Expansion

Chieftess

Moderator
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
24,160
Location
Baltimore
This grid shows possible expansion routes. There's several paths that we can take along the mountains to the south, or the ones to the north. I've circled our possible, optimal scouting location. There's also worker actions, which will aid our expansion (quicker units). I will also request that our Provincial governor look at this diagram. :)



 
Sounds like a good plan. If we build a road to that Game resource, It can provide us with food and comerce :D.
 
i think the northwest is our most viable option. the quickest, most profitable improving can be done there, and the terrain to expand to is likely to be simlarly fertile.

neutral leader is a good, responsible provincial governor

Our words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!!
 
Here's our growth potential. A bit cluttered, but the numbers are food/shields/commerce. A good estimate is to 'count the 2s'. I came up with a size 10 city with no irragation improvements. More than likely, this will be our max output throughout antiquity. There's also a little 'smudge' (if you look closely by that circle and question mark). It could be cattle, furs or spices. Furs most likely, as we're up north.

 
Chieftess, next time you make a map, push the delete key on your keyboard. The game interface will disappear so you can get a clean shot.

On the exploration subject, I recommend sending the first warrior north by the sea. That'll be our best bet for grasslands.
 
I think it would be wise to found the capital one tile north. It looks like a coastline there. A coastline capital with a fresh water source is worth the loss of a turn of production.
 
I like that idea. We will still have adequate food resources, and good access to mountains for shields. Capitals usually have the best production, and we can easily pump out both land and naval units.
 
But, how do we even know if we're one an island, or another huge pangaea?
 
That's what happens when you pick random...

Either way, there's no harm in a good navy. The lack of a river will make a slight dent, but if we build it on the coast, we can get the extra commerce from it.
 
I kinda like your idea Shaitan. The "on the coast or one tile away" is a good arguement. We had a rececnt example of that. Moving the settler one tile North would turn that grassland from a 2/0 tile to a 2/1 tile, so that would be a good thing. But, I'm wondering, is that just another large lake to the North of the little one? And will the loss of the production shields be compensated or covered by the commerce created and the available Navy production?

By moving 1 tile North we would lose 4 hills, a mountain, and 3 forests (unless there are more of these to the NE). As the capital city *Bavaria* will be our production powerhouse, I think we should keep these in our city radius. Of course, if CT is right and the little black mark is furs, I'm going to kick myself.

Just my 2g.
 
I second the move north for the settler.
What about moving the worker north first and if the furs resource is true there, then settle at that spot?

Just my 2/100g (equals 2c)
 
*looks at map*
I know city placement is not really my responsibility, but I think the city should be placed one tile to the north.
The mountains to the SE and S would provide good vantage points, but I think the best expansion would be to the NW where the lands seem fertile and verdent.
 
Originally posted by Almightyjosh
*looks at map*
I know city placement is not really my responsibility, but I think the city should be placed one tile to the north.
The mountains to the SE and S would provide good vantage points, but I think the best expansion would be to the NW where the lands seem fertile and verdent.

You know ALJ, you are still a mere citizen which does entitle you to speak out and give input on all issues faced by our country. Being governor/senator neither diminishes nor increases any of your powers as a citizen. You would do well to keep that in mind. ;)

Now, back to the topic. I agree that if we are to found our first city in the starting locale then we should build on the coast - if indeed it is a sea coast and not a lake coast. I'm not sure if lakes can be larger than one tile or not. I doubt that we'd see an inland sea this far north though. Can we not right click on the water terrain to see if it is lake or sea?

I am still a proponent of roaming south for a while before settling.
 
Here's what I got out of that mysterious resource, and the possible suspects. Upon closer (literally :D) inspection, it looks to be sort of a 'leg'. Elephants, Furs, and Cattle have such a 'leg'. But, Elephants are thick. Also, furs are in tundra and forest (it doesn't exactly look like tundra, and I'm not sure if it's forest)...

 
Originally posted by donsig

I am still a proponent of roaming south for a while before settling.

Lead us, O great one, across the deserts, across the river, through the unknown, to the promised land! :lol:

Chieftess, I just see pixels. Maybe it's just the coffee I'm drinking? I'm sure it will all be ours in time...
 
My 2nd guess would say, it looks like cattle or fur. You can sort of match the legs of the animals.
 
Originally posted by chiefpaco


Lead us, O great one, across the deserts, across the river, through the unknown, to the promised land! :lol:

Chieftess, I just see pixels. Maybe it's just the coffee I'm drinking? I'm sure it will all be ours in time...

It's the coffee. :lol: I had it blown up so you could try an match-by-pixel.
 
Top Bottom