 |
What option should we excercise in response to this future threat?
This poll is closed. |
Ambush the city as explained |
   |
0 |
0% |
Excercise the diplomatic option similar to how explained |
   |
4 |
66.67% |
Roll the dice and go for the complex plan as explained |
   |
2 |
33.33% |
: Do nothing and let them build on our doorstep |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Total: |
6 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
WarriorPoet
|
|

A grim choice lies before us. Read below, and then vote on the Ministry's decision.
The options:
Diplomatic: "For x techs, and retreat of your settler, we will not hasten our armies to crush you, and instead agree to protect our western brothers."
Military: Move the warrior one square east, wait a turn, then move one square SW, and on the next turn ambush their city. They are too close and will occupy an awesome city site that we cannot let fall into the hands of others.
Complex: Trade techs and move the warrior, then ambush their city.
I say we excercise the complex option, the biggest bang for the buck.
Drawbacks may mean that NDE will never trust us again.
Face it, this is a National Security crisis, and maybe with some long obscure explanation of the future threat posed by their unfortunately poorly placed city, they may understand and eventually cool off.
If you do nothing, then we risk having a potentially deadly situation with a powerful enemy city in close proximity to our core cities.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
WarriorPoet
|
|
Trip, this is top priority!!!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
CiverDan
|
|
Go Diplomatic, try to trade also. only attack if they insist one settling there. Don't bother with the ambush. I'd rather we not delibrately try to start a war.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
WarriorPoet
|
|
Diplomatic, then, but with an overt display of force? I.E. move the warrior to the south. This way, we deny NDE the ideal city location and let him know that we are not afraid to use the warrior if they don't pull their settler back.
My problem with this is that if I were NDE, I might feign agreement, pull the settler out, bring in a warrior and move both of them back to the ideal location I just let the other team think they had bullied me out of.
This is why I favor ambush. Unless you want to permanently leave the warrior on the ideal hill until you can send a settler there and build a city of your own, then you will end up with an NDE city on our doorstep.
A: he leaves, we leave, he comes back, and we have a serious problem down the road. Long war later
B: he leaves, we stay, and we loose out on scouting, and hope NDE doesn't come back with more warriors while we wait to build our own city.-> Delay that doesn't result in a war, but will drastically increase diplomatic tension in the region...War Later.
C: we feign a diplomatic retreat, then come back to ambush the defenseless city->Shorter war now, at least potentially, or expensive war...neither Civ would go for a protracted war this early, so it would be quick, but we'd fight the real war later.
D: Chase the Settler out of dodge...same result as C, but he keeps his settler.
So...war now, he looses a settler/city or war later....I don't believe we can have a good peaceful settlement that will last out of this situation.
The only way diplomacy would realy work is if this settler was popped far from the NDE core cities, thus we'd have a suitable buffer for diplomatic breathing room. However, I think the NDE capital can only be no more than 18 squares from our siting of the settler...that isn't much room at all.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|