Domestic Term 1, Discussion 1: Settlement Strategies

This is to get the ball rolling on Settlement Strategies. Settlement Pattern, Density, and Site Criteria (and anything else I've left out) will be discussed in this thread. A second thread will discuss long term build queues. Long Term work goals and Provincial discussions will not be held until we see the lay of the land.

We will have our first settler and worker as soon as we start the game. It is expected that we will have our second by the 3rd or 4th chat depending on the presence of bonus food.

We need to have a concensus on settlement strategies in place by about the 2nd chat so that the Director of Expansion has something to work with.

Reserved for Index and Summaries of Proposed Settlement stategies.

This thread is now open for business. Please present your ideas or discuss those already posted.

Proposed by Domestic Consul:

Settlement Density: We should settle cities so that cities on rivers/fresh water can support 12 citizens under a non-despot government. Cities without fresh water should be able to support 6 citizens under a despot government. All of this is without directly sharing tiles.

I'd like to see what our initial terrain looks like first. Let's wait until the Creation Day Chat.

CT, this isn't about specific settlement sites, this is about the Strategies we should follow. To some extent this even extends to what we should consider in regards to settling our first city. Its never to soon to start planning strategies.

We should settle cities so that cities on rivers/fresh water can support 12 citizens under a non-despot government.

Click to expand...

How is this limit determined? Most of us are used to mining grassland, but if we irrigate grassland, we need less land to support 12 citizens. Are we trying for maximum city density or not?

As a member of the East Royal Imperial Company, I dissent from Pet Shop Boys in the essence, and say, Go East.

I have several methods of my own. I don't care if the terrain is irrigated, mined, or not at all. All the methods are used in combination fitting on the terrain and potential settlement.

Method 1: No settling on terrain that does have bonus resources early in the game. If you settle on wheat, you won't get the bonus. Settle next to it.

Method 2: Flood Plains, Grassland, Jungle, Plains, Forest (non tundra based) should have a full 20 tile for the city.

Method 3: Hills, Desert, Tundra should have overlapping cities (some will never grow pass 12 so overlapping will allow 2 cities combined to have more than 12).

Method 4: Placing cites next to rivers and lakes are prefered over any other location to allow unhindered growth beyond city size 6.

Method 5: Coastal cities should be build even if it mean to lose potential 20 tile space. England is excellent on the coast.

Method 6: After contact on the same continent or coastal distanced continent, building cities to aggressively challenge their borders.

Lets concentrate on Settlement Density first.

I have proposed a relatively tight settlement pattern of city + 12 workable tiles if fresh water is available, or city + 6 workable tiles if no fresh water is available.

Double Stack has proposed a relively loose settlement pattern of city + 20 tiles in food rish areas, and city + max supportable in food poor areas.

To clarify for YNCS: planned improvements will depend on the city site chosen. If there are many low food tiles (desert, hills, mountains) then I would expect that we would irrigate many of the grasslands. Many of the details on long term work improvements will be determined once we see the lay of the land. I expect to have discussions on the optimal tile config for each city and allow the Director of Infrastructure to use these guidlelines to plan worker actions

Side note: By the way, I would expect that discussions actual city sites will be co-sponsored by the Director of Expansion and the Domestic Consulate.

Thanks for the clarification.

Ok, we've got the map of the starting location. We are in the far south and towards the corner of the map. Tundra and Mountains are both present in our starting location, so food might be tough.

I think we need to consider a tight build pattern.

With this type of start, I've had better results with a loose build pattern. Food, rather than shields, is the problem. The more squares available to each city, the faster the city can grow.

I would favour the loose pattern:

*We end up with more land in the land grab phase
*12 tiles per city is not best, as you want to work the best tiles and then as the years progress we get more out of the worse tiles and becomes less of a matter. By limiting to 12 we have NO choice but to work them all, bad policy.
*Will require too many cities to get enough land- remember land = production/opportunities for resources/and stops the enemies getting that land.
*too many cities = too much corruption.

Current Status:
1. Settlement Density:
A few proposals have been put foward for Settlement Density. I will begin polling these in the next 24 hours unless there is further discussion on this topic.

2. Settlement Pattern:
Limited discussion has taken place. Please make proposals on settlement pattern.

3. City Site Criteria:
Limited discussion has taken place. Please make proposals.



New Proposals from the Domestic Consul:
Settlement Pattern:
Very Flexible pattern. Only real consideration is that we be careful to allow for future locations when settling. IE: If there are decent sites on a short river then don't settle in the middle of the river so that the other sites would be silly.

Site Criteria:
1. Order of settlement: Priority should be placed on securing bonus resources (strategic, luxury, food, then other).
2. Fresh Water Criteria:
1st Priority is on Hill sites that will allow us to pass irrigation to dry areas (only applies if we have hills/mountains blocking an irrigation path.)
2nd Priority is to choose sites location on rivers.
3rd Priority is to choose sites with access to Lakes.
3.Sea Faring Bonus:
If we have access to 2 similiar sites (one coastal and 1 inland), Priority should be place on the coastal site to take advantage of our SeaFaring trait commerce bonus.


Please discuss, as these are the criteria that the Director of Expansion will use in proposing future settlement location.

MOTH said:

3.Sea Faring Bonus:
If we have access to 2 similiar sites (one coastal and 1 inland), Priority should be place on the coastal site to take advantage of our SeaFaring trait commerce bonus.

Click to expand...

The Sea Faring Bonus is something we have to keep firmly in mind, particularly if we're on a pangaea or large continent.

I have already made comments about city density.

With that caveat, I agree with the Consul's recommendations.

Always place cities on the coast if we can. A tight build on the coast and a looser build inland with good terrain is a good idea. Cities with tundra/coast should build harbors and then libraries/markets.

Once we have this first turnchat, we can start a dotmap.

I'm inclined to agree with Ginger. Our seafaring traits means we don't want to waste any coastal sites, however we also want to be able to grab as much land as possible in the initial expansion phase. If need be, we can expand quickly and then build cities to fill in the gaps we make in our territory.

I think we need a 20 turn turnchat to get a decent planning round with tiles to compare.
It is hopeless to run discussions like this after 10 turns only.

id say not to place citys closer than three tiles away from eachother, we could also go with ring city placement to reduce corruption but the downside of that is sometimes your have to mess up your pattern because it forces you to put citys in bad spots, or there are mountains or swamps where your supposed to put the citys.

Ring City Placement doesn't work in Conquests.