Where to found Olympus

DaveShack

Inventor
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
13,109
Location
Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
The gods have smiled on us and given us wheat, in the very field where we now stand. Since we don't want our children and livestock trampling it, we need to move the town at least a short distance away.

Where shall we begin building our civilization?

 
DaveShack said:
The gods have smiled on us and given us wheat, in the very field where we now stand.
I only beleve in one God :p

We should consider setteling on the tile 1 tile NE of our current possition. There we have a bonus of having three rivers bordering our city to slow down enemy troops. Also we will be preserving the wheat resource since setteling on top of it will lose the bonus.
 
Either NE or Due South, in the hopes that there's Iron in them thar hills.

Although E could be an alternative to NE
 
I say move the worker SE first, to see what's down there. If nothing new or exciting is discovered, we should settle one square directly East.
 
CivGeneral said:
We should consider setteling on the tile 1 tile NE of our current possition. There we have a bonus of having three rivers bordering our city to slow down enemy troops. Also we will be preserving the wheat resource since setteling on top of it will lose the bonus.

I concur with CivGeneral
 
CivGeneral said:
I only beleve in one God :p

Me too, but my in-game character hasn't picked up on that just yet. I believe the tech known as Monotheism is where that comes in... :p
 
Newbie question: Settling 1NE will give more of a river bonus (3 river sides) than where we are 9 (1 river side)? This is something I've never encountered.

All else being equal, I'm intrigued by the square 1N. That's where I'd go to explore/settle.
 
I think we should disband him.
 
Using the labels from this picture:


A settles on plains which increases their food value without having to irrigate. It leaves access to one hill which means the possibility of iron.

C being surrounded by rivers on 3 sides makes it easier to defend (rivers give a defensive bonus when attacking across them). On the other hand it also gives a movement penalty to units moving out of the city in 6 of 8 possible directions.

D moves away from both hills so limits our access to resources.

E leaves both hills within range of the city.

B is protected by rivers from 3 of 8 directions and keeps one hill.

So far we have people speaking up for B, C, D, and E, with building on the forest to the south also being mentioned. I don't like moving S because we lose the ability to harvest the forest.
 
I would go for C, defense wars suggests we may need all the bonuses we may get.
Also, all the rivers suggests an early launch for construction and currency.
 
I would go for C, defense wars suggests we may need all the bonuses we may get.
Also, all the rivers suggests an early launch for construction and currency.

Sounds good, rivers add protection, and citys surrouned by rivers look pretty.
 
Provolution said:
I would go for C, defense wars suggests we may need all the bonuses we may get.
Also, all the rivers suggests an early launch for construction and currency.

I would also choose C. Has the maximum river coverage and keeps us near a hill. Another problem with D that I see is that the NE and SE tiles to it are forests it seems, which would most likely mean so is the East tile. If this were the case, then a NE road for quick expansion would probably be done with a road to the North of either city anyway, since building through the forests would take a lot of time.

Thus, unless the Northern river turns NW immediatley, we'd be able to build a road to maximize a units movement while crossing the river to the East side anyway.
 
I think C is best.
 
i think E would be the best choice. 1) we keep both mountains in city range for possibility of iron. 2) we are still given a defensive bonus against attack from 4 of eight squares. 3) we can pull shields from the forest almost immediatly if necessary.
 
E is the best option for Olympus' site. We get both hills, doubling our chances of getting iron, the hills provide defense bonus and they hinder enemy movement. We would still be near two of the rivers providing some extra protection. Like DS said, we can also harvest the forest for extra production.
 
C three rivers give us extra prtection and make Irrigation easier.

The only downside to C would be our units would be slowed down severly until we get Engineering but it's not that much of a problem...
 
A second downside to C is that it is shield poor. I think we are going to need both hills long-term for the extra production. I would settle location E. A second bonus to this is that it leave the possibility to settle our second city on the river to the north. Settling at C removes nearly all the river locations we know about.
 
DaveShack said:
Using the labels from this picture:


A settles on plains which increases their food value without having to irrigate. It leaves access to one hill which means the possibility of iron.

C being surrounded by rivers on 3 sides makes it easier to defend (rivers give a defensive bonus when attacking across them). On the other hand it also gives a movement penalty to units moving out of the city in 6 of 8 possible directions.

D moves away from both hills so limits our access to resources.

E leaves both hills within range of the city.

B is protected by rivers from 3 of 8 directions and keeps one hill.

So far we have people speaking up for B, C, D, and E, with building on the forest to the south also being mentioned. I don't like moving S because we lose the ability to harvest the forest.
In conversion with my suggestion, site C ;).
 
Top Bottom