05-01-2003 06:12									#61
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Do we have the gold to do this?

	05-01-2003 06:13									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Having one more city sure would help alot..

	05-01-2003 06:18									#63
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

We actually can have 2 more freebie units, and for a short while can afford to run a deficit. It would be not for long, because after it's done, EotS can make a settler in 4 or maybe even 3 turns and our # of free units will increase. Also, we would probably suffer some losses in the battles.

	05-01-2003 06:19									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Now if I had 2-3 Archers.... *dreams*

	05-01-2003 06:30									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I would suggest keeping all existing (except no-name) going to Neck..
Try to take out the other Vox Warriors with new build units.
(If we attack (and win) the Istmuth they will retreat anyway IMHO)
1. We would have the initiative
2. We have a couple of expandable units on the hill?
3. reinforcements on the way..

	05-01-2003 06:30									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Edit: this is a response to the proposal to attack the warriors exploring south, not to Alva's proposal.

By the time we would attack, Vox would already have essentially all of the important military information that it could get. Information about our southern region is useful to them only in letting them know how big we are, and might even work in part to our advantage in providing some intimidation value if we can out-REX them as much as I'm hoping we can. (We'll have a settler pump; they won't, at least not for some time yet.) So I don't like the idea of compromising growth in EotS to build extra warriors at this time.

And Sir Ralph, you're not the only one dreaming of what we could do if we had archers.

Nathan

Last edited by nbarclay on 05-01-2003 at 06:35

	05-01-2003 06:41									#67
	update on Eli's strategy thread Tired of ads?

Is Vox preparing for war?

A slow moving army in enemy territory should not be distracted by the fast moving enemy units and instead head directly to stationary targets like the enemy's capital.
----------------------------------
mixing in both offense-oriented and defense-oriented units (at about a 2-1 ratio): e.g., 6 immortals + 3 spear/pike. Try to find avenues of approach crossing rough terrain, for the defensive bonus.
---------------------------------------
One thing the AI does is attack stragglers and damaged units trying to get*
---------------------------------------
Eli
You're all talking about the AI, but what if the opponent is human?

-------------------------------------
(part of jshler's answer)
IMO, speed is a must for offensive tactics in multiplayer. However, my bet is that civ III gets more like WWI as it goes along in the sense that reasonable human defence on a home country road system should beat offense.

Say, for example, that a stack of immortals trudge across the Siberian plains and finally arrive at Russia who has only swords and horses to defend. Persia will still have a tough time because they have to come to the Russian units who will generally fight with 3 attack to 2 defense or with retreat 2 on 2. A well covered stack will eventually get to a city, I suppose, at cconsiderable cost. But the human defender will concentrate forces using the road system in defensive strongholds better than the AI. What if the city has walls or is size 7 and has a barracks for healing while you don't have battlefield medicine yet. Then you are matching expensive immortals against cheap spears with little to show for it. On the other hand, if the riders from China show up, they are a real problem since they generally will be able to bring their 4 attack to bear and they have enough range to make defensive force concentration more difficult.
-------------------------------------------------

note: I cut a few answers..

*not important post, but it lead to Eli's following up question.

	05-01-2003 06:43									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Nathan, so you are basically saying we let them spy us out without any resistance, and whore our map around for money? That would be a sign of weakness, imho.

For the diplomats, RE the barbarian argument: We could propose to block the isthmus together, where it is not 1 but 2 tiles wide. One warrior of theirs and one of ours.

	05-01-2003 06:47									#69
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Alva: I saw this post. I don't think they prepare for war yet, but they are seriously considering it for the near future. One more reason not to let them spy us out.

Nathan, we would not compromise growth in EotS, because warriors don't cost pop points . At the countrary, it would grow yet more.

	05-01-2003 06:54									#70
	Put an end to popups!

Nathan, I believe your letter to Vox precisely sums up what we're thinking on the diplomatic scene right now. However, this is not the message we want to get across to the Voxians themselves. Although I'm a big fan of being "straight up", we need to nuance our comms a little bit here. After all, the Voxians may want to be tech-trading partners. There is no need yet for harsh language like 'hypocrisy', 'war', 'insincere', etc.

First, we want to convince them to let their Warrior "step aside" in order to let ours through. If they straight out refuse (or attempt to delay, this time with no good excuse), we begin hinting that "early skirmishes to defend our homeland" will be inevitable. Preparing for this eventuality, I believe amassing a small force of Warriors is a necessity (not at the expense of expansion, of course). If ever we do go to war, 2 against 1 odds should be ok. If the cost of expunging them from our heartland is 1 Warrior (for both sides), so be it. This will hurt them more than us due to their UU.

We should not trade techs at this point, no matter how much we may want Bronze Working (or even Iron Working). We researched The Wheel of strategic purposes, and all of this and more will be lost if we let them obtain it and trade it away in turn.

Finally, I do not believe that they are trying to trick us about the number of civs they've met. Sure "we've met another civ" could mean that that other civ is us, but such a devious phrasing is both difficult to come up with (do we give them that much credit?) and inflammatory if ever we figure it out. If they are lying, there goes any trust until they complete the Eiffel Tower.


Dominae

	05-01-2003 07:00									#71
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph For the diplomats, RE the barbarian argument: We could propose to block the isthmus together, where it is not 1 but 2 tiles wide. One warrior of theirs and one of ours.

What would this accomplish? Sure, it would prevent a third party from exploring our lands, by they're 1 Warrior already takes care of this. In fact, if they stay where they are, they could prevent a third civ from contacting us at all, which the partnership you're proposing would fail to do.

The two tiles just beyond the 1-tile isthmus is not a bad location for us to set up our own blockade. They would be foolish to assault the Hill, and going the other way would leave them open to an assault from the Hill.


Dominae

	05-01-2003 07:12									#72
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Dominae What would this accomplish?

It is just a possible answer to the lame argument "Thadeus is fortified to protect our land from barbarians".

	05-01-2003 07:13									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Finally, I do not believe that they are trying to trick us about the number of civs they've met.

1. If they hold the isthmus, it could be very long before we meet anyone else
2. how are we going to prove they havn't done so?

you made some good points though Dominae

	05-01-2003 07:17									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Nathan, so you are basically saying we let them spy us out without any resistance, and whore our map around for money? That would be a sign of weakness, imho.

I hadn't thought ahead to what to do with our map later, but I suppose that if Vox in effect has it, we may not have much choice but to sell it ourselves.

The real problem is that if we can't persuade Vox to back down through diplomatic means, there is no truly good solution. On one hand, we don't want them wandering around and mapping our territory. But on the other, we have a lot to lose if we attack and get unlucky with the RNG, not to mention that attacking their warriors would escallate hostilities in a way that could hurt both nations relative to the rest of the world.

My own first instinct is to let Vox get away with their transgression for the time being if they insist on doing so, and to focus on economic and military expansion aimed at making them pay the ultimate price later. But I'll admit it's more an instinctive reaction than a product of full and careful analysis.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 07:17									#75
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph It is just a possible answer to the lame argument "Thadeus is fortified to protect our land from barbarians".

True. I was assuming the Voxians want to block us (a safe bet, no?). If they refuse your proposal, they're openly admitting this. A nice political maneuver but, given that it's just us and them, I do not think much good will come from forcing them to account for their actions (no UN yet).


Dominae

	05-01-2003 07:32									#76
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Nathan, we would not compromise growth in EotS, because warriors don't cost pop points . At the countrary, it would grow yet more.

You're forgetting that EotS's status as a settler pump is production-constrained, not food-constrained. Even five-turn settlers represent a loss of growth due to production limitations, and trying to squeeze in warriors would interfere with growth even more.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 07:39									#77
	Remove this text

Uum, losses of pop affect Shield output, so in sense Eye is Food-constrained. Am I not looking at it the right way?


Dominae

	05-01-2003 07:42									#78
	Put an end to popups!

constrained = limited?

	05-01-2003 07:47									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by nbarclay You're forgetting that EotS's status as a settler pump is production-constrained, not food-constrained. Even five-turn settlers represent a loss of growth due to production limitations, and trying to squeeze in warriors would interfere with growth even more.

I don't want to argue about a couple of shields. Economy is not all, there's also a thing called military security. We aren't playing against the AI, you know.

EotS's status as settler pump was discussed, before the current treat was discovered. Now our plans shall be adapted. This needs constructive, not destructive discussions. You have avoided to answer so far, so I ask the question directly:

What do you propose to do against the threat to be spied out and having our map whored around?

If the answer is "diplomacy", I see it already fail.

EDIT: I hadn't seen your previous post, which is basically the answer to this one. Sorry about that. I'm not very comfortable with your answer, though. There must be a better solution. The way it goes, they make fools out of us.

	05-01-2003 07:51									#80
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Dominae Nathan, I believe your letter to Vox precisely sums up what we're thinking on the diplomatic scene right now. However, this is not the message we want to get across to the Voxians themselves. Although I'm a big fan of being "straight up", we need to nuance our comms a little bit here. After all, the Voxians may want to be tech-trading partners. There is no need yet for harsh language like 'hypocrisy', 'war', 'insincere', etc.

If time were infinite, I would go with milder words now and harsher ones later if necessary. But time is not infinite, and we need to use words that will be taken seriously (assuming such a thing exists). My goal was to use harsh words regarding what the situation will be if Vox does not either withdraw their explorers or let us through, while at the same time giving Vox the opportunity to dismiss the whole thing as an oversight that can be corrected. And if they have any sense at all, they will see that the harsh words are not entirely unwarranted.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 07:55									#81
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by alva constrained = limited?

Yes.

	05-01-2003 07:59									#82
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by nbarclay You're forgetting that EotS's status as a settler pump is production-constrained, not food-constrained. Even five-turn settlers represent a loss of growth due to production limitations, and trying to squeeze in warriors would interfere with growth even more.

A few thoughts on this:

EotS, size 5, assuming all tiles improved (not yet the case, I know):

3 citizens on irrigated floodplains, 2 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 2 turns: City grows to size 6 and produces warrior.

- 2 citizens on irrigated floodplains, 4 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 2 turns: City makes 8 food surplus (2 to go) and 18 shields.

- 2 citizens on irrigated plains, 4 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 1 turn: City grows to size 7 and the 6 citizens make 11 shields, netting 29 shields for the settler.

If the 7th citizen makes one measly shield (should be possible to arrange), a 5 turn warrior+settler factory would be born. The only thing that could be happen is one wasted shield. I didn't check it yet, it's late here. Somebody should, though.

	05-01-2003 08:22									#83
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph What do you propose to do against the threat to be spied out and having our map whored around? If the answer is "diplomacy", I see it already fail.

Right now we have a major long-term economic (and especially production) advantage over Vox due to our free city and what that lets us do with our settler pump. Any piece of that advantage we give up in order to get rid of the Voxian explorers will cost us when full-scale war finally comes.

One or two turns of delay in EotS doesn't look like much now. But since almost all of our other cities will be founded from EotS, either directly or indirectly, a delay of one or two turns now ripples into a loss of one or two turns' production almost empire-wide. That could make a major difference when full-scale war finally comes, and I'm reluctant to give it up just to protect what will be left hidden of our map by the time we could intercept Vox's explorers with sufficient force.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 08:26									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: and I'm reluctant to give it up just to protect what will be left hidden of our map by the time we could intercept

Vox doesn't know what is left, only we do..

Seeing where we are on the minimap, this could be the case for many turns to come. I for one don't mind keeping it that way..

	05-01-2003 08:43									#85
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph A few thoughts on this: EotS, size 5, assuming all tiles improved (not yet the case, I know): 3 citizens on irrigated floodplains, 2 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 2 turns: City grows to size 6 and produces warrior. - 2 citizens on irrigated floodplains, 4 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 2 turns: City makes 8 food surplus (2 to go) and 18 shields. - 2 citizens on irrigated plains, 4 citizens on irrigated fur plains, 1 turn: City grows to size 7 and the 6 citizens make 11 shields, netting 29 shields for the settler. If the 7th citizen makes one measly shield (should be possible to arrange), a 5 turn warrior+settler factory would be born. The only thing that could be happen is one wasted shield. I didn't check it yet, it's late here. Somebody should, though.

Nice idea, and I'm sure a variant could work (especially since the long leg only requires EotS to use two irrigated FPs for one turn and it can just use one the other two), but I suspect we'd be better off having EotS use lower-production tiles so Hurricane can use the irrigated furs to crank out veteran forces faster. EotS would be stuck building regulars unless we significantly disrupt settler and worker production to build a barracks. Still, it's worth a test when and if someone can get to it.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 08:57									#86
	Suffering from ads?

Nathan, apart from the "harsh" language (which you seem convinced is necessary), my other problem with your letter is that we're basically threatening war ourselves. "Let us through the isthmus, get out of our lands, trade with us" is essentially what we're saying. That's three demands. It may be very frustrating for us to have the Voxians at a momentary advantage, but we can hardly expect them to give up any advantage they have over us without reparation, especially the ones that are not directly threatening us. We are in no position to decree that the lands south of the ishtmus are ours. We may want this to be so, but we need to make this a fact. We also want to explore the North, and the Voxians understandably happen to want to prevent us from doing this. We can attempt a diplomatic solution to our problems. Anything else is clearly war.

Concerning leaving tiles for Hurricane, this is probably a fine idea in the mid to long-term. But currently, Hurricane has neither a Barracks nor useful units to build. Thus letting Eye have the best tiles and going for a Warrior/Settler pump (as Sir Ralph proposes) appears to be the best option in the short-term.

(I will do some REX testing tomorrow...I spent all my Civ-time today playing AU 203, a tough one!)


Dominae

	05-01-2003 08:59									#87
	Inflate your Upload Space

So we want a barracks in hurricane after building 1 or 2 warriors?
2 warriors in EotS then settler-warrior settler??

Something like this,?

	05-01-2003 09:06									#88
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I have not tested anything just yet, but ideally I envision:

Eye: Warrior-Settler-Warrior-Warrior-Settler (or variant with a Worker)

Hurricane: Warrior-Warrior-Settler at first opportunity

Instead of using the bonus Shields from chopped Forest for improvements, it would be good to rush some of the Warriors, like we did at the beginning of the game.

Sorry if this sounds presumptuous. As I said I haven't tested much just yet...


Dominae

	05-01-2003 09:33									#89
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Dominae Nathan, apart from the "harsh" language (which you seem convinced is necessary), my other problem with your letter is that we're basically threatening war ourselves. "Let us through the isthmus, get out of our lands, trade with us" is essentially what we're saying. That's three demands. It may be very frustrating for us to have the Voxians at a momentary advantage, but we can hardly expect them to give up any advantage they have over us without reparation, especially the ones that are not directly threatening us. We are in no position to decree that the lands south of the ishtmus are ours. We may want this to be so, but we need to make this a fact. We also want to explore the North, and the Voxians understandably happen to want to prevent us from doing this. We can attempt a diplomatic solution to our problems. Anything else is clearly war.

What in my message are you reading as a demand for trade deals? I don't recall saying anything about trade at all. And Vox could solve the problems of apparent insincerity and hypocrisy by either withdrawing their units or letting ours through; they wouldn't have to do both.

As for the mention of war, if you don't think Vox's actions are likely to lead to war, you must not be reading the threads around here. At the very least, a police action to deal with the intruders seems almost inevitable if they persist.

I can understand Vox's desire to exploit an advantage just fine. But if Vox has no respect for our desires, why should we have any respect for theirs beyond what we regard as being to our own advantage?

quote: Concerning leaving tiles for Hurricane, this is probably a fine idea in the mid to long-term. But currently, Hurricane has neither a Barracks nor useful units to build. Thus letting Eye have the best tiles and going for a Warrior/Settler pump (as Sir Ralph proposes) appears to be the best option in the short-term.

If Hurricane has "neither a Barracks nor useful units to build," won't it be high time for Hurricane to build a barracks?

There may well be be time periods when having EotS go into the mode Sir Ralph suggested makes sense, especially after all five furs are chopped and irrigated (or mined in the case of the one on grassland). I'm just trying to point out that that mode won't necessarily be our best use of our furs.

Nathan

	05-01-2003 09:43									#90
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Dominae Eye: Warrior-Settler-Warrior-Warrior-Settler (or variant with a Worker)

Please test it, and then we'll have a concrete basis for analysis.

quote: Hurricane: Warrior-Warrior-Settler at first opportunity

We need more tile improvements in the area before a settler from Hurricane will be practical. I'm thinking warriors and then a worker as soon as practical after size 2.

quote: Instead of using the bonus Shields from chopped Forest for improvements, it would be good to rush some of the Warriors, like we did at the beginning of the game.

Using chops for warriors always wastes at least one shield. We did it early because we needed the fur tiles irrigated and we had to chop before we could irrigate, but it's not a good general practice.

Edit: Fixed some quoting problems.