GaryNemo
Settler from None
Some easy generalities, regarding Mike's Caravans.
This poll will remain open 6 days, until Saturday.
This poll will remain open 6 days, until Saturday.
Caravan Priority 120AD
- Thread starter GaryNemo
- Start date
MonkE
Primate Philosopher
Do we really need to rush the Roskilde Relocation Project? If we rush the disband, we lose the current settler. It will take 4 turns to reach the Fruit City site.
The current settler can found FC, the next settler could rehome in FC and found on grassland E of FC, or even join FC. Third settler could disband. This won't cost anything.
The current settler can found FC, the next settler could rehome in FC and found on grassland E of FC, or even join FC. Third settler could disband. This won't cost anything.
Serutan
Eatibus Anythingibus
I think that we should wait for the first settler to
found Fruit City, then disband with the second. As long
as we can prevent Roskilde from growing, I don't think we need
to put a lot of money into IPRB.
found Fruit City, then disband with the second. As long
as we can prevent Roskilde from growing, I don't think we need
to put a lot of money into IPRB.
MonkE
Primate Philosopher
I'd like to hear the micromanagement details for that.
Serutan
Eatibus Anythingibus
Just hire an Elvis so Roskilde doesn't grow.
MonkE
Primate Philosopher
Doh - I'm so distracted. 
But really, what about making another settler there before disbanding?
But really, what about making another settler there before disbanding?
I think let the third settler be the one to disband it.
Simply putting Roskilde to an entertainer seems like it would be a huge waste. It would stop the growth, but also cut the city down to 1 shield of production. Plus, once the current settler builds its city, Roskilde will start having a surplus of 1 food per turn anyways. Unless we want to spend the money to rush build a settler in 6 turns after the other city it built, it's gowing to grow to size two anyways. I think it should stay on the whale and plan on the third settler (with some IPRB help) being the one to disband the city.
Simply putting Roskilde to an entertainer seems like it would be a huge waste. It would stop the growth, but also cut the city down to 1 shield of production. Plus, once the current settler builds its city, Roskilde will start having a surplus of 1 food per turn anyways. Unless we want to spend the money to rush build a settler in 6 turns after the other city it built, it's gowing to grow to size two anyways. I think it should stay on the whale and plan on the third settler (with some IPRB help) being the one to disband the city.
GaryNemo
Settler from None
Seeing this morning's posts, I voted to :
IPRB normally, not save $100 for Roskilde at this time.
Key Trade Routes, Civvium, Eboracum Reneaux.
Bedfont Lakes Cop's Caravan, then Dip, IPRB, onto Trireme.
MD Caravan, LC Trireme after Temple.
IPRB normally, not save $100 for Roskilde at this time.
Key Trade Routes, Civvium, Eboracum Reneaux.
Bedfont Lakes Cop's Caravan, then Dip, IPRB, onto Trireme.
MD Caravan, LC Trireme after Temple.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
