A late GA means a lot of extra commerce when most productive. If we have mostly city's with banks and such
I to will volentier for the first 20 (same question, each "turn" is 20 turns?)
Keeping the AI isolated, probably means Controle chocke points. This i learned in my the GOTM Arabia.
CRpMapstat, I (started) using CivAssist a while ago and like it very much. Any objections?
Goody hut. IIRC from reading on the war accademy. You cannot get barbs while you dont have any military units yourself.
I looked up the article on GHs
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_goodyhuts.shtml
Seeing as we are expansionist, we need not worry about barbs at all (accoording to that article).
I would be intrested in knowing what that coastline is, is it a lake or sea?
If it is a lake, it might be a nice move to settle on the lake. If a sea its good to get city#2 or 3 on the see to get a curragh out.
I downloaded the save to look at it in default Map. IMO:
S-SE and S-SW are swamps
SE-SE-SE (beyond the mountain) and E-E are Jungles
N-NW Plain-Forest.
Being near the equatar S and SE are likely to be jungles. Meaning (I read somewhere) nice grass underneath but needs lots of chopping => meaning again "lots and lots" of worker turns. (a couple of extra workers will be necesarry?!)
If there is indeed an extended jungle this also means our scout cannot make use of his 2 steps. Suggest exploring NW-N-NE and if possible SW.
Personally I would, probably, be against settling "on" the spot. The 2 forests are nice and the river and BG are too. This however also means we will have 2 march in the city range and probably 2 water tiles (W-NW adn W-SW) with which we know not what to do (like building a boat).
- Moving onto either BG is not an option (to me).
- Moving SE onto the forest is a lost chop (minus 10 shields) and would loose us the second forest as well and put Jungle and marsch into the city radius.
Moving W, SW, NE or N remain options.
- Moving NE leaves us with the pro's (Forests & BG & River) but not the cons (No water and no marsch)
- Moving N we loose a BG and gain a water (comparing to NE). On the other hand we leave behind the (in the early going useless) mountian and will not have (what looks like) the second hill (E-NE-NE) in the city radius
Probably more grass due N-NW. Maybe that would be BG as well? (whisfull thinking)
- Moving W or SW will set us water side which might be nice for using a Curragh (if Sea) for exploring. Moving W will leave us the 2 forest, while moving SW will leave us only 1. Also SW will give us (atleast) 2 march instead of 1 if we move SW.
All in all I would move my worker NW over the river to the BG. This is bad because the road will not "work" when moving over the river, but will give us a nice view of the water. If its sea, I may consider moving W (in favour of moving SW) for the scouting possibility of the Curragh.
Moving W will mean our Capital is "low" on shields 2 BG & a plains. Mining the BG & Irrigating the plains (after chop) leaves us 6 Shields. Which is not to bad I guess.
I would move the Scout NW-N, suspecting Jungle to the S, SE and E to explore option N or NE. Depending on what he finds deside weather or not that is interesting. BG or a cow maybe even wheat would be good reasons to go either N or NE.
- NE would leave us with (atleast) the mountain, 2 hills and a jungle, the 2 current BG, the 2 forest and the discovered tiles by the scout.
- N will leave behind a BG and put the mountain, the 2nd hill and the jungle outside of city radius. It will also include 3 undiscovered tiles. 2 of which may be nice due to the suggested precence of the river commerce.
1 or 2 of the 3 are likely to be plains due to the plain forest.
Also the "rogue" water tile is still in the city radius.
Depending on what the Scout and Worker tell us. But at the moment that is my view on things. I will probably favour N or W, but NE is an option as well.
Build sequence would be Scout, Warior (MP)
This will take 10 turns, Industrious means that Mine takes only 4 turns and road 2. Road the BG then mine. Will mean mine ready on build before production of turn 1 of the 2nd scout (tested it in a seperate test scenario).
While Mine-road will be mine will be finished on the 4th turn of the 1st scout. Gaining us nothing and loosing a few $ vs the other scenario. Using the mine will reduce the build time to 9 turns.
The hopefully moving the worker to a Bonus (cow or so) or 2nd BG for the same sequence. If we have atleast another BG somewhere in the city radius the second worker will be done in 3 turns being turn 12. Then I am not sure.
Should we go for a granary upping the Lux along the way?
We now have 2 workers 2 scouts 1 warior, already 1 to many costing use 1 gpt. An additional warrior for MP would cost 10 shields and 1gpt while upping the lux would do the same (cost 1 gpt) but save the 10 shields. So up the lux it is and build a granary, Chop chop = 20 shields leaving 40. 1 mined BG @ 3spt. For another 8 turns leaves 40-(8*3) = 16 shields.
--- Pass turn
At hopefully leaving 3 turns (3*5 + the growth bonus) to finish. Now at size 2.
Particularly if there is no cow or wheat I think we need the granary for the growth.
Throwing another warrior or scout before the granary may be an option. As the granary will finish mid size 2. It need only be there end size 2. Before or after does not really matter I suppose.
1st goal get some lux!
Geez. This is the first time I have given any Civ game such thought.
Should I get something like MSN or so, just so we can "chat away" our game?
Greetz
The Mailman
)
> settler or another warrior
