1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Office of Expansion-Settlement discussion #3

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game VI: Citizens' started by snipelfritz, Mar 18, 2005.

  1. snipelfritz

    snipelfritz Crazy about the Demogame

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2003
    Messages:
    506
    Location:
    The Demogame Forums!!!
    All right, where do we want to settle our third city?
    Here's some kind of map.


    Feel free to post any opinions etc. here.
     
  2. snipelfritz

    snipelfritz Crazy about the Demogame

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2003
    Messages:
    506
    Location:
    The Demogame Forums!!!
    As a citizen,

    I think we should settle on the tile between the cow and the tobacco(as indicated by the red dot). We need to grab these rescourses before the Dutch get them.

     
  3. Bill_in_PDX

    Bill_in_PDX Grumpy Submariner

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,880
    Location:
    The Wilderness of Orygun
    Given the overwhelming vote for Culture victory as our goal, I would say go for the site that lost in the runoff vote for settlement 2.
     
  4. donsig

    donsig Low level intermediary

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,892
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    You guys are too much! I'm the ninety-something registered citizen and our second city is named after me? :blush: If I'd have known that was gonna happen I'd have come up with a better name! :lol:

    I guess it's fitting that I voted and campaigned for spot #2 instead this one. :mischief:

    Now I don't know about city number 3. That red dot still looks good but I'm thinking if this is to be a permanent city (i.e., one we're not going to abandon later) then we should build the city one tile west of the dot. It's on the river. Sure, it doesn't get the tobacco but that stuff could cause problems down the road anyway. (What was Sid thinking putting tobacco in this game!) The red dot city was appealing as a temp settler factory but now that the Dutch are so close I think we need a permanent settlement. I suggest we build a city right where our warrior is standing. Hey, that's not W is it?
     
  5. MOTH

    MOTH Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    mostly lurking
    Let's hold on this discussion until that warrior explores a bit more. I'd rather we see more of the Eastern expanse and see if we need to outmaneauver the Dutch first.
     
  6. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    I second Donsig on the warrior spot. No need for flawed part time locations.
    The warrior spot got it all, and does not steal the bonus shield, have river and so on. MOTH, we need our borders consistent and intact, and the warrior spot does that too.
     
  7. CivGeneral

    CivGeneral Valkyrie Grand General

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    42,372
    Location:
    Solitude, Republic of Nova Terra
    I also second Donsig's choice for the settler location. This city should have high priority in the culture department to make sure that it builds temples, libraries, and other culture producing buildings in order to flip the dutch city.
     
  8. Xerol

    Xerol Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,542
    Location:
    In an IDE.
    Not to mention the warrior spot gives us DIRECT(i.e. 0-turn) access to a Dutch city, meaning if we do end up at war we'd have a good shot at taking one with minimal losses.
     
  9. YNCS

    YNCS Ex-bubblehead

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,098
    Location:
    -4 GMT
    The warrior spot will keep the Dutch on the north side of the river and give us the cow.
     
  10. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    In the future please turn the grid on, thanks!
    The warrior spot looks good, however maybe we should reevaluate after moving the warrior a bit...
     
  11. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Urgent new information is available regarding settlement locations. There are horses in the middle of the triange formed by us, Netherlands, and India. My position is we'd better grab them quickly, maybe even convert the granary build to a settler.

     
  12. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    And the name of the city, MOTHs "Roosting Tree" is perferct for that A spot, both to catch horses and to do other operations.
     
  13. YNCS

    YNCS Ex-bubblehead

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,098
    Location:
    -4 GMT
    I prefer B. C isn't on a river and A is too close to the Indians. That leaves B.

    How many shields would we lose by switching Camelot from a grainary to a settler?
     
  14. MOTH

    MOTH Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    mostly lurking
    Agressive builds is my choice.

    Spot D is my choice. North of Spot B, East of spot C in the hills next to the lake followed by a culture build to extend borders to the horses and push back the Hague's borders. Its also allows another agressive city West of Spot A to push on Bombay.

    I like spot B but it makes it difficult to fit a city in between there and Camelot.

    I also think we should keep on with the Granary build before the settler as we need to be able to build City 4 as quickly as possible.
     
  15. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    A settler would come in 2 turns if we switched. I would prefer to be guaranteed to get the horses, because if we wait there is a huge problem if one of our opponents chooses that location.
     
  16. paulfish

    paulfish cheese head

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    beer town
    switch and settle on A
     
  17. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    We don't lose any shields by switching. I would prefer A because B squeezes the cow at original site 2 a little too much. We're eventually going to want to try to culture flip Bombay, if we haven't already captured it at that point.
     
  18. Bill_in_PDX

    Bill_in_PDX Grumpy Submariner

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,880
    Location:
    The Wilderness of Orygun
    We need to get that horse, I would advocate switching to the settler.

    Do we really think we can flip Bombay? It will closer to India's capital than our new city will be.
     
  19. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    Please switch to setller, no time to lose.
     
  20. Bertie

    Bertie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    583
    I’m not inclined to switch production in Camelot from a granary to a settler. I agree it’s imperative that we secure the horses. We appear to be at the end of the world and I’d prefer to produce military units with mobility rather than foot soldiers. However I’m also worried about all that open land to the NE. That’s largely unexplored so we don’t know what goodies are out there, but given the map, that appears to be our natural expansion direction. The Dutch appear to be on steroids when it comes to producing settlers and I don’t want them settling that area before us, so that’s also a priority. Producing a settler in two turns is tempting because we get an immediate city; but we greatly delay the establishment of our settler factory. Is the cost worth it? Waiting is painful, but it’s what I suggest. Even if a rival civ settles the horses, it’s likely to be a weak city. Archers should be able to take it easily.

    However, there are things we can do to discourage the Dutch or Indians from settling near the horses. We’re about to produce a warrior in Donsignia, and the warrior can head towards the mountain (between spaces 1 & 2 on DaveShack’s map) and act in a generally threatening manner. After the warrior, Donsignia should be able to produce a settler in a dozen or so turns, particularly if the workers irrigate the cow when they’re finished roading. That settler can secure the horses.

    BTW I like Moth’s approach to aggressive settling, but I think it’s too early to make any moves like that. We’ll probably be at war with the Dutch or the Indians (my money is on the Dutch) within 40 turns or so. But I’d prefer to get some infrastructure established first – barracks – and crank out some vet units. Aggressive settling will irritate the Dutch, which is fine by me. But I don’t want them declaring war when we’re not ready; I want to declare war on our terms.

    I’m not sure where the best city site is for the eastern cow. There’s a lot to be said for the spot we were originally considering that could share one of the irrigated wines with Camelot. After warrior Clubbings explores more toward the east, the ideal site might be obvious.
     

Share This Page