SGOTM 01 - V Q

[namliaM]

What does yall think the is for?

Took a stab at a dotty for discussion.

Up north 3 is taking the spot of 2 cities. Thinking about it now....
3 should be W-W of the horses.
We can then fit in another city E or E-E(on the Dessert tile) of 3
2 should/could go 1 east or west as well.

I numbered them in the way I think we should settle them.

Offcourse if there is an istmuss with a good spot for a city we should take that first (if still available). But if we go for that city far away we want a second connecting city asap.

Re-thinking my previous post... Get a settler out now, dirrectly following the worker. Then grow to 4, and build and whip another settler ASAP. Then mids?

For worker actions I would go, Farm (1 turn on the FP), Pasture, Back to the FP to finish farm, Mine & road (hill NW of Cow), Irrigate & Road Rice, Quarry stone & Road to offcourse

We got lucky with the 5 forrest... We can chop atleast 1 for the mids...

 

[Maquis]

Do we want to farm the grassland or the fps?

I'd say farm a floodplain. This way we can work the mine and/or querry while building the Pyramids... extra food this early will help jump-start some production...

 

[bobrath]

Agreed that #3 is much better in the spot 2W of horses.

I'd actually settle the new 3 before 2, but that's dependant upon more exploration to see what's going on down southwest. I'd settle 3 adter locking off our western border because it gives us access to our UU and the fishes to make it more whippable.

I'm not sold at all on site 4, mainly because I dislike overlapping fat crosses. The clams and coastal location are plusses for it, but I suspect we may find a better 4th site as we explore/expand.

 

[Maquis]

I numbered them in the way I think we should settle them.

Do we want to settle up by the horses first? Depends on if we want access to our UU early...

I like the idea of moving #3, but how about 3 tiles west, one north. Put it on the coast, get access to fish, plaus the 2 cows and the horse. Decent production for sea vessels...

 

[eektor]

If we are planning on an early war, I would say settle horses first. If we are not, then I like the 1st site.

I disagree with the second site. I think the 3rd site should go second and the 2nd site 3rd.

About the 3rd site, how bout 2 west and one south of the horses? That way you get the two cows, horse, and a fish. Only downside is two tiles that overlap with the capital, but there are plenty of good tiles to work in that city. Basically I agree with Maquis. The way you said it confused me a bit, but I see that its the same place I was suggesting to settle.

Edit: I actually like the 4th site. Granted if we explore and find better places we should settle there before the 4th site.

 

[namliaM]

Do we want to settle up by the horses first? Depends on if we want access to our UU early...

I like the idea of moving #3, but how about 3 tiles west, one north. Put it on the coast, get access to fish, plaus the 2 cows and the horse. Decent production for sea vessels...

Thats what I said below the screeny...

I think if there is an istmuss, and it looks that way... Then we will want to seal it... ASAP which means another city even before 1. Or should we settle 1 anyway even if there is an istmuss?

We want our UU I think, take out Cathy or atleast take her down a bit. In the short on longer run even for Diplo, we want her out! We will have at least the - for 'close borders'

 

[namliaM]

From where we can see now, to the south (across from the scout) I can see Jungle. That means if Cathy is indeed due south (-east) she may be inside a jungle, having problems of her own to contend with ...

 

[eektor]

Ok, if you put it two west of the horses you lose one cow. One south will get you an extra cow. That's why I thought Maquis was thinking where I suggested since he said we would get fish, 2 cows, and a horse.

 

[Maquis]

The only reason I suggested one north was to elimiate any overlap with Thebes. We'd still get the same resources if we went south instead of north.

 

[bobrath]

Is picking up the cow worth having two tiles overlap with the capital? I sometimes find myself concentrating too much on the iconic resources and not the lay of the land. In addition to the tile over lap, we'd be trading off ocean for forests. That's not a bad trade until you realize that the forests are also needed by the capital and chopping becomes a potential problem. Part of this depends on what the max size of the capital is going to be. Will it be able to reach 20? If not, then having overlapping tiles isn't as big of a deal.

Re: the Isthmus. If we found a city there.. then site 1 becomes less urgent unless you treat it as a road extension. Site 1 has 3 mountains in it (dead tiles), so its got that in the way for long term growth.

 

[bobrath]

Looking just at that, we've got +8 extra food (unimproved) and -8 food loss. So from a pure "can we feed the people" point of view, the capital can easily sustain 20+ people. We could actually accept a tile or two overlap - depends on which tiles tho. Yes the capital will have health and happy problems, but it has the making of being a monster.

I know founding our first site on the isthmus will hurt for maintenance, but if it cuts off aggresive AI settling, then its obviously worth it. The prospective site 2W of the horses seems to do a very nice job of being the "real" second city site. It provides access to a key resource and is at the optimal distance (no overlap or lost space). Just missing on the second cows isn't a huge deal - our culture will take it easily if we want to trade/gift them.

 

[ChrTh]

So, um, should I build a settler next?

 

[eektor]

When I suggested going one south of what you guys said before, it wasn't that that city will be taking the grassland and the fresh water lake from the capital. The capital should be using those tiles. I'm just willing to accept the maximum worker on the other city to be 18.

If we go one south, we would get more hammers. Other spot we will knock down a forest to put the city. we would have 4 water, 1 hill, and a grassland that the other city would be put on. Going south, we get that forest tile, 1 hill, 1 water, and 1 cow on the plain.

I think I'm a little off, but what I see is we are trading 3 waters, for a forest and cow. Not too bad a trade I think.

 

[bobrath]

I think I'm a little off, but what I see is we are trading 3 waters, for a forest and cow. Not too bad a trade I think.

giving up 3 waters to pick up forest and cow and lose two workable tiles to the capital.

I'm probably going devil's advocate on this now and will hush.

Next build? How many turns left on the barracks? Grow til 4 and then either switch to a settler or get a warrior going so that we can protect the settler en route.

 

[ChrTh]

Screenshot makes it look like there is 27 turns left on the Rax, that will decrease once cows are online.

Looking at the screenshot, I'm wondering if the cows are actually on the river, I may have to road it as well.

 

[bobrath]

Not sure if a resource on the corner of a river counts... good question. If you have namliam's example save its easy to check

 

[Maquis]

Yes, 27 turns left on 'rax (epic sucks!) We could switch to settler one we grow to size 4 (but we just grew to 3, so size 4 will be (?) 10+ turns? By the time we grow the cows will be on line, so hard to say how many turns are left on 'rax at that point.

I think ChrTh is right, will have to road the cows... the river just touches on the corner, so cows are not on the river...

As far as where to put #3, I wish I had taken a better screen to show where the silver is

We might be able to get the silver in #3 also, depending on location....

 

[bobrath]

I think waiting on settler until we grow to 4 is a good idea - so do we put hammers into a warrior prior to the settler or do we get further along on the rax? We're prolly ok on barbs for a bit, but our second city will be barb bait sooner rather then later I suspect.

 

[namliaM]

Screenshot makes it look like there is 27 turns left on the Rax, that will decrease once cows are online.

Looking at the screenshot, I'm wondering if the cows are actually on the river, I may have to road it as well.

It devinatly is on the river....

I would go for the settler NOW, directly after the worker. Waiting the turns to grow to 4 may be to long to claim any istmus if there.

IIRC the silver is on the outermost point of our land. I should have captured it in my screeny too. I currently dont have access to CIV so, will have to wait...
The proposed #3 W of the cow would need atleast expansion level 4 or 5 to get the silver. So if we want the silver any time soon (would be nice for the happy face) we will need to settle a crappy-ish tundra 'fishing' town up there. Either on top of the Silver or just SE or SW of it...

Edit:
The istmus may be less important than we thing. Looking at the screeny I took there is a Coast/coast crossing SW of the sugar. If we leave site 2 maybe cathy will settle it and we can take it from her... If She is indeed in knee deep jungle (which I seriously hope for) City 2 would be a good prospect for her. Jungle offcourse is known for Gems... More

I would definatly research BW ASAP. If there is copper up north this may scew all our planning...

 

[Maquis]

So if we want the silver any time soon (would be nice for the happy face)

We won't need the happy if we get the 'mids. Representation will give us +3 happy most likely...