Domestic T1 P3: Camelot Development Plans

[MOTH]

Discussion on development of Camelot as a 6-turn settler factory is in this thread.

Two possibilities exist for development of Camelot to run as a 6 turn factory:

1. Size 3-4 Settler only factory building settlers every 6 turns using existing tile improvements.
2. Size 4-5 Warrior and Settler factory building a warrior and settler every 6 turns needing 1 more mined BG.

Option 2 would also be better if we got a barracks in there at some point. Even after Swords are available this option can still average a settler every 6 turns with 1 Sword coming out about every 15 turns running between sizes 3.16 and 6.16.

Short term analysis: Both options need 2 quick settlers to get to the right size. Settlers in 5 and 10 turns from the granary. Option 1 would then have settlers on turn 16, 22, 28, etc.

Option 2 would then build a barracks on turn 17. It would hen followed by 3 more quick settlers on turn 21, 25, and 30. It would then start warriors and settlers every 6 with the 3rd mined bg needed on turn 35. If we go with Swords at this point then we would build another quick settler and then a Sword and more settlers.

 

[MOTH]

The Domestic Consul reccommends option 2. Either way the next 2 settlers will be available on turns 5 and 10.

The cons are:
Slight delays in future settlers due to the need to operate at larger sizes. The 3rd settler will be delayed 5 turns and the 4th by 3 and the 5th and later by 2 turns each.
A second slight con is that we must Mine one more BG.

EDIT: clarification, the above delay turns are net, not cumulative. By the time the 5th settler is built we are up a barracks and only 2 turns delayed (not 10 turns). By the time the sixth is built we are still only 2 turns delayed and are now up a vet warrior and a barracks.

The Pros are:
We will start getting veteran troops every six turns as well.
We will have higher commerce with the larger population resulting in quicker research.
We will have enough surplus shields that we can sometimes produce other things at little cost and no additional longterm delay of settler production.

 

[RegentMan]

Can we really afford to lose the valuable turns for our settlers to be made? I will wait for some more opinions before I vote. I like option two, but delaying settlers may very well be suicide.

 

[MOTH]

Can we really afford to lose the valuable turns for our settlers to be made? I will wait for some more opinions before I vote. I like option two, but delaying settlers may very well be suicide.

We would get 2 settlers out quickly, and would then take advantage of the extra sheilds to produce some military as well. If we don't build the barracks then we could produce Regular military units with no real delay (2 turns to be at a little larger base size.) The 5 extra turns to build the barracks first is mainly a delay for settler #3, but then we've got the vet warriors coming out to escort the settlers.

We are also talking about the Strategic plans for Camelot. We can actually run as many turns at a size 3-4 6 turn factory as we want before we institute the combo factory, so if we need to rush settler 3 and or 4 we could still do it. We won't have to make this tactical decision until after the next turn-chat as the next 11 turns of builds are set and even then next 5 turns after this don't matter much as the build could be switched.

 

[RegentMan]

Okay, I see your side. As long as there isn't too long a delay...

 

[mad-bax]

The only point I would make is that the warrior - sword upgrade is 60g. We can't build too many warriors as we won't be able to afford the upgrades. For this reason, we may need to mix in chariots at 20 shields from time to time. In turn this will mean settlers off the 6 turn metronome, and lower usage of the irrigated wines. This is one of the reasons I would like a city set up to take the cattle and share the wines with Camelot, purely as a four turn settler pump.

Camelot can then switch to unit production.

I would aim at 6 settlers out of Camelot before the second pump is up and running.

 

[Gregski]

I like option 2 better because you get military backing and a larger city in general is more productive all round.