View Full Version : Where to settle next?


CivGeneral
Apr 16, 2005, 06:04 PM
I have not noticed a discussion being posted in regards to filling in the void where we razed an Indian city. I beleve we should settle in that location ASAP before the Indians reclame that location.

Please discuss uppon this issue.
Thanks,
CivGeneral

RegentMan
Apr 16, 2005, 10:32 PM
What city should be used to produce the settler?

snipelfritz
Apr 17, 2005, 12:47 PM
Here's the situation. Our war with India has opened a lot of land to settle namely around an old city site. Below is a (big ol')map. Where would you like to settle?

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/IndianRuinsG.JPG

RegentMan
Apr 17, 2005, 01:33 PM
This would be my layout plan:

greekguy
Apr 17, 2005, 02:13 PM
RegentMan's plan looks good to me. it fills in all the spots and gets us another supply of silks.

Ashburnham
Apr 17, 2005, 07:35 PM
I'm inclinded to agree with Regentman as well. But, remember that we will most likely be going to war with the Dutch in the near future. The resulting border shifts could disrupt the current settler plans. Just something to keep in mind.

snipelfritz
Apr 17, 2005, 08:04 PM
I like Regentmans plans.

Which site would we want to settle first? I propose the center one, because it blocks the Indians from the south eastern site.

Ash, we need to settle quickly, before the Dutch or Indians can. These are the best spots we have now. If something changes, we will stop and reasess the situation.

Octavian X
Apr 17, 2005, 10:13 PM
I'd be inclined to wait to settle that area for now. If we did plant cities in that area, we'd have to turn around soon and worry about defending them from the Dutch.

snipelfritz
Apr 20, 2005, 06:06 AM
Update
Donsignia has a settler in queue. What do we plan to do with it? Do we settle, or save it for later?

Furiey
Apr 20, 2005, 01:07 PM
Not only do we have a settler in the queue, but there is one built and it's currently East of Bentley heading West....

The Dutch have also built a city on the Silks.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/DG6_BC0450_WestFanatannia.jpg

snipelfritz
Apr 20, 2005, 03:52 PM
I propose we settle either on the horses or one tile SE of the horses. Myself, being more inclined towards the former.

Ashburnham
Apr 20, 2005, 04:44 PM
I would prefer settling SE of the Horses. It's the same spot that was proposed at the beginning of this thread, and all the reasons for it still apply. However, this most recent development (Breda) suggests that expansion plans will have to be curtailed for the moment, until we can successfully push back the Dutch.

Nobody
Apr 20, 2005, 04:46 PM
i agree with the idea of the 3 citys in indian land.

Stuck_as_a_Mac
Apr 20, 2005, 05:17 PM
3 cities in India is fine by me... provided they have CULTURE

DaveShack
Apr 20, 2005, 07:17 PM
I support going ahead to settle on the spot SE of the horses.

There is another settler either already produced or next in queue, let's decide on another place while we're at it.

RegentMan
Apr 20, 2005, 08:06 PM
I'd go for one tile southeast of the horses too.

Furiey
Apr 21, 2005, 01:51 AM
One possiblility for the Settler about to be built is near the iron. The original site (iron wheat) is now within the Dutch Culture (I think). However, settling W of the iron, although not on the river, would claim the iron, and 1 wheat from Rotterdam. But more importantly, now that Rotterdam has expanded, would mean our troops would only have to cross 1 tile of enemy territory ie: move in one turn and attack the next. We would have to do some roading to connect the new city and then protect it, but it could then be used as a staging post for the Rotterdam attack.

zyxy
Apr 21, 2005, 03:23 AM
I like the three spots proposed by RegentMan, the southernmost of which is still available. The second settler could go to the IronWheat area -- NW of the iron looks good -- after we declare on the dutch (then we can settle inside their borders).

DaveShack
Apr 21, 2005, 08:55 AM
I like the three spots proposed by RegentMan, the southernmost of which is still available. The second settler could go to the IronWheat area -- NW of the iron looks good -- after we declare on the dutch (then we can settle inside their borders).

Yes, we may want to adjust their spacing a bit to get our seemingly preferred 13 tiles per city. I don't know if we would want to use two defenders on a brand new city inside the battle zone.

RegentMan
Apr 21, 2005, 08:58 AM
Should we raze all Dutch cities and build settlers to fit our own city-placement style?

DaveShack
Apr 21, 2005, 09:13 AM
Should we raze all Dutch cities and build settlers to fit our own city-placement style?

Please don't, more settlers would just take away from building things like temples in our own cities. Also the general AI attitude towards us gets worse with each city razed.

LeeT911
Apr 21, 2005, 09:33 AM
I havn't looked at the save, but are all the Dutch cities auto-raze safe now?

snipelfritz
Apr 21, 2005, 06:15 PM
Here's what I have for next TC:

Settle one tile SE of horses in former Indian territory.
Move en queued settler to a safe possition near Iro-Wheat, and settle when it is cleared and safe.

For those who dont know, the iro-wheat site is within the red circles on the map below.(an old map, but it works none the less). Any thoughts on specific tiles.

EDIT: forgot map. Ta-Da...

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/irowheatsite.JPG