SGOTM 10 - One Short Straw

[babybluepants]

If we're going to use the worker for chopping, then yes SE LB moves SW and explorer goes onto the eastern gold. But seeing as how we'll probably be revolting as soon as we settle the first city, can't we move the worker around and have him still return in time to execute a chop?

With Bureau and Serfdom + 2 more civics @ t0:

Chop in place (GH) = Worker in 3t 1300 AD (Sidebar: I'm actually getting different things here - 3t or 4t... Does the sequence of civic switch / city founding / starting chop matter? I always thought that anything you do within a turn is equivalent, but I'm often very wrong about game mechanics.)

Move 1E, chop (grass) = Worker in 4t 1305 AD

Explore SW-SE, return NW-NE, chop (GH) = Worker in 5t 1310 AD

Explore SW-SE, return NE-N, chop (grass) = Worker in 6t 1315 AD

2 Workers can farm the rice in 3t or chop another forest in 2t + 1t movement. How much does a WB cost? Is it 45h or does it have some scaling with advanced start? With free Engineer, 2 X 1fpt2hpt tile, PH site, bureau and forge, I think we could get 214h by t6 if we chop in place and follow with a 2-worker chop 1E. That's the first worker + 133h. We could have the fish and clam improved by then, for very rapid growth.

If we're talking about chopping on t0, are we all committed to settling the capital in place? I could still swing either way. It's a ridiculously great city site and immediate chopping gives us kind of a monster start, but I guess I have a mental block about committing to capital location and production before even moving a unit...

 

[babybluepants]

Chop in place (GH) = Worker in 3t 1300 AD (Sidebar: I'm actually getting different things here - 3t or 4t... Does the sequence of civic switch / city founding / starting chop matter? I always thought that anything you do within a turn is equivalent, but I'm often very wrong about game mechanics.)

Civic switches apply immediately not after anarchy... It is 3t 1300 AD.

 

[mdy]

If we're talking about chopping on t0, are we all committed to settling the capital in place? I could still swing either way. It's a ridiculously great city site and immediate chopping gives us kind of a monster start, but I guess I have a mental block about committing to capital location and production before even moving a unit...

If we settle in place neither of the gold mines will get the bureacracy bonus. Depending on the map we may not be able to work the golds easily without sharing one of the food sources with the capital which would make it even less attractive.

If we moved a longbow onto the gold hill and the other due east we could get more information without comitting our worker to anything

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

I agree, we should move the LBs, then decide on the explorer and the worker.

"Due east": isn't NE better?

 

[Soirana]

deleted into oblivion

 

[mdy]

Honestly by moving lower longbow we commit to moving explorer to opposite direction. I would move explorer on eastern gold repost screen shot and discuss further.

Why? We can't do anything more useful with the longbow regardless of what we do with the explorer.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

nevermind

 

[Soirana]

deleted into oblivion

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

I agree with Soirana... the 2 units shouldn't go in the same direction

 

[shyuhe]

Well looking at the fog, there is coast to the NE. So moving the NE LB only reveals fishing resources. 2E of the NE LB is coast, 2E1S is flat plains.

South of the grass gold hill is a desert hill, south (and east) of the plains gold hill is coast. So unless there's seafood over there, it's likely that our second city will be to the south. With that in mind, I propose:

NE LB move 1E and SE LB move 1SW. We can move the second settler onto the grass gold hill, which frees up our explorer.

Also, 2S of the SE LB should be a FP 1W of that is probably a FP as well.

 

[babybluepants]

If we settle in place neither of the gold mines will get the bureacracy bonus. Depending on the map we may not be able to work the golds easily without sharing one of the food sources with the capital which would make it even less attractive.

If we moved a longbow onto the gold hill and the other due east we could get more information without comitting our worker to anything

The chopping only makes sense if we settle in place. If we're not sure, then I think exploring with the worker for a turn is better, as it reveals way more terrain then anything else and we might still end up in a good spot for a slightly later bureau chop to the south.

I think we should do what shyuhe is proposing. S LB SW, Settler GH gold, N LB E. Then post a screenshot and decide what to do with the worker and explorer. It lets us hold off a bit on worker action, 'till we can hopefully start discussing city location. The only thing is, I might go N LB 1NE, since our explorer is likely to cover the east coast well later.

 

[shyuhe]

1NE for the northern LB only reveals tiles that we won't settle for a while. I would prefer to find more food sources for the gold mines.

 

[babybluepants]

Cool with me. We're potentially not leaving much for the explorer to do in this scenario, but hopefully LB 1E reveals some more land tiles that way...

 

[Soirana]

deleted into oblivion

 

[shyuhe]

Do we have any agreement on the movements of any of the units right now?

upper LB 1E, lower LB 1SW are my proposals - please post your thoughts so that we can get this rolling.

 

[Soirana]

deleted into oblivion

 

[babybluepants]

Sure. We should get it going. We won't get much more out of this discussion without more info.

 

[mdy]

I agree as well.

 

[PaulusIII]

Yep. Let's do this!

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Good for me too