Provincial Discussion: Second Turnchat, Build Queues

[Ginger_Ale]

Right now we are working on a warrior that will be completed in 3, and then we also grow in 7 turns.

So what do we want the Build Queue to be? A settler is proposed after this warrior.

Warrior (current) -> Settler -> Curragh for opposite direction or a Granary if we trade?

Also, at size 4 we can get 4 fpt by working the 2 BGs, and 2 wines (irrigated). That's growth in 5 turns. This also gives us 4 spt. Is this laborer allocation better, or do you rather 2 wines, 1 BG and 1 forest for growth in 7 (one wasted food) and 5 spt - I like the first option better myself.

Discussion today and tomorrow (the 9th), and then I'll put up a tenative instructions with laborer allocation and build queues for 1 day, until the 10th (turnchat day).

 

[donsig]

We should work towards a granary. I know this is dependant on a trade but we should pursue that trade vigourously. Then built the granary ASAP option #2. After that switch to option #1 and build settlers to foold the coasts with new cities.

 

[Octavian X]

Build a granary! We should concentrate on growing faster and producing more food.

Had we not met the Indians this last TC, I'd suggest a curragh. However, given that we do have a foreign contact now, I think a curragh can wait for a bit.

 

[TimBentley]

We have pottery, and can build a granary already.

 

[DaveShack]

We should build a settler before the granary.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

I agree with a settler before the granary - we're at size 3, and growing quick. How does Settler -> Granary -> Set up 6 turn settler factory sound ?

It's someone else's job where the settler goes - I just choose to build it.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Sounds ok, despite that I usually build a granary before a settler.
I haven't looked at the save; perhaps building the granary before the settler isn't needed.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

We are growing really fast. At most, at size 4, we can do about 5 or 6 spt. That's a granary in 10-12 turns - a settler first, and then a granary would both save our luxury tax, and help us get a second city for units / workers. I will do a table of instructions tomorrow.

 

[TimBentley]

It looks like a settler first, then a granary, then having the settler factory ready would be good. We'll also need a barracks soon, since we can produce some units in the 6-turn cycle (certainly a warrior and settler should be easy, without a better look). But that's for a later discussion.

 

[Bertie]

I agree that we should build a settler before a granary. I'd like to get a second settler factory working as soon as possible.

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

I'd like to possibly build a settler first. We have good locations, a chance to pump out a settler quickly and a neighbor next to us who will settle quickly. We've got gold in them thar hills and cows to spare. Lets get another city or two.

 

[YNCS]

We need a settler to get the cow and the gold before the Indians grab them.

Settler -> Curragh -> Grainary -> Settler -> ?

 

[Ginger_Ale]

I don't know if we need a curragh at this point. We have a warrior in the west, curragh in the east. Maybe in the next couple cities, but I think our focus should be on the land grab.

 

[MOTH]

I agree on the land grab. I would be happy with any of the following:

warrior-settler-settler-granary
granary-settler-settler
warrior-settler-granary-settler

 

[mad-bax]

I now favour changing the current warrior build to settler - then granary, settler, warrior, settler, warrior. Can we make 40 shields in 6 turns on a 6-4 oscillation?
Who is responsible for this calculation? I believe it to be possible and would like to make the point to the responsible representative of the people.

 

[MOTH]

I now favour changing the current warrior build to settler - then granary, settler, warrior, settler, warrior. Can we make 40 shields in 6 turns on a 6-4 oscillation?
Who is responsible for this calculation? I believe it to be possible and would like to make the point to the responsible representative of the people.

I think we could actually get granary,settler,settler, and then alternate warriors and settlers.

Once we have mined all 3 bonus grass we can run a 6 turn combo pump operating at size 4 and 5. The turns would be as follows:

turn 1 (size 4.10): Wines, BG*2, Fish = 5 sheilds towards warrior
turn 2 (size 4.13): Wines, BG*2, Fish = 5 sheilds and warrior will be built
turn 3 (size 4.16): Wines*2, BG*2, Forest on Growth = 7 sh towards settler
turn 4 (size 5.10): Wines, BG*3, Fish = 7 sh towards settler (14 total)
turn 5 (size 5.13): Wines, BG*3, Fish = 7 sh towards settler (21 total)
turn 6 (size 5.16): Wines*2, BG*3, Forest on Growth = 9 sh and settler is built

This would also let us share 1 Wine on 2 out of every 3 turns. Sharing the wine is always good as everyone gets a little tipsy and the party gets wild.

We could also make some runs up to size 4.16 to 6.13 and build 2 turn curraghs instead of warriors.

 

[mad-bax]

I support this plan wholeheartedly. Where is the iron?

Without iron this pattern cannot be sustained indefinitely, and if we do have iron then we may need to interrupt the build sequence for a rax so that we upgrade vets. Does the policy regarding settler escorts specify the minimum strength of unit?

 

[TimBentley]

Does the policy regarding settler escorts specify the minimum strength of unit?

I've been slow to open discussion there; it currently does not.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

Here are the tenative instructions: food is priority when we are building the settler, then shields take a step ahead when building the 60 shield granary, yet we still have good amounts of food in both cases. Comments? Did I make a mistake?