civ 3, that strategy is simply not as effective. Culture has made city creation more difficult, and some other changes have led me to become a more expansionist player. Yet that does not mean that we have to expand super fast. We do need more space, but is France the right direction to look? If you ask me what we really need is to finish off the Americans and then the Greeks. That is all the territory we need, and most importantly, leaves a strong France to guard our south. Since France is fairly peaceful, they will make good neighbors. So if we do fight them this time, we should try to make up afterwards and curry their favor for the mid-game.
Ninot, you don't like the fact that UFC ppl are posting, and that is understandable. But what you should be angry about is the fact that only a few DIA ppl are posting. That should be a bigger concern.
edit: Also, Greece makes for a better location for a FP hub than France does. So we should only take a handful of the closer French cities, and not cripple them entirely. |
oh, im not angry at all personally. annoyed at UFC mingling? mayyybe... but its not really a heavy issue, its just bickering.
btw, Timeline, you didnt answer my PM 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
First of all, enough with the character assasination: it serves no purpose whatsoever. (ges up and wait for gOd to come down and punish his errant and whinning kids)
I Must say that I agree with Donal on the issue of early expansion, we need it to then set up a abse for expansion. Right now Franche is our weakest neighbor after the Americans- everyone else is stronger. War expansio wll be easier than peaceful for a few more turns, and we probably need to do it.
THe extent of territory Uber laid for us gaining would give us a solid base. I think that war with France will hapen:most people have been pushing for it since day 1 we met them, and there is no way we can stop that avalanche. We need to save political capitl for after the war, to try to arrest even further warmongerring aims, which might put us in a hard spot.
I also think we need to look further ahead in terms of diplomacy. Once we beat France, we will become a middle power, which will put us on the radar screens of various civs. The Greeks will only get stronger, as wil the Romans, wo wil become our new southern neighbors, them and the russians. As much as I know the effectiveness of immortals and Persia's strategy of building hordes, the terrain between us and Persia an be used for a defensive advantage, and we will always be better than the A.I. in fighting pitched battles. After lookig at all the civs, Germnay seems the greatest threat. They have the pop. to afford a big expansion for now, and they are rght north of us, on nice flat terrain, great for offensive warfare(against us).
I say that after the War with France(not before), we as a party, or just a group of like minded individuals, need to sell the rest on the need to build up our temples, cathedrals and so forth to be strong enough to weather what coems next. We also need to begin some serious exploration of the world around us, not only to Ubes sle but beyond. In short: war wth France is inevitable, Plan Gold won by a landslide. Wha we need to do is make sure that any plans after that are of a defensive nature, and keep in mind city expansion as the main point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ninot
|
|
Centre Bell
Nov 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by UberKruX
Its sounds as if you believe the people of Apolytonia are nothing more than sheep, blindly following anything I say with blind eyes.
This is so far from the truth it's almost appauling.
The citizens of Apolytonia, especially those in the War Academy don't just "nod their heads", they discuss everything rationally.
I've brought up the possibilty of War Chariots twice, and each time the majority has express a dislike of the ideas, so I will again discard that idea.
I'm the SMC. It's my GOVERNMENTAL DUTY to dream up strategies and bring them to the people. You seem mad because the people like my strategies and agree with them. Either that or you honestly believe the people just follow me blindly. Either way, it shows a severe lack of character. |
well, im not attacking your character. so you can get away from those illusions. the only purpose to my posts so far is to show my party they have other options than following war plans every term. after all, it is our party stance to not be warmongers
and, i wont pursue attacking your character at all from henceforth in this thread, as i feel I haven't truly done so to any bad degree thus far, and i feel i shouldn't do so at all from this point either.
and, as for the final paragraph of your post, i wont answer it in length, because that will only spin this more out of preportion. all i will say is that i disagree with all of it.
the purpose for my original rant was to get my party thinking more independently than it was. i did not plan for a war of "characters".
That is all I have to say 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:21
|
|
quote:
the purpose for my original rant was to get my party thinking more independently than it was. i did not plan for a war of "characters". |
This was also my purpose when opening the thread. A clear thing is predictable : warmongers will argue further wars (against Germans, against Persians, against Greece, against Rome) are necessary because we'd be threatened, and need a preemptive strike.
With their media (war academy, machiavelli institute to some extent), they'll say it so loudly we'll begin to believe it. We need places to discuss :
1. In order to know what mostly silent DIA people want.
2. In order to show warmongering is not the only choice.
Don't get me wrong : I finally support the war against France, and finishing off the Americans (not the French). But after this, we'll have a big enough territory, and will need an army only to defend ourselves against agressions, and to prune our potential rivals to victory. After this war, we'd be able to say "give peace a chance", or "Make love money, not war".
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:21
|
|
Unortho :
Actually, I thought the DIA needed a place to discuss its views, to elaborate a platform. The Great Debate (builders / warmongers) is unsolvable through compromise, because the game is balanced enough to make these 2 paths viable.
Warmongering or building are not vital necessities (well, building our infrastructure in the near future is necessary, but building all the time isn't), they are a choice of society. Warmongers are already organized, with the UFC and Military Ac. / Machiavelli Inst.
Builders, on the other hand, aren't organized because it was impossible to seriously push for builder policies in the past. We need intellectuals to think in global terms (such as "what does builder mean ?"), and we need a political relay to builder demands, which is the DIA.
A builder party is essential for builder policies to be more than talk. Same thing applies for a warmonger party.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-08-2002 09:31
Forgetting entirely his questions about the DIA's stance on various issues.*
.
satin
|