This is so that you all stop messing up my lovely provincial thread.
This is a discussion on what the build queues should be for the cities in my province. I will attempt to be as accomodating as possible.

Current:
Bavaria - Warrior, Warrior, Settler, Settler, Barracks, Archer

Initial discussions:
Bohemia Thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=464420#post464420) Expansion (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31179)
Agression (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31100)
Poll on proposed build ques (informational) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31328)

great. just remember-
the gl is comming! the gl is comming!! the gl is comming!!!

So, can we assume then that the queues will be posted before the next turn chat?:rolleyes:

Ok. Could the mods close the other threads and cross-reference the discussion to here? I would not like to see this critical discussion going "split and forget".

And also:
AJ, could you put the other proposals up the 1st post for discussion?

Just to prevent them from being posted n-times.

The other threads deal with more than the build queue. If the owners of those threads wish them to be closed they should request that in Needed Things.

Get rid of that second settler. It is a delay that we cannot afford if we wish to get an early attack.

Could the mods not close the aggression proposal thread, as although the subject overlaps with this it is a seperate proposal containing issues distinct from the build queues. I have also not yet finished polling and discussion on it.

If we manage to get a quick attack on the aztecs, we can burn them to ground fast... now will a baracs be needed? i think no, as our archers will train on their jaguars ;-)
a spearman will propably be best for replacing the settler-barracs combo. we maybe want to build a barracs in our second city though between the settlers and then switch the capitol to settlers and city#2 to archers...

Putting a second settler into the queue before building our archer strike force just gives the Aztecs longer to build themselves up to a point where a 6 archer strike force is no longer powerful enough. The effectiveness of this kind of attack is very much dependant on very early execution - even more so against a formidable foe like the Aztecs. Remember that with Emperor level AI production, their Jag Warriors cost less than half as much as our archers, and so a delay in our attack is very much in their interests, rather than ours. If we make our second city a settler factory then we can still expand with considerable speed, and remember that by attacking early we should be able to capture (as opposed to auto-razing) at least one of their cities, thus still adding to our production base.

@Dis: We can't count on archers getting many upgrades from "training" on Jags in the field, since the Jags will be able to retreat. The fact that our early target would be the Aztecs makes the barracks a must, in my view.

didnt think of that one... but how will we defeat the jaguars then? we will have to circle them with forces to prevent their cowardish behaviour, and with such a strategy we will need more spearmen to protect the archers.

We build veterans and drive straight for their capital. We do this as early as possible to minimise the number of Jags we will have to fight through to get there. If we do that then one initial spearman should be enough to protect the archers from Jag attacks. That's what believe to be the best way to deal with the Green Menace.

How will our capitol be defended by then?

"The green Menace" is a good theme for that war i think ;-)

By the time our strike force is approaching their borders we should have moved one of our exploring warriors back there to increase the defences and the military police presence. Once the second spearman has been built I hope that the governor would agree to build a 3rd to use as garrison.

So how would your build queue look like?

Back to my opposition of that extra settler, now ;)

Building it would mean we have to wait for the city to build itself back up to pop:3 from pop:1 again. That's quite a lot of turns, and shields, that would be wasted.

@Dis: my build queue would be "warrior, warrior, settler, barracks, archer, spearman, 4x archer". We could decide whether to build one more archer or just go straight to the final spearman closer to the time.

Yes, back to back settlers is a bad idea!

I like Eklektikos' queue. My personal preference is to get rid of the remaining settler as well but I don't think that's too popular.

@eklek: i think i can second your proposal. though i still think the barracs must be discussed maybe. i think it will throw us behind a bit.
my proposal would be:
2xwarrior, settler, archer, spear, 5xarcher

other opinions? please post with a copy of the proposed build-queue for easy reference!

building the barracks gives us more of an edge than an extra archer, I believe. Look at it this way: 5 vet archers = 20 hp in total, 6 reg archers = 18 hp in total. More hp per unit means less chance of each unit losing a battle and therefore less chance of the enemy getting an upgrade. If we add a 6th vet archer then there's no contest, and remember that as a militaristic civ our barracks are cheap :D

Normally I don't build a barracks before the first rush but for this situation I agree with Eklektikos. The cheep barracks isn't the time drain it normally would be.

i have to get used to the militaristic civ i believe :-)
ok, so we few comply on the eklek-proposal... now what about other citizens?

as long as the settler we spawn sets up to build more settlers (as often as possible w/out loss of shields) i am for the Eklektikos
build queue. my only concern is that we find another civ nearby when we throw our bulk attack to the azteks

As I was going to say... the second city should be placed on a spot with high shield and food nearby. A granary is a must in that city! Why? So we can get settlers twice as fast. Maybe we can expand to 4-5 cities while building up our military?

I agree with Chieftess. I think we should look at what we can trade the Aztecs in exchange for Pottery.

Where's Ehecatl when you need him? ;)

true. dont give them bronze working. let us destroy them while they hav jaguar warriors.
note- i am not a jaguar warrior.

Get the latest copy of Die Fanatischen Zeiten (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31135) for an in depth examination of the proposed build queues vis-a-vis the early agression proposal.

I guess we should be having this duscussion in the chat room...

OK, it seems that there are no voices of dissent (apart from my own, >sigh<) so I guess I'll change the thread.

New proposal
Warrior, Warrior, Settler, Barracks, Archer, Spearman, Archers x 4

sounds good...

Anyone besides me think we should build the barracks now? It would take four turns. Then we could make some archers right away. The archers could explore and garrison Bavaria just as good as warriors could. We'd also be that much closer to having our early aggression strike force in place. Time is of the essence!

Instead of switching to the barracks now we could go switch to a spearman which would also be done in 4 turns.

@donsig - Would that mess up our MP cycle? Meaning, would it prevent us from having full MP coverage for the population?

Not sure. I thought we were going to sacrifice the science slider in order to up the luxuries to keep the tiles worked.

We need some coordination amongst these discussions.

as the lord mayor of bavaria, the latest proposal has my full support.

(which is Warrior, Warrior, Settler, Barracks, Archer, Spearman, Archers x 4)

hmmm we should hope we find a spot on a river for that settler, it would also help growth to allow us to churn out the settlers while the capital does the military stuff......... oh and the build queue is good, we wont have any shield waste (2 settlers in a row = BAD, BAD) ok old we have moved on..........im just looking forward to the war........it better hurry up

URGENT!!!
Possible error in build queue!!!

As lord-mayor, i today had a review of my city...

I found it to have a shield production of 3 with a food surplus of 2.
I now make an example with the proposed queue:
warrior-warrior-settler:

turn 0:
warrior will be finished in 1, city will grow in 3
(production 3 shield, 2 food, pop=1)
turn 1:
warrior is finished, next is warrior
warrior will need 10 shields, city will grow in 2
turn 2:
warrior will need 7 more shields, city will grow in 1
turn 3:
city grows to pop2. highest production tile with enough food for growth brings 2 food and 1 shield=> production 4, food surplus 2
warrior will need 3 more shields, city will grow in 10
turn 4:
warrior is finished. next will be settler
settler will need 30 shield, city will grow in 9
!!!
the settler will be finished after 8 turns, at which time the city does not have enough citizens to produce it! this will result in a loss of 4 shields.

i propose changing the second warrior to archer or spearman.

Dis: if we change now we can have either a spearman, archer or barracks done in 4 turns. I think we should switch to barracks right now but a spearman now would do just as well. Better work fast though in order to get the build queue properly adjusted!

OK, Bavaria is going to grow in 3, the settler will be produced in 3. This will put the pop of B down to 1. Do we want to build the sett now or wait and build a barracks or spearman first?

The settler first, definately. :) I was able to swap worked tiles for 1 turn to get both settler and city size done at the same time. (and gained 1 gold in the process :D).

Settler. The earlier we get a 2nd city, the better off we are.

That was my thinking, thanks for the tinkering CT, it was looking problematic for a minute there! The faster we can get a second city up and running the better our chances are of getting that archer force together quick smart and expanding.

What? You guys wouldn't leave me alone for the first two turn chats, now no-one cares?

For Bavaria build queues, I would suggest 2 different paths. I'm not sure which is best, or if either is the best.

1. Archer, Worker, Sword, Sword, Sword (putting a worker in when the pop gets too high).

2. Archer, Archer, Worker, Sword, Sword (putting a worker in when the pop gets too high).

For Valhalla build queues, I would suggest:
Settler (c), spearman, Worker, Settler

Good queues!
I would go for the first path because I think it's slightly better :)

Good queues Cyc. Care to run for governor?

BTW, there is currently a temple queued up after the archers.

Thank you, and no thank you for the Governorship. Most of my time will be spent tracking prey and searching for fresh water. No time to hold office.