1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

LN F4 Poll 400BC

Discussion in 'Civ2 - Game of Democracy II' started by GaryNemo, Oct 17, 2002.

?

Little Nemo, its Settler and Current Build?

Poll closed Oct 21, 2002.
  1. Little Nemo, change to produce a Settler in 9 turns

    3 vote(s)
    21.4%
  2. Little Nemo, change to produce a Settler in 8. IPRB $4=20

    5 vote(s)
    35.7%
  3. Little Nemo, continue Caravan in 12, productivity doesn't matter

    5 vote(s)
    35.7%
  4. Little Nemo, build something else, see my post

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. LN Settler, build the one Road, Found F4 on Forest 3NW of RC.

    5 vote(s)
    35.7%
  6. LN Settler, keep building roads - recommended by the duke.

    8 vote(s)
    57.1%
  7. Road the GrassLandShield, its current location - recommended

    10 vote(s)
    71.4%
  8. Road back SE on Plains

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. Road back S on Plains

    3 vote(s)
    21.4%
  10. Irrigate GLS SW SW of Regia Civitas

    3 vote(s)
    21.4%
  11. Road Plains W W of RC (N of LN)

    3 vote(s)
    21.4%
  12. Irrigate GLS NW of LN

    1 vote(s)
    7.1%
  13. Nemo, you just don't listen! See my post.

    1 vote(s)
    7.1%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    The Little Nemo situation is controversial, because we have limited resources. Shall we found F4 now, or not? Our duke has announced that the F4 location stinks. It will be forever limited to its own Forest, 6 Ocean, Harbor, and temporary usage of RC territory. Of course, those reasons are why I recommend it.

    And should Little Nemo change to Settler, as your Domestic Advisor recommends? If we don't found F4, and LN does build another Settler (recommended in any event), irrigation may be required.

    Please contemplate this, post, and come back tomorrow or Saturday to vote.

    Here is a very old map, from Turn 1050BC, that shows RC, F4 and environs.


    For Road and irrigation ideas, please refer to Strategy of Productivity - Path Diagrams
     
  2. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    Duh. This is an old map, and doesn't show where the Little Nemo Settler is now. It is on the GrassLandShield, between F4 and the Whale. It could build a road there, then move W to F4 and found. Or move back toward RC and Road -- see poll options.
     
  3. Rout

    Rout ZZzzzzzz

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2002
    Messages:
    530
    Location:
    Leeds UK
    It does stink.
    Send the little fella north - more important cities need to be founded first, and it looks like dellham may have trouble pumping out settlers
     
  4. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    Other current details:
    A TFalls Settler is near Elysium, builds one more road to connect the cities, then can head north. Hopefully found a city ASAP.

    * TFalls: 30/40 of Settler in 3, Serf to Forest
    * Reneaux: working Oasis and River, 3 trade (1+2),
        building 39/40 Settlers w Elvis in 1 turn
    * Marl Downs w Elvis: 29/40 of Settler, IPRB $2, Settler in 5
    * Mordhiemia w Elvis: 31/40 Settler in 3

    That is 4 new Settlers in Jayn'e next move, and only one city North Whale to found. We are about to be flooded with Settlers. We do not have enough Archers to guard all of the cities we could found. Soon both LN and TFalls will be supporting two settlers each. The current LN Settler is a 'spare'
     
  5. Jayne

    Jayne Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    Worcs UK
    Remind me which city is North Whale?

    Also, if we did build F4, am I right in assuming that it's going to be more of a gold producing town than anything else owing to it's lack of shields?
     
  6. duke o' york

    duke o' york It don't mean a thing....

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,635
    Location:
    Don't get around much anymore
    I assume that North Whale is either the site north of Legendary City (I feel as if this should be said with a booming voice, like a wrestling announcer) or the site east of Reneaux. Those are the only two free whales I can think of other than the 4-special site.
     
  7. MonkE

    MonkE Primate Philosopher

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    343
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    If we don't have enough archers to guard all possible cities, I'd be willing to take some risks in order to build on the prime city sites sooner rather than later. Have no guards or revert to warriors for crowd control if necessary (we're going for Leo's Workshop, no?). The worst that can happen is that the AI captures a city, which we then recapture - a minor setback, really.

    "Audacity, always audacity."
     
  8. heliogabalus

    heliogabalus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    Germany
    The worst that can happen is that the AI also gets an advance out of us with the sacked city.

    Gary, I'm against F4 as well, as I already posted somewhere else. We need many settlers to claim the northern lands and to road, and having too many cities gives us those nasty black dudes.
     
  9. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    If I am the only supporter of F4, of Caravans, then we all loose.

    North Whale in on the map above, called "M3, was B2" It has other names on other maps, always the same Pure Green site. It is an old plan, about to be completed. Ditto G2, now called G2NE on some maps, always Pure Green adjacent to the 3 Forest. Neuma.

    Border cities all need Archer Guards, at founding. Not true for F4 nor G2NE.
     
  10. heliogabalus

    heliogabalus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    Germany
    What does the option

    > Little Nemo, change to produce a Settler in 8. IPRB $4=20

    mean?

    Do we have to IPRB five times so the net cost is $20?
     
  11. MonkE

    MonkE Primate Philosopher

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    343
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I believe it means that when there are 18/20 shields, spend $4 to get it to 20.
     
  12. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    MonkE, you can read my mind! For the good of all others, please feel free to continue to do so. Has anyone else noticed the hypnotic similarity of our avatars?

    I am sorry that I too often write in code. Interestingly, my friends and I believe we program in English, and most others code in Greek. My handwriting is even worse. I used a special technique to teach my children, one by one, how to read it. I would scribble a note such as ... Ask me for a quarter. Eventually, I was dunned for payment, and so that little training was done.
     
  13. Duke of Marlbrough

    Duke of Marlbrough The Quiet Moderator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,702
    Location:
    Southern CA, USA
    They could also get a bit of money from us for taking a city.


    F4 does suck as a city site. But, the premise behind filler cities is to get cities built quickly. That way they can produce things while the rest of the world expands.

    Since F4 is close by so it would allow us to get another city built quickly. If it has no real intention of growing very large, then it might be able to focus on caravans and settler production.

    If we started the filler city concept, we should stay within the premise of them.

    Granted we should get the Northern cities built also, but we should also use settlers that are already in that area. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense spend the turns to run a settler all the way up to the North when we will get settlers up there that can get there much quicker.

    Basically, it seems we have a choice between letting the settler build roads and irrigation for the southern cities, or letting it build F4. If F4 is built, we can look at having LN build another settler as well as have the production from F4.
     
  14. Leowind

    Leowind Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2000
    Messages:
    1,236
    Location:
    Eugene, OR, USA
    I think the real problem with founding F4, other than that the city site really sucks, is that it is one more city when we are already having happiness problems from too many cities. We are a long way from Mike's yet, and have many cities to found up North, so this problem is going to get increasingly worse. Is one crappy city that is so choked it will be hard-pressed to generate much gold OR shields for many centuries worth an extra unhappy person somewhere in the empire? That settler could spend it's time completing road networks, irrigating, etc. While I understand the concept of filler cities, I think this one has fewer benefits than the earlier ones (such as Little Nemo) we've founded.
     
  15. Duke of Marlbrough

    Duke of Marlbrough The Quiet Moderator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,702
    Location:
    Southern CA, USA
    The unhappiness issues we are having are a combinationof the riot factor and city size. Adding one more city might not make all the other cities more unhappy, but adding this city in addition to all the other 'good' cities we plan to build may very well make each city more unhappy.

    The unhappiness issues are the main reason I don't like filler cities. I would have preferred to spend the couple extra turns, irrigate the forest that was pointed out long ago and have built one good city there, rather than the two filler cities we have now.

    I would prefer to have the settler work on connecting our southern cities together. That will allow us to have a 'zone defense' rather than each city needing it's own set of protectors. In addition to that, it would allow any future units that are built to get up North much quicker.
     
  16. MonkE

    MonkE Primate Philosopher

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    343
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    1) I also would like to see the southern cities connected together. Once we have that, some of the settlers could generally work their way northward and eastward, building improvements as they go. Some settlers will be available to transport to other islands and some will stay to irrigate, mine, etc.

    2) Yes, it isn't desirable at all to have a city captured by the AI, but I would still prefer to take some calculated risks to promote faster creation of cities on the best land.
     
  17. Octavian X

    Octavian X is not a pipe.

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    5,428
    Location:
    deceiving people with images
    The F4 site should, at least, put off for know. I feel that founding the main cities should be a priorty, since AI's are already starting in on our land. The F4 city site can wait.
     
  18. Serutan

    Serutan Eatibus Anythingibus

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    5,521
    Location:
    Baja Arizona
    I too think F4 is a baaad site. Also, with the number of good
    unsettled sites in the North, I think we should suspend filler
    cities for the time being.
     
  19. GaryNemo

    GaryNemo Settler from None

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,237
    Location:
    Ohio, GMT-4
    Ok, I accept that we are not going to build F4 now. So, what roads shall we build? Are there enough choices in the poll? Irrigation for cities that are driving 2 Settlers? Discussion?

    One other thing. We are killing the AI. We have more cities than the AI, way more production and productivity. Shortly NUF will begin building wonders in one turn, as soon as we get the Science. At this point, all of the AI Domestic Advisors would throw in the towel, if they only knew. Stopping this one city, no matter how vital I feel it is, will not change that.

    But please, lets guard all assets, find the runaway horse, avoid loosing all of our hunters at a single stroke, and get back to controlled expansion. To me, that means security, cities, caravans, roads, Temples, Cop's and Mike's.
     
  20. StevieP

    StevieP Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2002
    Messages:
    71
    Location:
    Warwickshire, UK
    I Agree with this concept. Some of the settlers will be employed in productive infra-structure for use later (roads/ irrigation/ etc).

    This is a very good reason for keeping some settlers to hand for our overseas expansion plans. I know what people are saying. Yes we do need a military unit to go with them! We should try and resolve this soon.
     

Share This Page