I want a decision on what to do with some wandering nomads!

Do you want the settler to settle on the nice spot?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 42.9%

  • No

    Votes: 8 57.1%
  • Total voters
    14
Zwelgje

Zwelgje

Deity
Joined
Nov 20, 2001
Messages
3,953
Ok people. I didn't even play one turn, sorry! :D
The reason: I popped the hut and got wandering nomads who wanted to join us (quite understandable of course ;) ) but I didn't want to make a decision on my own on what to do with them.
So I made a screenshot and there I show what I would like to do with them: I want them to settle that nice spot near Dellham (I think Ren pointed it out).
If you agree on settling at that spot just vote yes, if you don't agree vote no but please say what you want to do with the settlers if not settling that nice spot.
Discuss!

settler2600BC.jpg
 
That site works for me. Go for it!!!
[Edit]
That site would be ideal for cranking out some military
units for that region, which so far seems to be the most
likely place to have a run-in with an AI civ.
 
Keep it to build roads! A Settler from None, my namesake. We have lots of city power building supported settlers -- two right now, more on the way.

It can walk North 4 turns before we need any other decision. Unless people want to settle somewhere near where it is now.
 
Originally posted by GaryNemo
Keep it to build roads! A Settler from None, my namesake.
Click to expand...

If the settler were really NONE, I would agree with you, Gary.
But I'm pretty sure it's supported by RC, and therefore should
settle as proposed by the Pres.
 
Question, they are Settlers from None, right? If they're supported by Regia Civitas (or anywhere else) then go ahead and build a city. If they're supported by RC, lets build ASAP. Maybe 2 squares SE on the pure green, somewhere on that coast, I'll need to think about that.
 
:blush:
Forgot to check whether they are supported or not...
Please post what you would like to do with the settler in both cases (supported by RC or NONE)
 
If the settler is a NONE, then I support Gary's idea to use
it to build roads/improvements.

If the settler is supported by RC, then I think it should settle
the spot picked out by civ1-addict, to take advantage of
the specials.
 
Yep it makes sense to keep it for road building as if we keep on building settlers then we can still expand quickly.
 
As it's a NONE settler I definately thinlk we should use it for improvements and take advantage of not having to support it. Of course if it had been supported then building a town would have been better.

BUILD ROADS!!! :)
 
That also means it's not draining Regia Civitas.

We'll need to carefully consider what few roads to build on the long counterclockwise walk back to our homeland. Mining the Wine is a temptation, but I think not right now.

Reneaux has public support for the first Dellham Settler, at the River Bend site with Oasis and Wine. Sounds like a good plan, a good site, and a good name. Any objections?

Let's walk the Settler due North 4 turns, it can explore the black for the chariot, and costs no time. It can then Turn due West and come back home, perhaps building a road our new Elysium... I need to think about that.

Civ1 - you've made my day and you're good to go...
 
It seems to me it would be best to let the settler go to Elysium right away and build some roads there, it's the SSC and needs trade for a better science. Although the settler passes Dellham quite closely I don't think Dellham needs roads in the near future with all the rivertiles it has.
It will take 14 or 15 turns for the settler to reach Elysium which is a long time so maybe no roading on the way to Elysium as it will make the trip only longer?
 
An early road network built by NONE is a real treat and could save our scalps from barbarian attack.

On the other hand, this 1 NONE settler could be transformed into a city which then goes on to build 2 supported settlers, which we could keep for road building or further city building... Even if those 2 settlers just build roads forever, it would be better, over time, than having this 1 NONE settler. I think this settler is most productive as a city on the Nice Spot.
 
Given that its going to take 10 turns to get the settler to the spot indicated, why don't we just build a city two squares to the south-east? It will be close to RC (although not roaded) so corruption should not be too high. A city in this area will reduce barbarians appearing in this area, and in the 8 turns that we save, we can probably get a phalanx half-built. We're going to build cities down there eventually, and at some point we save the time for the settler to wander all the way down there again.:)
 
Sean and Ainwood have good points. We will be farther ahead in science if this settler builds nearby.

I suggest to move 1 square east to build a road on the grassland shield, then 1 square southeast to found a city on the grassland. Then we'll have 2 surplus grain and an extra trade arrow. :)

After building a phalanx, more settlers can be produced ...

[Edit] The reason for picking this location is to include more grassland tiles in the city radius and claim more of the land.

On the other hand, Ainwood's suggested location has more sea squares. With a harbor it could be a trade powerhouse. :goodjob:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

stealth_nsk
Finished one age. Some thoughts
Replies
1
Views
497
evonannoredars
evonannoredars
disjointaccount
  • Poll Poll
Do you typically play with Crises on or off?
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
4K
reddishrecue
reddishrecue
Brutus2
The Problem with Diplomacy - (Constructive Feedback)
Replies
15
Views
1K
Yzman
Yzman
Naokaukodem
Memo : finding new fun ways to build one's empire
Replies
0
Views
306
Naokaukodem
Naokaukodem
O
How much missionary work do I really need to do?
Replies
6
Views
492
AriochIV
AriochIV
Back
Top Bottom