This picture speaks better then I would be able to on the matter of this topic. If we were to do this, we could keep the west free to ourself. And all if would cost is 4 warriors (legions, when we get them).

Just a note, trades that could be done for a WM alone:
Any civ but Abe- HBR for WM.

Think about it.

A Maginot line? That's a good idea, we will be able to keep the west to ourselves. I am in support of controlling a chokepoint like that.

BTW, post 500!

It does seem like we're on a long continent/island, so it's posisble. I haven't seen ANY barbs except for those from goodyhuts. So, I think we could take those warriors from the west, and bring them east if we want.

This plan allows us to trade WMs without fear of sudden settlers. I, as FA head, support it.

While I like this idea and generally use it if at all possible in my own games, I still would not trade WMs. The AI will build a few galleys and begin sending settlers to any open land they have a map of.

I proposed a similar idea earlier this term to block us off as we expanded west.

That said, this would be a great idea if we weren't planning to settle the East right now. Building a city on the Northeastern hills should give us a great strategic advantage in the region and make this Maginot line unneccessary.

Let's focus on settling the Northeast quickly before Egpyt does. At this time, they have 11 cities; we only have 5.

I also agree with Governor eyrei that giving our map will alert the AI to our little secret in the West. Trading our map would have possibly been an option if we hadn't dragged our feet on claiming these lands.

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
I proposed a similar idea earlier this term to block us off as we expanded west.

That said, this would be a great idea if we weren't planning to settle the East right now. Building a city on the Northeastern hills should give us a great strategic advantage in the region and make this Maginot line unneccessary.

Let's focus on settling the Northeast quickly before Egpyt does. At this time, they have 11 cities; we only have 5.

I also agree with Governor eyrei that giving our map will alert the AI to our little secret in the West. Trading our map would have possibly been an option if we hadn't dragged our feet on claiming these lands.

They have 11 and we have 5. Gee, this sounds familar. ;)

This is only monarch level, we should have had maybe 9-10 by now. That settles it. I'm running for governor at the start of the next game! ;)

So should I take it that we want to do this?

Seems like a divided issue to me, SaaM. You may want to take this one to the polls.

I am actually not against doing this; I just don't think it's necessary. I would rather move troops(preferably Legions) to the Northeasternern base of the hills, so that we can easily pick off Egyptian troops if we ever need to. A city should be built there to culturally claim the land as well.

@DZ- I dont really see any oposition here, just a voice of concern from Governor Eyrei. I will keep this discussion open, but it is really Militarys doing. CG!!!

Well, of course CG is going to love it. He name drops the Maginot Line every chance he gets. :D

Regardless, this should still go to the polls. Let's have discussion run for a bit more. At this time, you can probably mark me down as opposed.

The one thing that it will do is buy us some time - otherwise, the other civs are going to be expanding like crazy. AFAIK, there's no ports on our side of the landmass (that is, all of them are on the east - the other side).

I am going to recomend this for the following:
1) There are no ports on the western side of the landmass
2) The AI is dumb and would turn back after seeing this (I've seen them do this)
3) This will serve as an effective block, for now
4) I have yet to see opposition

Opposition? Oh, I see....from someone that matters, one of our elected officials. Are you sure you want to cast off a citizens opinion so close to election time? ;)

This should be polled.

I like this strategy. However, contrary to the thread's title, we're not blocking ourselves. We can still pass through the line. It's a one-way passage, which is beneficial to us. I say go for it!

I like the idea of blocking out any other civs, but, I think we can get more out this situation by building am city as suggested ealier.

There is one other thing. Besides expansion, there's no real reason for the AI to go that way - no other civs.

Frankly I don't see the point in setting up any kind of Maginot Line at this time. We'd be far better off concentrating either on building more cities or on preparing an invasion force to hammer on the Egyptians. This seems like a waste of both time and units.

I agree a bit with Eklektikos. We have bigger priorities and the defensive value of a MID-territory Maginot-line is limited; we have better use for our Legions.

Furthermore; we are able to spot foreign settlers quickly enough to take action then.

As far as 'our' western-lands; I fear galleys with settlers more than walking settlers.

Wow, this discussion picked up again out of nowhere.....

It seems that the tides are turning on this issue, especially since we have now expanded well past the territory in question. Let us instead focus on gaining a stronghold in the Northeastern hills.