Conquests COTM01 Speculation Thread

Whatever happens, I would love a lower difficulty level! I got too crushed in the start of GOTM 31 to have anything good come out of it. My guess on the Civilization is either England or Russia.
 
ainwood said:
You are a pushy lot, aren't you? ;)

60% ocean, dry warm world. :)

such a map has a lot of desert, floodplains, and jungle. of course, ainwood could always go anti-cyclic, but why (rhetoric question) would this be a map to play the russians? i would give a map for a russian game the opposite characteristics: wet and cold!
i support the zulu party, instead!

btw: don't we need a new characteristic of the games, that would read like:

'number of one-tile islands: ??'
 
Maybe a piccie or two??
 

Attachments

  • minmap.JPG
    minmap.JPG
    6.5 KB · Views: 459
It would be mean not to post the start map as well. Of course, because I'm in a particularly evil mood, I decided to change the civ colours to keep you guessing a little bit longer. :) Its not like you really need to know which civ you are playing or anything. :)
 

Attachments

  • colorchanged.JPG
    colorchanged.JPG
    21.3 KB · Views: 495
Is it my eyes or... Isn't there a third white line next to the settler indicating an exploring civ with the extra ub´nit being a scout?
 
And if I had read the thread from the beginning instead of jumping right in I would already have known it was an expansionist civ... ;)
 
I knew it I knew it I knew it
even with scout he found a way to complicate our first move... thats just so unfair...
 
Though now it is a little bit more clear for me...
If that mountain to the west wont show flood plains with three or more wheat on it :D I will move the settler to the North East I think
 
I have a feeling this might be a no resource start. I'll probably look around a bit before settling.

And if this does turn out to be England, perhaps the weakest civ in the game, can't you just hear the staff snickering in the background?
 
Scout W,W to mountain would reveal a lot of land. But whatever it reveals could take the settler 4 turns to reach, rather a long walk. And that river has to come from somewhere and go somewhere. So I'm thinking scout NW,N to hills. And if that doesn't reveal a reason to head north, then settler E.

Do our seers-under-the-fog see anything at the edges?
 
The best visible tiles all give 1 food, meaning it will take 20 turns to reach size 2! So it is worth moving up to 10 squares to find better land. We need to move at least 2 squares unless there is game in that forest.

The best general direction to move is north, above the tropic line. There we should find enough grassland to support our capital AND a few more cities.

I will move the scout NW,N and the settler NE. They will both move farther north on turn 2 unless I see a very convincing reason to settle in place.
 
NW of that northern hill looks like another desert tile to me. N to that hill seems to be plains. NE of the mountain next to it looks like forest. All in all not very promising, a bit like the land next to the river.
 
DaveMcW said:
The best general direction to move is north, above the tropic line.
That is a good point. I still want to see what's along that river though. My revised plan is scout NW,N, worker E, settler N. And then the worker and settler can continue northward if necessary (seems likely if the first 2 moves didn't show anything), with the worker revealing an extra tile to the east as they travel.
 
Worker to the East sounds good--with any luck, there is a good spot one move east of the river (that would be 2 turns altogether). My Civ geography's not what it should be, but is it likely that there might be some grassland just east of the visible forest/river squares?
 
Back
Top Bottom