SGOTM 11 - Fifth Element

[Dhoomstriker]

There's a trick i learnt for rivers: once in rivers mode, you can draw the river with mouse left and move. But you can delete the river from a single tile right clicking on that tile while in river mode. then you can draw again pressing left and move.

If you don't know this, you can actually spend hours in drawing a river shape.

That's a neat tip, thanks. However, the real problem is not whether you draw the Rivers by single mouse clicks or mouse dragging--both of those methods will give you the same results. The real problem is that River appearance is based on a repeating pattern, such that if you build an identical River 1 square east, the layout of the River will look different. Also, the layout of the River will look different based on which direction you draw it. It's that point about "starting your River on the right square" and then adjusting all of the surrounding terrain AFTERWARDS that becomes the key point. But don't take my word for it--try it yourself and you'll quickly see what I mean.

Sure... i was referring to Tanya, one of the hero units in that game, since you named her. Maybe she was in Red Alert? can we have a Colonel Burton, just in case?

Yes, Red Alert. Red Alert is based on tank warfare, so I assumed that you would understand my reference when I mentioned tanks.

How do you managed to draw signs in black? ususlly they have the color of your Civ.

As I mentioned, they are Barbarian-coloured signs, because they were drawn using the corresponding World Builder tool. I drew them so that I could place the Settler and Warrior again after every single terrain change, just in case the wrong terrain would reveal extra squares. If you accidentally place a Gandhi Lion, for example, you can easily reveal too many squares and then the whole point of the exercise would be defeated. I was afraid that a similar effect would happen if a distant Hills square or Peak square became visible because I hadn't yet put the Forests in place correctly during my intermediate steps of simulating the actual map.

The list of saves is OK for me, but no lines in their graphs. There's a chance that those Dwarves lovers (can we call them this way?) have just uploaded their save and not all of the links were updated from the database when you look at them.
I wait some hour, then if i see nothing new i'll PM Alan.

Thank you. The issue as I described it is still happening to me using Firefox, so please copy and paste my previous message into a PM to AlanH and you can mention that I was using Firefox as my browser, since he seems to care whether or not issues are browser-specific.

Talkin'bout Alan, have you seen his answer about Skype? I'm not sure how to interpret it. I think we can do even if he doesn't likes. At least he does not mention a rule infraction.

No, I did not see his answer. Did he post his reply publically? If so, in which thread? If he did it privately, then kindly forward on the Private Message, as I was not included as a recipient of said Private Message.

 

[BLubmuz]

Not since I started paying attention to the tech trading of AIs, which was probably after about my 10th game of Civ4. If you keep on top of the trading situation and you know which AIs do have Education and what their likeliness to trade it with other AIs will be (this info is all in the XML and can easily be downloaded from the forums in handy Excel spreadsheets, if you prefer), then you will not fall into this situation.

Hombre, i'm not a newbie and i can (and do) read the XMLs using the appropriate SW. And i'm also modding them for FFH or other mods. To better suite my taste.

I meant that No One AI has Education when i started Liberalism. My aim was AL i think or SP, so i delay it a lot. But i was relaxed since all the AIs would Edu in trade (F4).

Then damn Gandhi (yes, that bald little guy, i still remember that game) was the first to Liberalism. I suppose he popped a GS, bulbed Edu and with a spare GProphet he bulbed Lib. Anyway, he could NOT have researched both the hard way, even if he was few turns to complete Edu when i look to F4.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I've read Dhoom's game writeup (just the beginning to be honest) and he seems to regret to not have played a more "science oriented" game. Dhoom, please enlighten us!

The fact is that I do not know how! Some players seem to have amazingly quick Liberalism dates. Conquistador 63 is one such player. I was VERY surprised that he decided to play a lazy game in that Diplo game and went for the Cow award, instead of leveraging his ability to tech like crazy to compete.

An ultra-fast Liberalism date is not my specialty, so I don't have a clue about how to get it. I can make guesses, but they would only be guesses.


What I am used to doing is targeting certain Wonders and Religions and playing a game where I sometimes take risks to get some of them while other times I am almost certain to get them. I'm good at that kind of a game, so I am thus comfortable with a religious beelining strategy. That said, I am an adaptable player so I will play towards any other strategy that the team would rather play, but the more we talk about it, the less I see competition except for from a team that can get tech SO quickly that they have 50+ years of lost voting ahead of us being able to strongly compete. That would be the kind of Science-based approach that I would think could win this game, but I don't have the foggiest idea about how to execute such a strategy.

 

[havr]

We can't continue to spend tons of post, but mostly time without taking a decision.

We have only 2 for now, the research can be discussed later.

1) Where to move the warrior
for what i can see there're 2 chances:
1a) NW
1b) SW
1c) somewhere else (please specify)
those options seems to be the most discussed, so i've put a 3rd one in case i'm wrong.

2) Settler
2a) move to PH
2b) settle in place and maybe regret 1 second later

24 hours from the time of this post to decide.

My votes:
1b
2a

I already gave my reasons for the settler.
I don't actually care about the warrior, he can't reveal nothing interesting for our opening.

My votes:
1b
2b

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Hombre, i'm not a newbie and i can (and do) read the XMLs using the appropriate SW. And i'm also modding them for FFH or other mods. To better suite my taste.

I meant that No One AI has Education when i started Liberalism.

No offense, but that's not a very safe situation. When they don't have Paper, you can comfortably not watch the tech situation.

Otherwise, when you fear losing the race, you'll check every turn to every possible Liberalism-competitor as to what they will offer in trade for your Education. As long as they have a bit of Gold or a small tech available to trade to you, you can watch to see when they are close to researching Education. Looking at any F4 screen will not be sufficient.

It is POSSIBLE that he lightbulbed Liberalism, but I highly doubt that the AI lightbulbed two techs in a row. More realistically, he completed Education when he was almost finished it, had the tech runoff overflow into Liberalism, and just had about 2-3 more turns left on Liberalism to go. In that case, he didn't use a Great Person at all but just had a much better tech rate than yours. That situation is very plausible and I've seen it happen.

At that point, you need to decide if further research into Liberalism will likely be enough to beat the AI or maybe if declaring war on the AI and getting others to do so will disrupt that AI enough. If you declare war, sometimes they will switch tech research, they will surely lose trade route income, and you will certainly mess with their Health and Happiness levels by destroying their Resource trades... not to mention any pillaging of Cottages that you might do in a couple of turns.

damn Gandhi (yes, that bald little guy...)

Let's play a game where the other AIs feel the same way about our Religions, Wonders, and Liberalism beeline.

 

[BLubmuz]

With Copper, you have a square valued at 7 (6 Hammers + 1 Commerce).

Correct. Can you bet we have copper on that hill? I don't even if it's possible.

People who see one Gold Resource and think that it makes a big difference are the kind of players that don't see the equal or greater value of working several River squares. Those are the same kind of players than think a Science rate of 40% is bad to have, so they'd rather stick with just 3 cities the entire game. See the analogy? Sometimes you have to open your mind past the obvious one-square benefit and see that working multiple River squares adds up just as much over time.

I agree. But try to perform a CS sling without gold and not being Financial. Then, youll work your riverside cottages.

BTW, settling on the PH will probably give us more riverside tiles instead of those poor tiles to the West. But:

I don't wanna settle there, i wanna see what there is over there. 2 gold hills? 2 Dyes? 4 gems? tundra? ice? if you don't climb it you won't know until too late.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Maybe a test is in order.

While I agree that more tests will help, I don't see a lot of other players jumping in to try. Both Mitchum and I have provided appropriate test games to work from. Irgy and Mitchum have already run some test games... will anyone else volunteer?

The benefit of following a more traditional tech path (e.g. Agriculture -> BW -> Wheel -> Pottery -> Writing, etc.) is not just for early REX. It also ensures that our cities develop faster. We are able to build critical infrastructure sooner (e.g. granaries and libraries), make tile improvements sooner (cottages, roads, etc.), chop and whip sooner, etc.

Early game, you probably won't be working Cottages, if you can instead get more benefit from working squares like Corn and Copper (or at least a Plains Hills River square). Cottages will come into play after you've got 3+ cities and are starting to feel the Corruption Crunch.

Our strategy has us grabbing Writing relatively early on, right after Bronze Working. If you'd rather delay Writing and fit in The Wheel -> Pottery immediately before researching Writing, that was also one of the options presented and is something that we can try for, but we'll have to test that possibility as we get closer in our game to that point, so that we'll be certain of getting our tech of choice from The Oracle.

So, minimally we'll have access to Libraries relatively early and if we want and a test game supports us doing so, can fit in Granaries first. However, note that Granaries usually don't do much for you in the early game--just like a Barracks won't do much for you in the early game. Instead, you'd rather just keep your population high and build more Settlers, instead of whipping a Granary and not having time to grow again before wanting to start on the Settlers.

A true REX usually does not involve Granaries to begin with, as the point of a REX is to pump out Settlers before building a Granary or much other infrastructure.

 

[BLubmuz]

That's a neat tip, thanks. However, the real problem is not whether you draw the Rivers by single mouse clicks or mouse dragging--both of those methods will give you the same results. The real problem is that River appearance is based on a repeating pattern, such that if you build an identical River 1 square east, the layout of the River will look different. Also, the layout of the River will look different based on which direction you draw it. It's that point about "starting your River on the right square" and then adjusting all of the surrounding terrain AFTERWARDS that becomes the key point. But don't take my word for it--try it yourself and you'll quickly see what I mean.

You're welcome. You'll be surprise to see my WB things. I can do what i want with rivers

Yes, Red Alert. Red Alert is based on tank warfare, so I assumed that you would understand my reference when I mentioned tanks.

Sure, but also choppers are great there

Thank you. The issue as I described it is still happening to me using Firefox, so please copy and paste my previous message into a PM to AlanH and you can mention that I was using Firefox as my browser, since he seems to care whether or not issues are browser-specific.

No, I did not see his answer. Did he post his reply publically? If so, in which thread? If he did it privately, then kindly forward on the Private Message, as I was not included as a recipient of said Private Message.

No he PMed me, but since you and the others were BCC i thought you received it.

np, here it is

Spoiler :

Hi Alan,
i got a question:
we're thinking to use Skype in playing our Turnsets.
It now allows other people connected to see the desktop of one ot them, while speaking live.
i.e., if i'm the up player, my teammates can see what i'm doing and help me to decide in case of AI demands or else.

Do this will fit with the rules? I think so, but better safe than sorry.

I just hope my teammates will forgive my less-than perfect spoken english.

Thanks in advance, ciao.

I'm not enthusiastic about use of other media for discussions between team members, mainly because such discussions are not shared with the wider CFC community, and are not available for analysis by staff now, or to other teams after the game ends.

In this case, it sounds as if you plan to play the game as a collaborative activity in real time. That is not really what a succession game is about. "Succession" implies one player at a time making the decisions during a turn set, not everyone sharing in them.

Last, for this "maintenance post", i posted this in the Maintenance thread.

Spoiler :

I've noticed there're no graphs corresponding to T'dr'duzk b'hazg t't.
Great effort to copy/paste their name... They deserve the Wooden Spoon for that thing only.

I think that many other players or lurkers have noticed this, so it's more appropriate post the issue in that thread than PM to Alan.

 

[Mitchum]

but the more we talk about it, the less I see competition except for from a team that can get tech SO quickly that they have 50+ years of lost voting ahead of us being able to strongly compete. That would be the kind of Science-based approach that I would think could win this game, but I don't have the foggiest idea about how to execute such a strategy.

Hmm... I don't know if I agree with this. A team only has to be a bit faster than us tech wise by getting to Mass Media a handful of turns before us. Assuming both teams have a GE to burn and ample production to be able to produce the UN in a few turns, said team COULD win the UN election and a diplo victory in their first attempt, thus beating us due to building the UN marginally faster than us. Whether they win the vote via luck or via intelligent diplomacy (which may or may not include religion as the major lever), the team that gets to MM and builds the UN the fastest will have the first chance at winning, right?

So, I would contend that to win, we should focus on a game that gets us to MM the fastest with the best opportunity to build the UN as quickly as possible (2 GEs?). Then, by our cunning and intelligent use of diplomacy, we'll win the vote the first time by manipulating all levers available to us (e.g. religion, wars, trading, civics, spies, etc.).

Or, we could almost guarantee victory on our first UN vote via the religion hammer (a really big lever where we control 80% of the religions), knowing that we've gotten to MM somewhat sub-optimally. In this scenario, we're either playing for second place or hoping that the first team(s) to build the UN can't win on the first vote and have to monkey around trying to win friends and influence AI.

Or, we could go for a cultural game where we are almost guaranteed the best possible cultural victory date due to Dhoomstrikers experience. The question is, how would this "best" cultural game compare to the "best" or even a "mediocre" diplo game?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I don't wanna settle there

Then let's not move the Settler there, please. Hold your horses until the Warrior gets there and we're well on our way to either building the next Warrior or a Worker.

, i wanna see what there is over there. 2 gold hills? 2 Dyes? 4 gems? tundra? ice? if you don't climb it you won't know until too late.

If it's that good, we will certainly pump out a Settler at Size 2. I'm thinking that we will do so anyway, or possibly at Size 3, but we'll get a Settler out soon enough if its a decent site and ASAP if its as good as 2 Gold Hills + 2 Dyes + 4 Grassland Gems + 1 Food Resource. If it is, then great... we have 2 Legendary Cities. If we were to settle on the Plains Hills square, then we'd only have 1 Legendary City and would have to walk much farther to find another location.

Plus, most of our cities will likely be settled to the north, considering that there is Tundra to the south and a Temperate Climate will not place much land on the map with Tundra on it--we are very likely only going to have 1-2 more cities directly to the south of our starting location, so for Palace Corruption purposes, in place and 1E are slightly better, as well.

 

[BLubmuz]

While I agree that more tests will help, I don't see a lot of other players jumping in to try. Both Mitchum and I have provided appropriate test games to work from. Irgy and Mitchum have already run some test games... will anyone else volunteer?

I will surely run tests once we have decided where to settle and we can see our BFC. Otherwise is time lost.

 

[Mitchum]

I will surely run tests once we have decided where to settle and we can see our BFC. Otherwise is time lost.

Yes and no. When is the last time you won a diplo victory? How about a cultural victory? Do you know the subtleties required to get an AI to vote for you? Do you know what will and won't work to get an AI running Free Religion to switch back to a state religion? Do you know based on experience (not HOF dates) whether cultural or diplo is faster based on the constraints placed on this game?

I don't. I think running two quick games would give me a bit more insight into the preferred victory condition for this game and possible snags we could run into in the future. Now, just me running a test is beneficial for me and what I can share to the team based on my experience. If we all run two test games and compare end dates for each VC, we'll have a better idea about a) which VC is preferred, b) which strategy for that VC would be preferred (early religion vs. standard opening, etc.), and c) any pitfalls related to our intended VC based on the experience of 7 players having played the same map shooting for the same VC. I think this would be an eye-opening experience for everyone (except maybe Dhoomstriker). But I would prefer that we all (or as many as possible) play both games.

If this is too taxing time wise, just play one game for the VC you think is the best for this game. I'm assuming a game played rather speedily on Quick can be played in a few hours, right?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

said team COULD win the UN election and a diplo victory in their first attempt... Whether they win the vote via luck or via intelligent diplomacy

A very valid point.

So, I would contend that to win, we should focus on a game that gets us to MM the fastest

That's my weakness. I don't know how to play that kind of a game. Our team is relatively inexperienced in terms of teching quickly. You're probably the best on our team at that, so we'd need to rely on you for most of our major decisions. Are you confident enough in your skills and comfortable enough in this role? If yes to both questions, then it is an option, but it would certainly not involve a religious-beelining strategy (I just don't know WHAT said fast-teching strategy DOES involve).

with the best opportunity to build the UN as quickly as possible (2 GEs?).

I disagree with needing 2 Great Engineers. 1 Great Engineer can get you 90% of the Wonder in a large city, or 75% of it a medium-sized city. Great Engineers are hard to come by and a 2nd Great Engineer woudl be better used on Wonders such as Apostolic Palace, Taj Mahal, and The Pyramids (if you can get one early enough and no one beats you to that Wonder by the time that you get said Great Engineer), which are expensive but high-value Wonders. Sure, we should use ONE Great Engineer on The United Nations for a Diplo game, but 2 would be a waste, in my eyes. I'd rather focus on getting a single, large, relatively-high-production city. If we plan to give that city away, we can very quickly whip it down to size 1 by whipping a ton of units and buildings that we don't plan to complete on the turn before we trade it away, so as not to give 17 votes to an AI from that city's large population value. We could even build a nearby city or two afterwards, to steal back most of that city's squares, in order to get the most value of those squares for ourselves and to prevent that city from regrowing quickly.

Then, by our cunning and intelligent use of diplomacy, we'll win the vote the first time by manipulating all levers available to us (e.g. religion, wars, trading, civics, spies, etc.).

That is my belief--that we'll win on the first vote, assuming that we go for a Diplo game.

Or, we could almost guarantee victory on our first UN vote via the religion hammer (a really big lever where we control 80% of the religions), knowing that we've gotten to MM somewhat sub-optimally. In this scenario, we're either playing for second place or hoping that the first team(s) to build the UN can't win on the first vote and have to monkey around trying to win friends and influence AI.

To be honest, I thought that we were only playing for 2nd or 3rd place. 1st place in a Diplo game requires a lot of luck (so there's no point PLANNING on winning when luck is involved) and no one seems to believe that Cultural will take Gold. Since Fifth Element has never come anywhere close to the Laurels (6th or 7th place or so was the highest that they'd ever scored in the rankings), I figured that even getting ANY Laurel was going to be a pretty big win for the team.

 

[BLubmuz]

I disagree with needing 2 Great Engineers. 1 Great Engineer can get you 90% of the Wonder in a large city, or 75% of it a medium-sized city. Great Engineers are hard to come by and a 2nd Great Engineer woudl be better used on Wonders such as Apostolic Palace, Taj Mahal, and The Pyramids (if you can get one early enough and no one beats you to that Wonder by the time that you get said Great Engineer), which are expensive but high-value Wonders.

I agree that 1 GE is enough for the UN on a mid-sized city.
Burn a GE for Taj was a pre-BtS trick. In BtS is just a waste.

To be honest, I thought that we were only playing for 2nd or 3rd place. 1st place in a Diplo game requires a lot of luck (so there's no point PLANNING on winning when luck is involved) and no one seems to believe that Cultural will take Gold. Since Fifth Element has never come anywhere close to the Laurels (6th or 7th place or so was the highest that they'd ever scored in the rankings), I figured that even getting ANY Laurel was going to be a pretty big win for the team.

We're playing for a laurel. possibly not the Wooden Spoon.

Like we did in any other game.

I'm very strong in the opening and in the late game but for some reason i make a lot of mistakes in the mid game. Strategic mistakes, i mean.

And often many members were too busy to actively contribute to the strategy and in some game i became demotivated.
Here we seem to have great motivations and probably the skills to do better.

My neurons (both) are still on strike about strategies and so on. They let me know that they need a mountain climate to start working again.
I've tried to convince them bribing with some more holidays, but no way. They want to climb that hill (an holy mountain, perhaps?), look at that beautiful landscape, then they promise me they will work with doubled energy.

Well, we know that Management - Labour relations are tricky, often more than a Diplo game, but i must trust them. It's all i have to think in the end.

 

[Irgy]

To be honest, I don't expect the overall plan of beelining religeons to cost us all that much in terms of tech time. The only tech that's really out of the way is Theology, otherwise none of the other techs are wasted, and they should provide good trading material.

The only reason it could cost us a lot in terms of tech pace is if we make big sacrifices (like late agriculture ). The Monotheism detour will cost a bit but I don't think it will be all that critical actually.

Of course it's not the same as a truely dedicated fast-tech path, but unless someone knows exactly what that is it doesn't help. Going all-out to Liberalism isn't that great anyway though if we're not then set up to follow through to Mass Media (although maybe we would be anyway, I don't know). Compared to a less dedicated but still fast technology focused path though I don't think the religeons will slow it down that much.

I'm happy with aiming for 2nd or 3rd (with an off chance of 1st anyway), I just don't want to aim for the middle of the pack.

 

[BLubmuz]

Yes and no. When is the last time you won a diplo victory? How about a cultural victory? Do you know the subtleties required to get an AI to vote for you? Do you know what will and won't work to get an AI running Free Religion to switch back to a state religion? Do you know based on experience (not HOF dates) whether cultural or diplo is faster based on the constraints placed on this game?

Long time, i think. But don't be duped by the quick speed:
first, things are a lot different than in Epic and you need a strong MM. Ways more than Epic. For a non competitive game you can't avoid to watch your cities every turn on Epic, but you must do it on quick, since every H,F,C counts a lot more.

I suggest we keep the same settings of this game to have a decent comparison and training.

I can try a Culture, maybe asking Dhoom some trick. We can even set up a sort of SG like the one we frozen and playing it using the Skype thing.
So we can better practice just in case.

We can test a Diplo game when we know our in-game opponents.
Or we can just put the best jerks around in it.

 

[Irgy]

As far as the warrior move goes, everyone except me has voted SW, so I'll give up and go with that for the sake of consensus. I'm not that fussed anyway. So:

First move PPP
1. Move the warrior SW.
2. Save, post a screenshot.


The settler move is still somewhat controvertial though. Either option is a big risk. I don't like the idea of walking up the hill only to walk down again, it seems something we would only do if the land SE was desperately bad, as it will end up wasting two turns before we settle, possibly in the same spot we started in anyway. It's such a gamble either way that we're unlikely to come to consensus. We have all the facts we can get already really, we just need to pick one option and take the risk.

 

[BLubmuz]

As far as the warrior move goes, everyone except me has voted SW, so I'll give up and go with that for the sake of consensus. I'm not that fussed anyway. So:

First move PPP
1. Move the warrior SW.
2. Save, post a screenshot.


The settler move is still somewhat controvertial though. Either option is a big risk. I don't like the idea of walking up the hill only to walk down again, it seems something we would only do if the land SE was desperately bad, as it will end up wasting two turns before we settle, possibly in the same spot we started in anyway. It's such a gamble either way that we're unlikely to come to consensus. We have all the facts we can get already really, we just need to pick one option and take the risk.

PPP approved. Go on. No need to wait.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Arguments against moving to the Plains Hills square

Correct. Can you bet we have copper on that hill?

No, there is no such guarantee. I was simply making a case for the fact that I would rather work that Plains Hills square in the case where the is no there Copper Resource as well as the case where there is a a Copper Resource there, compared to settling on said Plains Hills River square. If it were instead next to a Lake (still getting the Fresh Water bonus) and thus didn't have the River Commerce bonus (from working the Mined Plains Hills square) and if there were clearly nicer squares around it (Tundra Hills and Tundra-converted-Forests are not evocative of this possibilty, neither are Forests or Hills that we cannot see beyond), then and only then would I give settling on the Plains Hills square more weight.


What is it exactly that you are hoping to scout for in terms of Resources by going SE with the Settler? We're all pretty convinced that Forested squares will not contain Resources, outside of rare map types like Arboria that put Deer Resources on Grassland Forest squares (you won't see those here unless they were edited-in by the Map Creator).

The Tundra Hills square is probably just that--a Tundra Hills square. Even if it contains Silver, that Silver likely comes with at least 1 more Tundra square, making it a worse combination than 2 Grassland Cottage squares. I don't see us basing a Civil Service slingshot around a Tundra Silver square--I wouldn't do it around a Desert Gold, either, which is a better square--only on a Plains Gold square or possibly a Grassland Gem square. So, the early benefit of this low possibility would not pay off, in my mind.

What else would we see? Well, we'd see the squares to the S+S and S+S+S of the Settler's initial location. They are both Grassland River squares, that much we already know. We'd get the northern one by settling either in place or 1E anyway, so other than what's on the Tunrda Hills square, it's only the square to the S+S+S that we'd reveal a potential Resource on that would make settling on the Plains Hills square any different.


So, you'd risk losing 2 moves just to see what possible Resources are on a Tundra Hills square and a River Grassland square? That's not a good trade, in my eyes.

Just to show you what I'm talking about, I'll upload a screenshot of what we'd see if only the Settler moved to the Plains Hills square. Although, yes, we'd reveal more squares by way of being able to fog-gaze them, what we WOULD NOT SEE are any additional Resources on those squares. So, we'd only get TWO squares that could contain Resources showing us whether or not Resources exist. Can you really justify the Settler's movement in this manner as a scouting mission? Honestly?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

PPP approved. Go on. No need to wait.

What??? How can you move the Warrior? We don't have a primary and secondary settling location determined. We can't say for sure where to move the Warrior until then. I will tell you what I think is the best spot to move the Warrior once we have this settling perspective in place.

People are still flip-flopping in their votes, anyway, and some of us have not even cast a vote, so you can't even claim that there is an official majority.

EDIT: Until we have relative consensus on our strategy and our resulting settling location, moving the Warrior can waste the chance to gain valuable information on either Turn 0 or Turn 1, depending upon where we plan to move. If anyone still thinks that moving to the Plains Hills square with the Settler is the way to go, then moving the Warrior SW is a mistake.