Department of Turnplay

oh well - I had new worker east road then irrigate, the new build as a settler (the road would save the settler 1 turn journey time). Doesn't make too much of a difference if we road first here, then mine, and the settler goes N E E of the capital. Graceland should never get a baracks, it will be a settler factory after a settler and granery build.

City 2 will produce a warrior first, then workers/settlers as required. City 3 is our military city.
 
In MP the road finishes a turn early and the worker is immobile. So if the bg worker roads he should have time to come back over and be able to road the FP right? Or is my calculation wrong on when the settler is coming out?
 
If the city is going N E E it won't matter and the worker might as well stay and mine the bg. If the city was going E E then road then irri the FP would have given the new city 4fpt from the start.
 
Right but road north and then road east will still get the settler there one turn more quickly, ie there is enough time to complete the road if going EE. The tradeoff is more gold from the roaded BG vs. more food immediately at city 2. Not too bad either way.

SGOTM 12 is upon us. Do we want to have a GONG team? I noticed Tim and Madviking signed up.
 
RFH said:
City 2 will produce a warrior first, then workers/settlers as required. City 3 is our military city.
I think that is running to light on steel. I'm usually a careful general and even more so with restless barbs and humans. We will have a lot of unprotected settlers and workers running around until that 3rd city starts producing vet units. I'm worried. I better take the dog for a walk.
 
Do we start with a military city second then? perhaps E E se, that has 3 BG's to work, can share the FP E of Graceland. I don't think the road will be there in time, as I was going to work 2 forests after the chop comes in, delaying growth in graceland. The delayed growth didn't matter for the speed of the granery, and we didn't need the extra pop to run the settler factory.

Presumably reg warriors are for settler escort? If so how many do we think we need - we could probably get 3 or 4 out of cities 2 and 3 while they are growing.

OK here is how I plan graceland to go - I'll let those with wiser heads decide on the location and build queue for city 2

The main page gives my suggested build order, the main 2 page squezes out a second warrior but delays everything 1 turn which isn't too bad either. Notice that the FP's are being irrigated for city 2 - if that is not required then we can turn Man at work to something more interesting.
 

Attachments

By the way, with regard to barbs: A barb camp will appear (whether it does this check for every time, or just the first, I don't know) when the total number of cities>=2*number of players (don't know if that counts dead players) and every living player has at least one city, and given sufficient space (in a spot no unit with attack or defense or borders can see, I assume) and if there are fewer camps than number of players (haven't tested what happens if a player is eliminated). A new barb unit (this may change when they start producing new stuff, i.e. horses or galleys) may appear (in one test it took four turns) when there are less than 2, 3, or 4 (for roaming, restless, raging respectively) barbs per camp (or perhaps number of players). The distinction between will and may is intentional.
 
It'll influence what tiles are worked next turn, so it would be useful to know whether we want to build a warrior in the capital to delay settler production by a turn. The second city could start out with three warriors or so if not. I think building an extra warrior in the second city would be better than delaying the founding of every city by a turn (until the second city catches up, I guess).
 
OK settler will be done soon - next question - warrior/granary/settler or granary/settler. either is viable, but my cautious nature says warrior first, and send him south and west
 
My vote would be for a warrior first. However, what is the current spt and growth rate?
 
OK time for a revised plan.

If we build a warrior then Hammertime needs to chop and road the forest to the NE to speed the granary.

We then need an irrigated plain to get the SF up and running. The best one is the one due S of the cow (we are likely to want a city down there somewhere so a road in that direction would be good.) Man at work should irrigate and road that tile next.

This means that we don't lose any time on the SF, it is at a reasonable size (starts growth at size 3.5) but it does mean that we lose time irrigating the FP's. The new city should work the sugar and produce warriors. Once the existing workers have set up the SF then they should irrigate the FP's for city 2.

Detailed plan attached, - what do people think?
 

Attachments

If thats the case then the western worker needs to chop the forest and the eastern worker needs to irrigate the plain south of the cattle. After that it will be irrigating and roading the FP's. I'll have a play with the order.

Can anyone tell the first corrupted shield of great walls of fire?
 
OK still getting used to this multiplayer timing thing. Revised version up

Key points

worker to floodplain next turn. Other worker will road after it finishes the mine. Graceland will work cow and mined BG's and then a Forest until the granary is in, then we will have the irrigated plains to work for the settler.
 

Attachments

Back
Top Bottom