General Turn Discussion

Heh, I agree...but hunting fourth has not really hurt us, we can get 1 warrior out of the second city and then get a granary (which I would have prefered to building a granary straight away in any case).

W1: Heal until atleast 1.6 health
Tech: Myst (just to be contraversal , ;) )
 
yeah mysticism great tech choice :P

W1 we definetly need to get him to fight 1 more wolf...
 
Hey, looking at the sims if we find a good city to the north east of the capital, I´d seriously consider trying to oracle something like alphabet or fued (and if no religion has fallen by the time we finish AH...etc)
 
heck - I'm just too lazy to look up what we wanted before.

I thought it was pottery, then AH. If it was AH, then pottery, I don't see any reason to have changed our mind.
 
Reason to get pottery first: we can get a granary in the copper city and grow it to size 4 quicker. A definate benefit to the economy, it gets a strong production city up to speed sooner, and it wil decrease the time taken to reach size 5 and 6 when we hook up our happiness resources. I think that getting 1 warrior out of the copper city then building a granary with a forest chop is an acceptable compromise considering our current technological and explorational (is that even a word?) position, as it allows us to explore to the west and north of the copper city for other viable city spots that may contain horses, and allows the city to grow to size 4 and pump out a settler (the units to defend the city could be built while growing) in a decent amount of time, so we are not relying solely on the capital for workers and settlers.

Reason to get AH first: we know where horses are earlier. No benefit to the economy, though we can plan to get a horse city third instead of a city for the elephants earlier and hence tailor our plans accordingly. (Though personally, as we have copper, horses are only useful to scout with and kill an axe stack with right now, so I would vote for the ele city as the third city, and consider a quick fourth city for the horses against other plans)
 
Warriors:
Warrior #1 would be called Willem Barentsz, right?
Warrior #2 perhaps Cornelis de Houtman, first Dutchman to reach Indonesia (or the Dutch Indies as I prefer to call it :p)

Where are we planning on building the second city again? The copper site right?


Link for city names

Wild Amber Oolong has been suggested for the copper city.
Perhaps Copper Kettle? :)
 
ooh - I really like Wild Amber Oolong! :thumbsup:

But this is really a discussion for the Domestics Thread - which should be launched soon by Krill, our very first Daimyo of Domestics!

I like the warrior names also... but again, this should probably be settled in the Exploration thread which will hopefully be launched soon by Daimyo of War Azzaman333.

:salute:


P.S. Yes, yes, I know I need to launch my own threads also! I'm working on it! I'm buried in stuff here at the office after taking a week off, and my internet is on the fritz again at home :gripe:
 
What is the logic behind moving the warrior S (to meet up with the settler) next turn, rather than SW (on to what I think is the proposed city site)?

It doesn't look like moving SW would leave any dangerous tiles in the fog?
 
true. but if we move SW and reveal and animal then the settler has to wait....that warrior can defend agaisn't everything but a bear on a forest hill.
 
Did the wolf attack W1?
 
That got him to 5XP right?
 
What is the logic behind moving the warrior S (to meet up with the settler) next turn, rather than SW (on to what I think is the proposed city site)?

It doesn't look like moving SW would leave any dangerous tiles in the fog?

What Memphus said, and I only posted those notes so that when people logged in or the next turn aws played they would have a better understanding of what we required W2 to do.
 
So I think North is the move for warrior #1.

Civ4ScreenShot0023.jpg


Warrior 2 can go SW next turn.

Anyone want know why i didn't move him?

In retropect, this was a risky move (not the chocie to not move him, but the fact that there WAS the choice to not move him.)
 
With the lack of movement by the settler-guard warrior, I must ask to make sure I have the right idea why.

Was it because with the settler where he is, we know that no 2 move animals can come out of the fog and attack him, so it is more beneficial to heal him this turn incase an animal pops out of the fog next turn?
 
In my opinion, it is very hard to "pinpoint" city sites while there is still black on the map. We need to reveal all the tiles in possible fat crosses in order to be fully accurate.
 
Back
Top Bottom