Here is our start emailed from the admins, along with this email:

Greetings Team CFC,

Your start position screenshot is attached. Also please note the
password for your civ is cfcreborn. This may not be exactly the same
as the password you requested, we were informed that some of the
passwords contained characters which are suspected to cause
difficulties with the game.

Regards,

DaveShack
ISDG Co-Admin


We also received another email from the admins

Dear participating teams.

The Mapmaker Sirian would like to follow the game on the maps that he
made as it develops on your forums. He would like access to your
secret forum to do this.

It will be your decision to allow him in or to not allow him in - I'm
only asking. So, if you get a request from member Sirian - you know
what it is about.

There is no need to reply to this email. However, if you have a
question to us or when you need the admins for other reasons: email us
on this email address.

Regards,
Rik Meleet
Co-Admin.


Note: I assumed the forum attachment system would be more secure than uploading the picture on the cfc server, please tell me if I am wrong

settle in place after warrior climbs hill just to look about. Great food rich city with 2 health bonus and a happiness bonus.

Moving 1W would give us a bit more river to work with, and keeps all resources. I haven't cruched the numbers, tho'.

Moving 1W would give us a bit more river to work with, and keeps all resources. I haven't cruched the numbers, tho'.
It would also give us another hill

nope it does not add a hill...it removes one forested plains hill inexchnge for a plains hill

settle in place vs settle 1 west
in place city is on grassland
picks up 2 coastal, 1 ocean(?unsure), forested plains hill and 1 grassland compared to the settle on a plain and pick up 2 coastal , 1 plains hill and 2 grasslands.

So it boils down to this...stay nets you one forest and 1 ocean(?unsure) where as moving nets you 1 grassland. No brainer..move 1 w

sorry for the poor picture paint job...http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/5460/cfcstartbz4.th.jpg (http://img516.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cfcstartbz4.jpg)

FYI chatroom is available if you would like real time discussion.

I agree with moving 1W

As far as exploration it looks like to the west is just ocean, but I can't tell if that bit of land closes off or not. South looks like it may expand out again but it seems that it isn't fertile land. West seems obvious to explore as it looks like we have a bit of grasslands there.

What I suggest if there is contention on what to do with the warrior, is that the settler moves first and builds a city (Firstonetopia sound good? Thunderfalls?) and then post a screeny. Wait an hour or two for response and the move the warrior.

One west would be my idea, also possibly allows us to squeeze in a city east.

I would settle in place. I consider the space which will remain to the east as too small for a serious city (if we settle 1W).

I would settle in place. I consider the space which will remain to the east as too small for a serious city (if we settle 1W).


a serious city no, but if we've only got 5 cities for whatever reason having that 6th will be usefull for things :)

Or if we only have 4 cities the 5th would allow us to build many things that need 5 of something else.

I'd much rather keep the river health bonus. If we were going to move, I would much rather it to be 1SE. We would waste less space in the east, and have more space west for more cities.

Now someone shoot down my idea, and say why it wont work. ;)

echo of azz

ohhh...SE.

either in place or SE. for the health bonus

Someone want to figure out the longer term differences...:)

we have 3 sites to think about.

I like azzamans idea, it makes better use of the land and the health bonus always helps

what a lovely start
just settle there and 3 gte 3 mines form the hills

1 tile SE means we lose 2 of our lux's (yes i know we only need one) but we can cottage them early on to be big money givers. it also means that instead of more grassland tiles we'll have plains tiles.


if we need health theres plenty more we can do to get it, resources, granary's. aqueducts etc.

1 tile SE means we lose 2 of our lux's (yes i know we only need one) but we can cottage them early on to be big money givers. it also means that instead of more grassland tiles we'll have plains tiles.

it's not like this is our only city

There's lots of different opinions going here maybe a poll would be a good idea

Anyone good at crunching civ numbers?

what ever we do..we need to do it quick. The save is one team from us.

I will do a listing of the tiles covered by all three and post back here. Its going to take me a while...but it will be up soon.

triple post

triple post

city site analysis...
green is the plains site(west), red (settle in place) adn blue( east) on the plains with river.

I removed all the common tiles between the cities. These were..2 coastal clams, 4 coastals, 1 plain w/ river, 1 plains, 2 grss with rivier, 1 silk, 1 forest grassland, 1 sheep plains hills

That leaves...to decide based on this.
Blue(east) 2 coastal, 1 unknown(coastal?), 1 plains, 1 grass w/ river, 1 forested hill, 1 plains hill
red ....1 coastal, 1 grass hills, 1 plains, 2 silk forest grass, 1 forest plains hils, 1 grass
green... 1 grass hill, 1 grass/river, 2 silk forest grass, 1 plains hill, 2 grass.

Someone else want to play with hammer, food and commerce..my eyes are killing me.(double checked and numbers are right ..I think)

I also think that there was a suggestion to move SW.

city site analysis...
green is the plains site(west), red (settle in place) adn blue( east) on the plains with river.

I removed all the common tiles between the cities. These were..2 coastal clams, 4 coastals, 1 plain w/ river, 1 plains, 2 grss with rivier, 1 silk, 1 forest grassland, 1 sheep plains hills

That leaves...to decide based on this.
Blue(east) 2 coastal, 1 unknown(coastal?), 1 plains, 1 grass w/ river, 1 forested hill, 1 plains hill
red ....1 coastal, 1 grass hills, 1 plains, 2 silk forest grass, 1 forest plains hils, 1 grass
green... 1 grass hill, 1 grass/river, 2 silk forest grass, 1 plains hill, 2 grass.

Someone else want to play with hammer, food and commerce..my eyes are killing me.(double checked and numbers are right ..I think)

completely unimproved:
blue : :food: :6 :hammers::6 :commerce::7
.red : :food:: 9 :hammers::7 :commerce::4
green::food::11 :hammers::5 :commerce::3

remember, this is unimproved

double checked with simulations in the worldbuilder

I also think that there was a suggestion to move SW.
awwwww man....someone else do it. I can this morning..

You are our Domestic minister and as such that is your job. :D

it's not like this is our only city


no it's not but it's our capital and therefore our most important city, we need to get as much out of it as we can.

You are our Domestic minister and as such that is your job. :D
yeah I just didnt have the time at the moment...I was busy watching a little bike race...man what a race.

Well since I am the minister... cant I just do what I want any way. :) I will have it done with in an hour or 2. I need to go ride off the energy from the race. :)

To me Blue is the best one..we will have more than enough food and those hammer and gold make it the best city as a capital because of beuacracy.

update...we need to make sure whereever we move we have sea access. Otherwise we cant use the clams till we get another coastal city. This handcuffs our early growth. Therefore I think the three previous posted sites.are the only one we should think about. Remember the one "given" in civ is a food resource in you captial and no desert in its fat cross if you settler in place. We dont want to move and put our food resource in danger of not helping early growth

Here is a map with the dots...where else do you want me to check. I think blue is best. And I will put that as my official recommendation unless someone tells me there is somethign wrong with it.

http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/4438/cfcstartdotshu7.th.jpg (http://img327.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cfcstartdotshu7.jpg)


yes I know sheep are food...but they will only yield 3 so...2 sets of clams...give 8 or 10 with an lighthouse. Remember what Sirian said about the maps so we need to use every last resource to its maximum advantage.

I still say green, gives us most amount of plains, river tiles, resources/lux's to work. also gives us an equal number of hills, i see no reason to not go with that one.

green will be a low production city compared to blue. We will get those resources with another city or even expansion of borders. Silks are OK but the tiles will only be 2/0/3...not that great of a help.

Blue is better in commerce also..my call is still blue

We look to be kinda tight on space so lets try to use it.

i dont see your reasoning behind the production, green will still have 3 hills, same as blue(yes one is a grassland so 1 less hammer). i dont mean just 'getting' the resources either, i mean cottaging them. putting our capital blue would also increase the distance from it to our next city which will undoubtably be west. Green means less maintenance for future cities.

Your going to need to explain to me why blue is better for commerce.
Green has 3 silk tiles to cottage, 3 other river tiles to cottage, the sea tiles only give +2 commerce but it still has the 2 clams. I just cant wrap my head around just why blue has greater commerce though i'd be happy to be proved wrong.

Blue has the same amount of forests to chop, red has more. Red would give +3 health.

OK the poll it...or we need more input

We need the silks to trade..if you understood what Sirian was saying about the maps is that resources will occur in clusters. So trade will be more important than a few extra commerce. We are financial so cottages will not be as lucrative. IMHO..no cottages on the silks..planataioans yep but not cottages. With 2 food before planatations they dont give enough growth to the city compared to the other tiles like the 2 clams and sheep. At the earliest population you would even think about using the cottaged silks is 4 pop since they give no hammers.Even at size 4 or 5 I would work a mined hill with the sheep and 2 clams. Because its silks and not something better...(gems, dyes, gold) I dont see us working them till much later so no need to cottage them.


Maintenace cost are not an issue..the next city should be smack up against this one unless copper is a ways away. 2 difference will not be a major factor.

Point is...all sites are fairly equal. However....if ybbors numbers are right this site(blue) has more potential with out as much workers turns or game turns to give mature cottages tiles.

/you and I will never agree...even in our multiplayer team games vs other people:)we have heated discussions...

I don't think blue is best. If you are going off those "unimproved" stats, I think that is a mistake. Better to think about what it'll be like improved, because +3 :commerce: for silk makes a big difference. Disregarding the farm/ cottage choice, keeping forests, improved resources and mines (and assuming a lighthouse):

clams - 5 food, 2 commerce
silk (forest) - 2 food, 1 hammer, 3 commerce
sheep (hill) - 3 food, 1 hammer, 1 commerce

Green - 2 clam, 3 silk, 1 sheep, 6 grassland (2 rvr, 1 frst), 2 plains (1 rvr), 1 plains hill, 1 grass hill, 4 coast. 42:food:, 14:hammers:, 25:commerce: 42 food will support all 20 tiles, so we can cottage everything!!(will reduce hammers by 1)

Red - same resources, 4 grass (1frst, 1 rvr), 3 plains ( 1 rvr), 1 grass hill, 1 plains hill, 5 coast (assumption ;)) 41 :food:, 15:hammers:, 26:commerce: Again, we can cottage everything. (will reduce hammers by 1)

Blue - 2 clam, 1 silk, 1 sheep, 5 grass (1 frst, 2 rvr), 3 plains, 2 plains hills, 5 coast, 38:food:, 14:hammers:, 18 :commerce: Need 2 farms for full tile work.

So there you go. Count my vote for red, settle in place.

Actually, I left off the actual "city" tile in the count. How does it differ on grass or plain, or on river?

cant answer you last question about city tile

Good analysis..want to be assistant Domestic minister? :)

based on that..red settler in place. Hey I can see that wisdom.:) BTW..with lighhouse we would need to farm at blue? or did you count the lighthouse?

Doesnt really matter.. the hammers and gold are better elsewhere.

I disagree, not just for the sake of it but just because the first third of the game before you get calendar is probably the most crucial. During this time you can/need to cottage the silks, until calendar we wont be able to trade the silks anyways, so if we need to we can always take the cottages off the tiles and put a couple of plantations down. I assume you meant we are not financial but that doesnt mean cottages arn't as important.

Even when worked clams give you 4 food and 2 gold, thats after time has been spent investing in a work boat. So many turns will be needed to produce a couple of decent tiles. Civ4 is a commerce game, similar to the way that civ3 is a growth/expansion game, therefore anyway inwhich we can get more and more commerce we should take, in this case one of the ways would be to cottage them silks, even if they wernt usefull now when we have differing civics they will be very valuable.

The tiles which you suggested can even still be worked if the tiles were on the green site, yet give a greater middle game bonus.

You get the same base city tile no matter where you settle, from what i remember its 1 hammer, 1 commerce and 2 food. could be wrong though.

plains hills its 2 hammer 2 food....FYI

I have had some computer issues( vidoe card went belly upp..now runnin gbare minimum card from old computer) that are at least as of now resolved....I do not know if civ will work past the start adn i know it willcrap ut on wonder movies.

Thsi shoudl be corrrected within a week when i get a new card. IF someone has a suggestion for a top line Civ -proof card let me know. I am looking at right aroudn a hundred to spend if that possible.

I say we go for red. We need to start right away and Sweetacshon's arguement to me makes the case.

The save..is now officially overdue. So you can hope to see our save any time.

So Settle red....My decision with only one negative opinion on settling red.

ok i'll settle red, warrior heading north west into the forest, then continuing north west for awhile

did you get the save? or is it still over due

Crucially people, were going to need to decide what to name the cities, do i get to choose as first term prez etc, do we vote? or do we just have a list which i randomize from?

I think someone said to name it Thunder Falls. makes sense its on a river

ok but that doesnt help so much for the future.

well that covers the NEED now we will cover the future

You can ask us. In past ISDGs we had a list of names we used. Whenever a person posts a city name, it goes on the list, and eventuallly gets on the map. But the first city is always Thunderfall related

I think when we plan to make a city people can throw out some suggestions and the turn player can pick the best one.

My choice would have been settle in place, by the by.

Regarding city naming, we can create a thread dedicated to proposing names, or we can just suggest names a few turns before we settle the city. The latter would be easiest, and it would let us use the landscape should we desire.

For the capital name, I propose Lake Fortaleza. It stems from the end of the ISDG, with an arousing post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2733767&postcount=24) by Donovan Zoi:

In case anyone was wondering, the selection of CGN targets before our demise was intentional. We at CFC have no gripe with CDZ, knowing that conquest is their instinctual domain and was therefore expected.

However, when the cultural example of greatness in our world (CGN) decides to go along for the ride and elects to instill psychological warfare on its enemy through the renaming of units, we just had to take the parting shot. We at CFC are neither *****s nor morons, and do not appreciate the inference. It is important to remember, even in the heat of battle, that you are playing this game with actual people.

All in all, a great and memorable game. And from the ashes settling in Lake Fortaleza, CFC shall one day rise again. :D

I think it would be fitting.

Wow, I agree, let's go for Lake Fortaleza. That is great.

Why Lake Fortaleza?-what does it mean? i disagree that we should be looking at past cfc games for influence, this is a new game new people- i like the idea of everyone throwing around a few names before settling. i think if were going along Thunderfall lines it should be 'Thunder Falls' as our first city.

Thunder falls should be our first city's name. The other name can be for our next city.

I agree with Classical_Hero, we are lead by Thunderfall, and so we should the most important city after him too.

For our second city though, I'm open to Lake Fortaleza (though the ones who don't know the backstory will think us crazy for naming it that when there's no lake! ;) )

OK maybe you gusy can start a back story thread on teh name...we need somethig to read while those other teams drag this out waaaaaayyyyy longer than what they should have.

Missing the first turn like this only makes me think that this team may be one of the few that cant finish this game due to lack of interest.

for the name of city we should put our teamlist in alpha betical order
then go and in order

eg

karl
robboo

i would go first and id get to name the city whatever we want could we suggest we do it this way after we name our first city
casue i do aggree with classical

The problem with naming it lake forteza or whatever is that some of us are on different civ3 ISDG teams-same reason why so much can't be given away. For instance for some obscure reason- (who knows why) im on team poly-think oct recruited me.

I dont mind naming it that if others want to go for it but i do think that this ISDG should be seperate as much as possible from the previous one.

I think BC has a point...its new game new ISDG. Lets try to not use retreads.

The problem is that we can play a bit of psychological warfare with some ouf our naming and thus make it a ploy to other teams.

We could but we still should be thinking of this as a new game with nothing else happening, theres nothing wrong with say not trusting 'whatever team' because of what they did previously but we cant go around treating this game the same as the civ 3 one, i think the demogame itself is quite a good example of that right now.

Behold Fortaleza:

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/TitanicWhiz18/14020brazil20big20.jpg

One of CBR's early cities. We were CBR's southern neighbor, and we attempted to negotiate a peace with them. One was put in place, but it didn't remain. After several insults by the slimey northernors, CFC invaded CBR. We were hoping to take them out with the help of the other continent, but CDZ and CGN decided to take a weak team to the finals, so they sided with CBR and 50+ mounted warriors and 50+ gallic swords landed in our core. Naturally, our cities fell in huge clumps to the invaders.

Our last city was chosen as our stronghold. But it was obvious we wouldn't hold out for long. CFC had quite a few galleys left over, so we planned to settle a one-tile island inside CBR territory and hold out to marines. However, such actions were debated and we decided to take one of CBR's cities instead; Fortaleza.

With a settler in our cargo, the capture of out last city reduced CFC to what our ancestors had practiced for so long: a band of wandering nomads. We landed and prepared to capture the villiage full of stench and filth:

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/TitanicWhiz18/ad290-fortaleza2028229.jpg

Then a cunning plan came about: why not sail our settler into the lake, then abandon Fortaleza? It is still one of the best civ-plans I've heard of, a perfect compromise of settling on an island and going out with honor. We took Fortaleza, captured some CBR workers, then sailed into the lake, abandoning Fortaleza after our safe arrival. CBR soon caught on, however. They rebuilt the city one tile northwest, and trebuchet fire began hitting our galleys. With the game obviously soon over, we weren't going to let the trechorous CBR eliminate us. So CFC disbanded all galleys, including our settler-filled one. The game was over for CFC. :sad:

Some heavy bashing took place at the UN (including CFC-bashing and admin-bashing). In response, Donovan Zoi, who played the first and the last turns of the game, posted this (the renaming units part refers to CGN-renamed units; we'd get banned for posting the actual names on the forum):
In case anyone was wondering, the selection of CGN targets before our demise was intentional. We at CFC have no gripe with CDZ, knowing that conquest is their instinctual domain and was therefore expected.

However, when the cultural example of greatness in our world (CGN) decides to go along for the ride and elects to instill psychological warfare on its enemy through the renaming of units, we just had to take the parting shot. We at CFC are neither *****s nor morons, and do not appreciate the inference. It is important to remember, even in the heat of battle, that you are playing this game with actual people.

All in all, a great and memorable game. And from the ashes settling in Lake Fortaleza, CFC shall one day rise again. :D
Ever since I read that last sentence on April 30, 2005, I had a desire to name CFC's next capital Lake Fortaleza. It puts a nice closure on the whole situation, both role-playing and history-wise.
The problem with naming it lake forteza or whatever is that some of us are on different civ3 ISDG teams
That makes no difference whatsoever. Lake Fortaleza is round one, reveiled in a now public forum.

Why not draw from previous games? It's CFC culture. Something that everyone seems to have forgotten; our capitol is never named after Thunderfall.

[c3c] - Fanatazuma
[ptw] - Shen Ling

That's why I support Lake Fortaleza for our capital, our first city since our defeat last time. It shows the other teams "Hey, CFC's back! We have risen from the ashes and are ready to kick some ass." Even if they don't instantly get it, we will know what it means. And that's all that matters.

I strongly urge we do not use this name. IT will reopen past memories. While we may have a secret desire to kill CBR and others..we too may want to keep a weak team around till the next game.

MAYBE rename the city as an anagram of the name you want. OR better yet..when we take a CBR city then use the name. That will be more of the rising from the ashes. You dont want to remind them of the manuver especially if it didnt garner you any support in the UNa nd casued bad feelings.

I wasnt in the Civ 3 game and if this one turns into paying back old scores...why have a foriegn office.... our enemies and friends are set.

This is starting to make me regret my signing up here..I dont want to relive/replay the Civ 3 game. I dont want to go thru the same BS that going on in the other demogame where newbies never get tehinside jokes and arent as respected as someone who "has been here for XX number of demogames". This is a new game. Bury those preconcieved thoughts and histories...and lets go write a new history.

I can see your point, and for the most part, I agree with it. However, I don't see why we should abolish all past references. Naming our capital Lake Fortaleza isn't a hardcore "veteran" [c3c] demogame reference. It's simply a nice little "Heh" from the past.

I wasnt in the Civ 3 game and if this one turns into paying back old scores...why have a foriegn office.... our enemies and friends are set.
Our enemies are not set. We just have to prepare what their the likely response will be. I probably will advocate peace between us and our first neighbor, be it GWT, CBR, or GCA. However, if it is GCA, we need to be ready to jump into military production at anytime, as past demogames have shown they are war hawks. We'd be fools not to remember the past. And some sites, such as COG, are completely new rivals. We will write a new history this time around.

But again, I hope to not lose you, nor anyone else. I hope the ISDG is a nice break from the single player demogame, as many here (myself included) don't actively participate in the single player version. References to the past are going to come up, not necessarily at every corner, but they are going to come up. It will be the same in the Civ V ISDG; references to this game will come up there.

I am quite firmly against naming a city from the past simply because it 'was' a city in the past, sure if the name had some value to us right now i'd go for it but really i see no need to re-open the civ 3 ISDG in the civ 4 ISDG.

You say that allies are not set in stone but you already accuse that brazillian team of being trecherous bastards (something i agree with totally), so that is one avenue we wont go down.

Obviously lake forteza would be a good idea if there was a lake about but there isnt so just what is the point???

I am quite firmly against naming a city from the past simply because it 'was' a city in the past, sure if the name had some value to us right now i'd go for it but really i see no need to re-open the civ 3 ISDG in the civ 4 ISDG.
But it does have value to us. We as a team are arising from the ashes, and what more fitting name than the lake that swallowed us? Why are we afraid of bringing a tidbit or two from the past? I doubt any of the other teams would even get the reference. And if CBR noticed the name, who cares? I've seen the word "the" used before, but I won't get crap for using it twice in this sentence.

You say that allies are not set in stone but you already accuse that brazillian team of being trecherous bastards (something i agree with totally), so that is one avenue we wont go down.
I never used the word bastard, but I do think of them as trecherous. I'm simply going off of what I remember of them. They twist deals around until it benefits them the most. That's what they did in the past. That's what we'll have to keep in mind upon running into them. Could they have changed? Of course. We won't know until we chat with them.

Obviously lake forteza would be a good idea if there was a lake about but there isnt so just what is the point???
The point is symbolic. There are no waterfalls about either, so why Thunder Falls?

But it does have value to us. We as a team are arising from the ashes, and what more fitting name than the lake that swallowed us? Why are we afraid of bringing a tidbit or two from the past? I doubt any of the other teams would even get the reference. And if CBR noticed the name, who cares? I've seen the word "the" used before, but I won't get crap for using it twice in this sentence.



But we're not, there are a few vets from the previous ISDG but their are lots of new faces, sure name the 3/4/5 cities after that but why should this isdg be so attached to the last one?


Well im not that bothered about whether we names it Thunderfalls just it appeared a few people wanted to name it that and no-one was really strongly opposed to it, obviously not the case with Lake Forteza.

I'm not trying to make it so attached to the last one. I just thought it would be a nice connection; completes a circle.

If we do go with the Thunderfall name, then I'd like to see it Thunder Falls. Although are we going to rename the "leader" Thunderfall? If we are, then I would rather have a different name for the capital.

Its a town name... :rolleyes:

Its a town name... :rolleyes:
Indeed it is. And with such debate, it's obviously a very heated issue. Thanks for pointing that out.

Well then perhaps if we capture it CBR's capital could be renamed.

I dont mind how we name it, i used to like the old way we did it in the demogame with the prez getting first dibs on what the city is called (maybe a little bit because i am prez right now).

I prefer naming towns that have a significances to their roll/geography. Naming a town "lake" makes me want to go look a for lakes on the map.

Well then perhaps if we capture it CBR's capital could be renamed.


No, we will rename their Capital JokerDF :lol:

Whats in a name? For my part, I'd like to see new names used, not being part of previous isdgs, but I really wouldn't mind that much going the other way except that it might tip the brazilians off that we (or at least some of us) remember the last one and will be targeting them. I am happy enough to beat them to a bloody pulp, even if you didn't give me an extra reason, but we shouldn't let them know about it.

Considering the history behind that name I rather like Lake Forteza, but then again I understand something that most of you do not -- what its like to be part of a group that is larger than ones self. After 9 years of the marching arts I learned that people come, and go, sometimes there is a period of great growth in the group with new faces, but its still the same group. I went and saw my old high school's show (been out of there for 4 years now, wow) and they were still doing traditions that were started when I was there and even before I came in. It may not have meant much to the incoming freshman, but over time it will.

The multi site demo games seems to keep around the same groups of people. The members may change, but they inherit the experience and stories of those who came before them. To ignore them in a childish pout is a tactical error as well as, for the lack of a better phrase, a spiritual one. Yes, this is a new game with some new members, no different than me learning a new show every year, but its still the same group, the same team.

Welcome to the family.

Hey, why not Fortaleza backwards? Azelatrof (I'd pronounce it azz-al-AT-rof).

I don't think we should name it Fortaleza. First off, the move seemed kinda cheap. Second, we'd gain more fun from having a good game without UN-drama and teams that respect us than we would get from the temporary boost of pride from naming our first city.

...but then again I understand something that most of you do not -- what its like to be part of a group that is larger than ones self.

To ignore them in a childish pout is a tactical error as well as, for the lack of a better phrase, a spiritual one.

Sorry, my friend, but that is patronising, and a little offensive. We all understand the history, as well told by RM, but that doesn't mean we are being childish in wanting a new name. There certainly is no tactical or spiritual errors involved, just a desire for a fresh start. We will remember and learn from history, but won't be limited by it.

I like it backwards. I also suggested an anagram. The people that know what the name means will still get their pride adn histroy form the name. The others....we can tell them after we sever their heads from their bodies.

We do NOT want to make it seem we are holding a grudge. I agree with ybbor...I dont know if I would take pride in that move. I rather not be reminded of defeat, start fresh.

sweet..couldnt agree more

The turn is here:

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/TitanicWhiz18/Turn1.jpg

Both BAT and CBR have settled. Have we agreed where to settle?

ok i'll settle red, warrior heading north west into the forest, then continuing north west for awhile


Based on President BC's post and the consenus its settler in place.

BC will be a long shortly I am sure to play the save. Just because they were slow to give it to us doesnt mean we have to rush.

alss..look at the land mass that we can see...looks like the boot of Italy.

Or a boot anyway.... maybe its a sign that we will be kicking some butt.

It is prophesized! ;)

BCLG, would you mind editing in the "My Details" section with these (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4212709&postcount=2) names? It seems like that was one thing we could all generally agree on. ;)

Yup ok. Im settling where it is with normal set name right now, we can continue to argue about the name but we may as well get the turn played.

I'll play within a couple of hours and post my thread.

Wow. I totally do not remember writing that. I'm sorry for the overtone, I have no idea why I put it in there.

drink a bit last night croix...it was late....:)

3am my time..

A little, like I mentioned elsewhere I normally dont stay up that late, but its quite hot here (25ish C at night if I converted right). That and I think I was a bit irked that my bf was playing WoW instead of talking to me =P

A little, like I mentioned elsewhere I normally dont stay up that late, but its quite hot here (25ish C at night if I converted right). That and I think I was a bit irked that my bf was playing WoW instead of talking to me =P

I've lost three friends to WoW.

ISDG - My anti-WoW

Could the minster of Domestic or Prez make a poll on the city names. To avoid all this argument, we should just resort to democracy.

I wonder how a dictator game would work... ;)

I haven't lost him to it per say (i've heard horror stories tho!), and I also have my drug of choice with EvE.

Besides, I'm a much better kisser than Wow

Same teams will be an anarchy situation.

Ok well the name's i have seen so far are

Thunder Falls-this seems a bit weird if we're called Thunderfall

And

Lake Forteza- strong objections to this from non civ 3 ISDG players.

Sooooooo, how about we get some more proposals- mine is 'Simons Spot'

Frank's Silk Emporium?

Liberté?..

Go with tradition and call the name Thunder Falls. We are by a river so it is a good name.

I think RM pointed out that it wasnt tradition at all though. Also the leader we have is Thunderfall, so it'll be a little weird.

Thunderfall City??

ybbor suggested it backwards....Azetrof. Just for kicks we could say Azetrof ekal OR Lake Azetrof OR Azetrof Lake OR Ekal Azetrof

okay, first you guys are all spelling it wrong, the city's original name was Fortaleza, so backwards it would be Azelatrof. And second we aren't anywhere near a lake, so just Azelatrof is what we should use

yes on the spot byt the way who desgined the map casue i hope he gave cbr a **** start

yes on the spot byt the way who desgined the map casue i hope he gave cbr a **** start


why? we're you in the past ISDG or something?

I still prefer Lake Fortaleza, but if that's not going to fly, I like Liberté and Azelatrof as alternates.

I like it........ Azelatrof.

They will be googling it for days and trying every language transaltor possible

Ok so can we have an agreement of Azelatrof? i dont see the need to poll everything.

Aye. Azelatrof is okay with me. Has a nice ring to it.

We forgot to address this:
The Mapmaker Sirian would like to follow the game on the maps that he
made as it develops on your forums. He would like access to your
secret forum to do this.

It will be your decision to allow him in or to not allow him in - I'm
only asking. So, if you get a request from member Sirian - you know
what it is about.
He hasn't yet requested access, but if/when he does, shall we let him in? He has access to all of the [civ4] MTDG forums as well.

yes, obviously we should, he's gone through the time and effort of making 4 custom maps for us. Also he's proved in the civ4 MTDG he's full capable of just lurking.

I agree with Azelatrof and I also think we should let Sirian in.

Sirian yep....
Azelatrof yep

Both are fine by me

:agree: xcl

To quote my idol (which is, interesting enough, myself):

"Ditto"

:clap:

Group hug!

Sirain yes.
that name, NO!

Sorry CH you seem to be out posted, thats what im going to name it unless you can change everyone's mind by the next time we get the save, i dont particularly want to be spending so much time on such a trivial matter.

Just popped into Evo forum today for some fun (don't know why really) and much to my surprise we have a save :D, so i'll be playing that within a couple of hours.