Grey Fox
May 08, 2002, 04:58 PM
Here is my suggestion for FP-location.
It would need us to build a city there but that location is a very good one.
It would need us to build a city there but that location is a very good one.
|
View Full Version : Suggestion: Forbidden Palace location Grey Fox May 08, 2002, 04:58 PM Here is my suggestion for FP-location. It would need us to build a city there but that location is a very good one. chiefpaco May 08, 2002, 05:08 PM I like the spot for centrality. However, I thought of an alternative, just to throw it out there. PDX produces around 10 productive shields (out of 15) per turn. It's impossible for me to tell right now because the city is in disorder. But I'm pretty sure this is the case. We could build the Forbidden palace there in 20-25 turns. It is about a 12 hundred miles from Fox's Nest (12 tiles anyway, maybe my math is off about the miles) meaning our Eastern provinces will become 12 tiles less corrupt by distance. I don't think this is "bad" & could spare our leader for another wonder. Our citizens of PDX might also appreciate the new wonder! I thought about Philadelphia too, but the production there is not that great, maybe 2 or 3 productive shields. It might take 60 or so turns to build a FP there, unless we could do a WLT Pres day there. The new spot would probably take a long time too, from scratch. I'd recommend using the leader for rushing in GFox's spot or Philly. Cyc May 08, 2002, 06:17 PM I'm going to have to vote for PDX. I tried to get the Hanging Gardens into PDX, but that didn't fly. Now I'll push for the FP, as PDX will be a good builder and fine city. It's only 4 tiles away from your spot Grey Fox, and already has the shields and growth to be an FP city. Plexus May 08, 2002, 06:43 PM PDX could work but, maybe something a little further from the capital would be better like Washington GC or San Francisco. punkbass2000 May 08, 2002, 07:00 PM I would be inclined to go with the PDX plan, and save the leader. Sistine hasn't been built, has it? Eklektikos May 08, 2002, 07:15 PM PDX looks to be a pretty good position to me. If later on we feel that it could've done with being further from the capital then we can just move the capital :D Cyc May 08, 2002, 07:17 PM @Plexus - your concern about PDX being to close to the Capital is a valid one, but keep in mind that there are a lot of people who believe in Great Palace relocation. As the Capital gets relocated, it will be, I'm sure, an appropriate distance from the FP. In the mean time the PDX location would mean a huge boost in the old empire cities. I just feel we need all of PDX's shields. Edit: Sorry, Eklektikos, I guess we were posting at the same time. Justus II May 08, 2002, 09:53 PM My vote would be for Philadelphia. I think by rushing a courthouse and adding some population and mines, we could make it productive enough to finish it in 30 or less turns. I think that saving the leader is more important for a wonder that another civ is going for (like Sistine!). Also, it is further east and could influence some of our new Egyptian cities, if we don't move the palace. BTW, I would be against moving the palace, our beloved Fox Nest is home to two of our wonders, and the cultural capital of our nation, and should remain so! crabapple May 09, 2002, 12:58 AM first it would not take many turns to build forbidden palace so we could save our leader to something else. Second PDX is very central, and if we move the capital Fox nest could still be a production center with courthouse. third if we build in PDX it will become a production powerhouse. Daaraa May 09, 2002, 04:15 AM How about putting the FP in New York? It has Iron to help with production. It also has a river to grow if we wanted to get some workers to join New York to maximize its size and thereby increase its production. It is a few squares east of the proposed site and would further maximize the anti-corruption effect. I would say lets save the GL for the next big wonder, especially if it ends up being Leo's workshop. IMHO Leo's workshop is a much better use for a GL than a FP. eyrei May 09, 2002, 06:25 AM Originally posted by Justus II My vote would be for Philadelphia. I think by rushing a courthouse and adding some population and mines, we could make it productive enough to finish it in 30 or less turns. I think that saving the leader is more important for a wonder that another civ is going for (like Sistine!). Also, it is further east and could influence some of our new Egyptian cities, if we don't move the palace. BTW, I would be against moving the palace, our beloved Fox Nest is home to two of our wonders, and the cultural capital of our nation, and should remain so! My thoughts exactly. By starting a WLTK day in addition to that courthouse, it should be reasonably productive. A temple would probably also be required for this. It is also closer to the Egyptian cities, which would make them more productive. A new city does need to be built in the spot Grey Fox mentioned, however, this settler should not come from Eyr.... donsig May 09, 2002, 06:43 AM If PDX is already producing 10 good shields out of 15 then building the FP there or close by will net 5 shields/turn in that city. Also, if we build the city in PDX by conventional methods it will be at least 20 turns till it is ready. Building it in the new city suggested by Grey Fox will again only give the minimal boost in shields. Building it by conventional means in the new city would take even longer than building it in PDX since the new city has to grow. We could use the leader to build the FP in the new city but I think that if we are to use the leader to build the FP it should be built in a city that currently has maximum waste. I would build it in Elephantine using the leader. Not only would it give maximum boost in shields now and in the future we'd have a great chance of enticing the cities surrounding Elephantine into our great republic. chiefpaco May 09, 2002, 10:17 AM I know I was just throwing up an idea up there, but I agree with the President. Does no one else? The spot he proposed is perfect for getting the maximum productive cities. Should we place a new town there & rush a Forbidden palace, we will pick up the most productivity from our lands. I don't think any other location would be more optimal. Where are our perfectionists? Cyc May 09, 2002, 10:36 AM Nope. Sorry Chief. I can't see the President's plan on this one. Not only is PDX primed for building the FP naturally, building it in any of the other cities mentioned here would cost us time and resources just to come close to PDX's current stability. Donsig has an excellent idea about Elephantine, but I still think the Capital relocation should go to that area (Elephantine, Thebes, or Athens). I just have a feeling that people will say "Oh yeah! We NEED to move the Capital" and it will be done. Anyway back to PDX - please, it is the obvious choice. Chieftess May 09, 2002, 10:57 AM I also agree with the FP/palace plan in the Egyptian lands. It is more cetral to our rivals, risking capture though. It could be a tradeoff... Grey Fox May 09, 2002, 11:01 AM Originally posted by Cyc ...but I still think the Capital relocation should go to that area (Elephantine, Thebes, or Athens). I just have a feeling that people will say "Oh yeah! We NEED to move the Capital" and it will be done. Anyway back to PDX - please, it is the obvious choice. To move the capital we would need another leader, will we ever get any more? And move the capital to an egyptian city? I wouldn't want to live there... Eklektikos May 09, 2002, 11:07 AM Originally posted by Chieftess I also agree with the FP/palace plan in the Egyptian lands. It is more cetral to our rivals, risking capture though. It could be a tradeoff... We only get one FP, and if we lose it it's gone forever, correct? so if we build it in PDX (a city that looks fairly safe from attack from where I'm standing) we can move the palace out to another site without worrying so much about it being captured, since you can't lose those things even if you want want to. :cool: Eklektikos May 09, 2002, 11:14 AM Originally posted by Grey Fox To move the capital we would need another leader, will we ever get any more? Question: Is it not possible to pay to rush the palace, or is it treated like a wonder? I have to ask as I've never had to explore this myself. And move the capital to an egyptian city? I wouldn't want to live there... Once that road through the mountains has been built you can just commute there :D Grey Fox May 09, 2002, 11:18 AM Originally posted by Eklektikos Question: Is it not possible to pay to rush the palace, or is it treated like a wonder? I have to ask as I've never had to explore this myself. No it's like a wonder. Once that road through the mountains has been built you can just commute there :D I might not be President anyway, when and if we move the palace. It doesn't seem to be in the near future. And btw, it would be better to have the Palace in the Ehyptian Territory then the FP, as the Palace helps with Cultural Flips. allhailIndia May 10, 2002, 01:14 AM WE have to keep in mind future expansion and I think PDX would be right if we relocate our capital further away:goodjob: Justus II May 10, 2002, 06:45 AM Why is everyone assuming we are going to move the Palace? Fox Nest is our capital, and should stay that way. It has our only two wonders, is our most culturally advanced city, and still affects our most productive cities. I don't think we should base the FP decision on moving the palace when we have not made that decision yet. Cyc May 10, 2002, 08:34 AM Exactly Justus II. If you can guarantee the Phoenatican citizenry that the Capital will never be moved, then the discussion of the FP location can be seen in a different light. What say you? eyrei May 10, 2002, 08:45 AM If we stop expanding, and place our FP correctly, we should have no need to move the palace. I sincerely hope we do stop expanding as the demo game will become more organized as our number of cities and provinces becomes static. Even if we do continue to expand, I will oppose moving the palace except in extreme circumstances. With the additional effectiveness of courthouses and police stations with patch 1.21, corruption and waste should remain at a manageable level. donsig May 10, 2002, 09:06 AM I agree with our current and former cultural ministers on not moving the capitol. I would ask the president this: If we do not move the capitol would you still think it best to build the FP in a new city near PDX? If not, then where would you build it? I would also ask the domestic leader where he would place the FP. (Note: I also agree with eyrei that the time i snear for us to consolidate our gains and stop expanding.) eyrei May 10, 2002, 09:11 AM I would place the FP in New York. Or possibly Philadelphia if we continue to expand to the south any more. If we build the FP in New York, I would also want to change the name..... Cyc May 10, 2002, 09:25 AM I believe the only good reason for considering New York is that it might be a future build site for "The Iron Works Wonder". BTW, what would you change the name to? Philly just falls right back into the same discussion. So you can guarantee us the capital will never be moved Eyrei? That's where this discussion is leading. eyrei May 10, 2002, 09:33 AM Were it up to me, the palace would only be moved if we decided to try to win by domination. I do not see this happening. However, it is not entirely up to me. I would however, vote against it in a cabinet poll. crabapple May 11, 2002, 10:20 AM If we want to build the forbidden Palace fast we should build it in PDX becouse it would take only 9 turns to build it there currently. And if we build Forbidden Palace in any other city it would take a long time or we would need a leader. russia1292000 May 11, 2002, 10:36 AM We should place the FP as far away from the palace as we can. This way it can effect more cities Falcon02 May 11, 2002, 03:23 PM Russia, load the game, look at the map and make a suggestion. I disagree with your stradegy, but when it comes to a vote you should make sure your option is on the selections. |
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.