Robin Hood, Sherwood Forest and The Sheriff of Nottingham
Richard Wagner wrote an opera based on the legend of the Flying Dutchman. The legend tells of a ghostly ship that is doomed to sail the seas forever never reaching port. The first save file for this game brought it to mind, as some of us played to 150BC to find the game hanging as Barbarian pirates sailed forever looking for a place to land.
There was no water at all on that map.
(For more detail of this bug please see the game thread itself.)
Magic acted promptly in producing a second save file, retaining the overall forest theme but this time with some water, and incorporating some suggestions from the group.
This episode did mean some of us began with direct recent experience of progress of the early game on an all forest section of a large horizontal map. Compared to "normal" you could rely on what specials would be where, and barbarians were not a problem, so it was pretty good. You would inevitably build a lot of settlers and caravans, in best ICS style. Technologies would not necessarily arrive very quickly, and one may have to choose wonders. Not because of shortage of shields, but rather because of the shortage of arrows and the need to choose technologies.
A key question for me was the pattern to be used to setup cities. How dense should the cities be? How much tree clearing? What roads? Should silk be converted to wheat? How should that be balanced by the imperative to expand east and west, given the conquest objective?
An 8-wide section of map includes 11 pheasants, 4 towards the middle, 4 to the top and 3 to the bottom. There are 9 silk too.
I decided I wanted my cities in clearings, to get some arrows from the city, with one or two pheasants available to each. I would try and balance that with east-west expansion. I would make an east-west road as I went. I would not use all the pheasants. I would convert silk. Well maybe later once I had some width.
This meant a long road would appear across the middle of the map linking cities in a regular pattern. There would be some cities north and south too, so as to grow more quickly and get some relief from corruption.
There were also two restrictions I placed on myself, because it would be (it is) a long game, and these would help keep interest:
1. I would not look at the map using the editor, although it was permitted for this GOTM.
2. I would not look to irrigate using the automated settler technique.
For development I would prioritise Hanging Gardens and Marco Polo.
How did it go?
As expected. One exception was the other Civs did much better than with the first savefile, as they had more land and opportunities to grow.
The significant feature I did not expect was the seas to east and west of my homeland.
I think it might be of interest to others to give dates for making cities on the near shores of these. For me: East Sea AD 220, West Sea AD 420.
Richard Wagner wrote an opera based on the legend of the Flying Dutchman. The legend tells of a ghostly ship that is doomed to sail the seas forever never reaching port. The first save file for this game brought it to mind, as some of us played to 150BC to find the game hanging as Barbarian pirates sailed forever looking for a place to land.
There was no water at all on that map.
(For more detail of this bug please see the game thread itself.)
Magic acted promptly in producing a second save file, retaining the overall forest theme but this time with some water, and incorporating some suggestions from the group.
This episode did mean some of us began with direct recent experience of progress of the early game on an all forest section of a large horizontal map. Compared to "normal" you could rely on what specials would be where, and barbarians were not a problem, so it was pretty good. You would inevitably build a lot of settlers and caravans, in best ICS style. Technologies would not necessarily arrive very quickly, and one may have to choose wonders. Not because of shortage of shields, but rather because of the shortage of arrows and the need to choose technologies.
A key question for me was the pattern to be used to setup cities. How dense should the cities be? How much tree clearing? What roads? Should silk be converted to wheat? How should that be balanced by the imperative to expand east and west, given the conquest objective?
An 8-wide section of map includes 11 pheasants, 4 towards the middle, 4 to the top and 3 to the bottom. There are 9 silk too.
I decided I wanted my cities in clearings, to get some arrows from the city, with one or two pheasants available to each. I would try and balance that with east-west expansion. I would make an east-west road as I went. I would not use all the pheasants. I would convert silk. Well maybe later once I had some width.
This meant a long road would appear across the middle of the map linking cities in a regular pattern. There would be some cities north and south too, so as to grow more quickly and get some relief from corruption.
There were also two restrictions I placed on myself, because it would be (it is) a long game, and these would help keep interest:
1. I would not look at the map using the editor, although it was permitted for this GOTM.
2. I would not look to irrigate using the automated settler technique.
For development I would prioritise Hanging Gardens and Marco Polo.
How did it go?
As expected. One exception was the other Civs did much better than with the first savefile, as they had more land and opportunities to grow.
The significant feature I did not expect was the seas to east and west of my homeland.
I think it might be of interest to others to give dates for making cities on the near shores of these. For me: East Sea AD 220, West Sea AD 420.
So I could manage 1 tech per turn with only 30 or 40 % science. 
) about when is the right time to stop? Or do I have to do it myself? I still have several cities with growing potential and have them in celebration mode, so the score is rising every turn.
