Domestic T3 D2- Settling Settler(s)

[greekguy]

We currently have a settler in Black Hole. We need to settle him somewhere, and there are lots of options. This thread will be used to discuss where to settle next. I also hope to get a basic plan out there for the future, so i don't have to discuss and poll every time we get a settler.

 

[MOTH]

I still like the Iron & Wheat site between Rotterdam and The Hague (or whatever we renamed them). I would settler a river spot so we can grow to size 12. The Wheat will let us work a lot of the high shield tiles.

 

[Furiey]

We will soon have more than one Settler to consider. Governor mad-bax's instructions for Wednesday's turnchat will give a Settler in Camelot in 2 turns, plus several from other captured cities. It may be that some of the soon to be captured cities will be razed, if so, then we will will need to replace them as soon as possible.

 

[greekguy]

Since there isn't much discussion about this i'll have to go with my gut and the iron/wheat spot. If anyone else wants to add their thoughts go ahead, but i'll have to post my instructions soon.

 

[zyxy]

There may be several spots opening up where Amsterdam and Arnhem currently are.
That might be a good area for additional settlers.

EDIT: there's still a few days before instructions have to be posted...

 

[Furiey]

There may be several spots opening up where Amsterdam and Arnhem currently are.
That might be a good area for additional settlers.

EDIT: there's still a few days before instructions have to be posted...

Exactly - I do hope the instruction will be clear whether there will be gaps or not . When we complete more Settlers than this one are they to just sit around and wait while the chat continues? (bit of a waste when we know we'll get those Settlers) do we stop the chat? (I hope not after 2 turns). We don't want to leave gaps for others to rush their settlers into, even if for now we just directly replace Amsterdam and Arnhem. Of course the Iron/Wheat site we could settle with the Settler we have now.

Instructions don't need to be in until 1 hour before the Chat - that's 2 days away, so plenty of time yet.

 

[mad-bax]

I have always argue that the person in charge of deciding where to settle should maintain a dotmap that shows the next "n" city sites. Maybe I'll create one just for discussion.

Have to build a bunk-bed today though. It's one of those flat-packed kits where you throw away the instructions before you start and end up with spare bits at the end. Could take several days....

 

[Furiey]

I have always argue that the person in charge of deciding where to settle should maintain a dotmap that shows the next "n" city sites. Maybe I'll create one just for discussion.

Have to build a bunk-bed today though. It's one of those flat-packed kits where you throw away the instructions before you start and end up with spare bits at the end. Could take several days....

Agreed, good luck with the bunk bed, I have to visit my sister in a bit or I was thinking of a dot-map myself. I was alway good at jig-saws and do quite well getting those kits to comply with how they should (in my opinion) go together, sisters without Civ - no chance. Care to swap tasks?

 

[zyxy]

Exactly - I do hope the instruction will be clear whether there will be gaps or not .

There is a poll up now. In 24 hrs we will know. I have not heard anyone say we should not raze these cities, so I would plan for a replacement.

 

[greekguy]

If we raze the 2 Dutch cities should be build the new cities on the same spot or on different squares?

EDIT: i just looked at a clean map in the another thread and noticed we have a cow and horse just outside of the Oxford and Spichester boundaries not being utilized. We could put a city between the 2 resources or put a city on the coast nearby.

 

[Bertie]

If we raze the 2 Dutch cities should be build the new cities on the same spot or on different squares?

I'd build them nearby just to help claim squares. Arnhem is built on wheat, so we don't want to build there. If we want that city to capture the whale, I'd suggest 1 SW. In that case, we'd probably want to move Amerstdam slightly; maybe 1 SW as well?

 

[mad-bax]

Here is a bad dotmap - really just to show how many cities we need to build. Not perfect by any means.

I guess we can build the pink and the 3 yellow in the next TC fairly comfortably.

 

[greekguy]

I like the pink and 2 yellow dots you have up there, but i disagree with the south yellow dot. I think we should build a city on the red dot you have south of Spichester. another option would be to put another settler in your build queues and found cities at all four spots.

 

[zyxy]

FYI: Arnhem and Amsterdam will definitely be razed.

 

[greekguy]

After our latest aquistions from the Dutch, we now have some open land. I was thinking we should build a city up North in the desert by the whale and fish. This city would take up some land and could utilize those resources. What do you think?

EDIT: just saw another thing. a long time ago RegentMan put forth a proposal to build 3 cities in the former Indian heartland. We still could build the 3rd city, which would be on a coastal hill near the whales.

 

[zyxy]

The northernmost desert tile (SE of the fish) looks nice to me. We should also start considering settling the east as some of the Indian towns there will autoraze.

 

[Furiey]

The northernmost desert tile will fill a gap that the AI will try and settle - lets fill it before we start getting settlers traipsing across our lands.

 

[Furiey]

We will also need to replace razed Indian cities in the coming war, and the 2 French ones we plan to raze. Looks like we need lots of Settlers!