Secure iron in the east!

[alex_t]

I would highly recommend to send our settler in Immo to secure the iron in the east. I have marked (red circle) my favorite site but maybe the alternatives (yellow and blue X) would do even better. The next settler should move to the northern spot (red cricle) to secure our iron and get wine. The following settlers should close the gap between our empire and the outer iron city.

And this is the idea behind my proposal:

1. Prevent Rome from getting iron to produce their Legions
2. Build our Swordmen or Samurai army and crush the Romans
(3. Connect the nearby silks and get happy citizens )

I know there might still be iron under the roman fog, but i don't think so. At least they have not connected one yet. And even if they have some iron, we still have the silks in the future. If the plan works out, we will have an enormous strategic advantage.

Veni, vidi, vici

 

[Provolution]

Alex_T, good job in readin the national security plan, you interpreted it correctly, iron and silks as well as cutting the continent in two is the vision.

 

[BCLG100]

could we not move the city so it secures the horses and the iron immediately, then once we build a temple then it will still get the silks.

oh and welcome Alex

 

[Rik Meleet]

Welcome to the DemoGame.

I have several objctions against this plan.

1 - I have already located 7 sources of Iron (1 hidden in the fog in Babylonian lands, 5xSouth of Epolenep). If we manage to secure 3, there are still sufficient Iron sources for all. This will not block the Romans from Iron, but instead increase AI-AI trade. The trading partner is not a likely victim for attack, thus our chances of being victimised increase.
2 - The city is too far away, thus requires culture and defenders. This can and will prove a burden on our nation.
3 - We are unlikely to get there in time. Rome is build with Wheat and Cattle, thus can cranck out a settler quickly. We'll have a lot of time wasted if the settler has to return.

BTW:I see you have moved the Settler in Immo. This is an inreversible act, thus not allowed by Constitution article K. You could be charged with this crime. This is not a threat, but please be very careful when opening a save to have a look.

Article K. All irreversible game actions must progress during a
public turnchat, while reversible game actions(ie build
queues) that adhere to legal instruction can be prepared
offline.

 

[alex_t]

First, thank you for the warm welcome

Provolution, dividing the continent is crucial and I am with you with most of the points in your agenda. Although, I am not sure if we can win the wonder race for the Oracle or Hanging Gardens.

BCLG, getting the horses would not be my first priority, but as I already mentioned, I support every location that brings the iron and silks.

Rik, I did not notice I moved the settler; my appologies.
However, I still think getting the iron is crucial. All our neighbours are getting closer and closer, so we will have to go to war sooner or later, if we do not want to get behind. It think, it will take some time if Rome will be able to trade iron, and by that time we could already have control over the roman territory.

 

[RegentMan]

1 - I have already located 7 sources of Iron (1 hidden in the fog in Babylonian lands, 5xSouth of Epolenep). If we manage to secure 3, there are still sufficient Iron sources for all. This will not block the Romans from Iron, but instead increase AI-AI trade. The trading partner is not a likely victim for attack, thus our chances of being victimised increase.
2 - The city is too far away, thus requires culture and defenders. This can and will prove a burden on our nation.
3 - We are unlikely to get there in time. Rome is build with Wheat and Cattle, thus can cranck out a settler quickly. We'll have a lot of time wasted if the settler has to return.

I agree with all of those points Rik. Rome will get an iron source somehow, either via trading or securing one of there own.

 

[blackheart]

I like expanding out there, but I am against this proposal. If we found a city at the proposed location, it would be out of reach of our core city and would stretch us thin.

BTW, is that the German vision of PTW or C3c?

 

[invy]

Lets first get Wine . We will hardly be able to defend that east city if war comes faster than we expect and corruption will be too high.

 

[Gunner]

I agree that building a that city would spread ourselves too thin at this point and should not be done. Also, it would have a signifigant corruption burden which would make it difficult to get defenders and a temple going.

 

[GenMarshall]

I hope the Ministry of Domestic Affairs would look into this discussion page and possibly post a poll on this manner .

 

[Sir Donald III]

I have adopted your suggestion as an "Alternate site" in the "Pan-Japatanica" portion of my recent settlement proposal in the official expansion thread ("3rd city and beyond"), and have also posted a deeper expansion into the Silks for later. (Easier to ask forgiveness than permission.)

Actually, looking at it, the Red circle, combined with another city right on top of the Silks and near the Fish, looks a bit better than my original suggestion which would have forfeited the Horses.

 

[MSTK]

BTW:I see you have moved the Settler in Immo. This is an inreversible act, thus not allowed by Constitution article K. You could be charged with this crime. This is not a threat, but please be very careful when opening a save to have a look.

I think he pressed the Left Arrow key to move the view. I've done that many times in my games, and wound up accidentally moving a unit Of course, the Left Arrow Key does not move the screen in this game, but in other ones I play, it does.

 

[alex_t]

I have several objctions against this plan.

1 - I have already located 7 sources of Iron (1 hidden in the fog in Babylonian lands, 5xSouth of Epolenep). If we manage to secure 3, there are still sufficient Iron sources for all. This will not block the Romans from Iron, but instead increase AI-AI trade. The trading partner is not a likely victim for attack, thus our chances of being victimised increase.

Although my idea behind the story was an early war with Rome, I think it makes also sense on a peaceful path. Because we could be the one trading iron to Rome, which would make Rome thankful for ages.

2 - The city is too far away, thus requires culture and defenders. This can and will prove a burden on our nation.

Of course, this is an indisputable disadvantage, but the three resources in the surrounding area (horses, iron and silks) should outweight this disadvantage. "Trade Lovers" would agree, I guess.

3 - We are unlikely to get there in time. Rome is build with Wheat and Cattle, thus can cranck out a settler quickly. We'll have a lot of time wasted if the settler has to return.

The proposed location should be 8 or 9 turns away from Immo. That is not too far, but of course it is a gamble; but you have to take risk at some time in the game. I think it is worth taking that risk. Moving back 4 to 5 turns if it goes wrong is not a disaster.

BTW, is that the German vision of PTW or C3c?

It's the german version of C3C, blackheart. (I know we are playing a plain-vanilla Civ3, but I was runnig C3C and just wanted to have a look on the save).

I have adopted your suggestion as an "Alternate site" in the "Pan-Japatanica" portion of my recent settlement proposal in the official expansion thread ("3rd city and beyond"), and have also posted a deeper expansion into the Silks for later. (Easier to ask forgiveness than permission.)

Thank you for your support, SD3