 |
| |
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MrBaggins
You've not heard of ICS then?
It stands for 'Infinite City Sleeze'. Its a typical TBS ploy... and had its heyday in Civ2.
It effectively exploits a 'weakness' in the design of TBS games... namely that your cities use 1+POP (basically) squares of resources. Its mathematically advantageous to just build just settlers (and enough defensive units to be viable) whilst you can (subject to space and empire size caps.)
I do agree that we should take an Austrian City, but not at the expense of as rapid an expansion that we can muster, ourselves.
MrBaggins |
ICS doesnt work in CtP2, well not half as powerful as before. We should strive to gain cities until we're roughly 1 or 2 over the max for our government, by force or by building settlers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrBaggins
|
|
Thats something everyone can agree with (the gaining as many cities as possible.) At least in my opinion.
Last edited by MrBaggins on 29-01-2003 at 21:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
|
|
aachen, germany
Aug 1999
time: 05:25
|
|
yeah, hippos can be dangerous
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Turambar
|
|
England
Apr 2002
time: 05:25
|
|
Thanks for the support Maq!
Lets keep the peacemongers out of power!!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
Sorry IW, i think your wombat nature is getting the better of you in this time of crisis.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
|
|
aachen, germany
Aug 1999
time: 05:25
|
|
well, at the moment, i would advise the warlovers as well to vote for IW. at least those, that only like wars when the win them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
Don't get me(or all the members of the war party) wrong Zaphod B.I'm not a war-monger, infact i will, in most situations rather live a peaceful CTP2 life.
Still i feel, as do the members of the war-party, that our current situation is not good. So much so that going to war against a stronger civ is possibly a better option for long term survival. We all know that the AI is at a huge disavantage when going to war against a human opponant. We can be 'wiley' in ways the AI can only dream about. We can lure enemy armies into traps, we can scout attack(use a unit as sacrifice to see the defences before going to attack) etc etc.
So even when at a disadvantage the human player can fight tactical to even out the balance of power.
Also the AI is very bad at keeping to it's diplomatic agreements. You can spend all the gold you like and be as nice as you can, but at a momments notice you will be attacked without provication. When surrounded by stronger and bigger AI civs this can lead to disaster.At the momment we have two larger civs on our doorstep, each within striking distance and each capable of fielding bigger armies than us.
This make me nervous as we already had diplomatic probs with the austrians and the germans won't be happy that we are so close.
Even if we expand south and invest the production into settlers and science, we will not catch up with either austria or germany for along time, time enough for them to decide they don't actually love us anymore and instead want to kill us - completely. We still won't be strong enough to defend ourselfs.
Atleast if we attack early and really fight a good tactical and focusd campaign, we will expand our empire quickly enough so that we can get decent defences in place and weaken one potential 'super' enemy for later on in the game.
There is a risk in attacking a stronger enemy, and it could all go horribly wrong if we don't do it well enough, with the right focus at the right times.
There is also a risk in being stuck between two very powerful, unpredictable and untrustworthy AI civs.
Which is worse? We feel the later in this camp.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
Bumped this thread cause i couldnt find another relavant one.
Who is the WP going to concentrate their votes on in MoD election, Pedrunn or Turambar? We cant split the votes between them or neither will win, we need to make a decision.
Ive already voted for Turambar because even though Pedrunn is going to start more discussions an stuff i still dont see that as a reason to kick out a perfectly good MoD. Anyone can start discussions on tactics, even Pedrunn can if he wants to when Turambar gets elected, but its hardly a reason to elect someone out.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-01-2003 14:18
read my sig 
, The Austrian's are "developing weapons of mass destruction!!!!" and we can not allow it to continue 
|