Just to show support: I agree that the iron should not interfere with our placement of CivGeneral's Seaport
The next few turns...
- Thread starter Chamnix
- Start date
fe3333au
Deity
Enthusiatic agreement 
Rambuchan
The Funky President
General_W said:
Conquest barbs tend to move only NW/SE. If our warrior was not directly SE of them, they probably saw something to their NW that made them move (rival settler, worker, town, warrrior?)
Current Plans in Motion:
General_W said:
Tough call on the whale. If we settle on the ivory, we will never get the whale (another town there is too close). The problem with moving 1 SW is that we have no productive tile to work. We can either work the forest or the fish. The forest is only +1 food, and I would hate to work a 1 food tile this early when food is critical. The fish is no shields which means it will take forever to get our navy. I don't think we can afford our third town to be unproductive for a long time, so I think we stick with the original plan.
General_W said:
I think our warrior needs to continue exploring. We should have 2 warriors produced in the homeland for defense within 3 turns.
General_W said:
It is critical that our new worker mines one of the BGs W or NW-W of Athens. Which one? I can't come up with a good reason to favor either.
I will post something similar in the instructions to the President thread in a few hours, but I want to give some time for comments to change my mind.
Rambuchan
The Funky President
Not sure where to post my thoughts on the wandering / exploring warriors. 'Next few turns' seems a good place to do it.
I would like to suggest that the western warrior explores due north along the coast.
Ivory Coast view:
And the northern warrior explores east and north east, we can cover that eastern coastline later with new warriors.
Northern view:
I would like to suggest that the western warrior explores due north along the coast.
Ivory Coast view:
And the northern warrior explores east and north east, we can cover that eastern coastline later with new warriors.
Northern view:
fe3333au
Deity
sounds good Ram ...
At the same time I'd suggest that the 3rd rover should skirt the western edge of Dismal Swamp ... Just remember that there's a damned Suren nest out there somewhere ...
At the same time I'd suggest that the 3rd rover should skirt the western edge of Dismal Swamp ... Just remember that there's a damned Suren nest out there somewhere ...
General_W said:
Is this correct? Are we going with 5 spt with slower growth, or was a citizen moved after you wrote this?
General_W said:
I am going to respond to this after a little analysis it looks very close. I agree completely that we should avoid wasting worker turns and stacking workers after roads are built if often better, but because the river is in the way, I am not sure this is the best time to do that. I thought Id get the rest of this post up, then deal with the hard stuff.
General_W said:
All things being equal, inland is better than the coast since the curraghs can reveal the coast faster. I would really like to know what is to our NW because the disappearing barbs may be trying to tell us something, but I dont have any strong feelings.
General_W said:
Worker!!!!
I agree with Chamnix. I think the Northern guy should try and see what distracted the barbs, even if it means going right throught he swamp. I never knew that about the directionality they prefer. Very cool to know.
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Chamnix:
Unfortunately, I believe that IS correct. The governor keeps switching citizen workers to the forest when the Pop changes. I'm gonna try to turn the governor off... again.
(I forgot to check citizen tile placement this morning I was too focused on the city #3 placement and worker direction discussions and I barely made it to work on time as it was. Anyway whine whine whine. It won't happen again!)
Plan is still Max pop and science.
Unfortunately, I believe that IS correct. The governor keeps switching citizen workers to the forest when the Pop changes. I'm gonna try to turn the governor off... again.
(I forgot to check citizen tile placement this morning I was too focused on the city #3 placement and worker direction discussions and I barely made it to work on time as it was. Anyway whine whine whine. It won't happen again!)
Plan is still Max pop and science.
Stuff happens we are all human, and we will make the best of it. I dont think you can do anything about the governor he will always assign something on growth, and he will always take something away when the town shrinks. I think to minimize harm you have to have it set to maximize production, but really he will never do what you want, and you still will have to adjust periodically.
As I see it, we will have 3 food and 5 shields at the start of our next turn. We can grow in 3 by working cow + forest for another turn (3 food and 5 shields again), then change to cow + wheat for 2 turns (7 food and 3 shields plus 2 shields on growth). If we stick with warrior->warrior, then our second warrior will be done at size 3 with 7 food in the bin. We can then start the factory slightly larger than necessary, but we lose the masked settlers. The end result compared to the original plan is our factory is 2 turns behind, and we lose the masking, but we have 1 warrior more than we would have had.
I think a better result may be to change to curragh now. We can complete the curragh in 3 turns on growth easily and be ready to build a warrior to start the factory. The end result compared to the original plan is we start our factory 1 turn later, but we have a curragh instead of a warrior. It may even work out better for us.
If we go with the curragh, then forget working the forest. We will overrun by 2 shields so instead of working the forest, we should work the elephant for some extra coins. Ill post a summary if people agree on the concept and can accept a curragh from Athens instead of a warrior. We still have a warrior coming from the Black Hole, and we will get a warrior from Athens after the curragh (in 5 turns total), then every 6 turns thereafter.
We need to decide this before our next turn if we stick with warrior, he will complete on the next IBT.
Now, regarding worker turns to compare the stacked approach (worker on BG roads then mines, other worker comes to help mine as soon as he finishes his mine) vs. the unstacked approach (worker on BG mines then roads, other worker does other projects). First, Ill look at commerce. The road will be completed 6 turns earlier using the stacked approach, but we will not work that tile until size 4 in any case. If we use the stacked approach, we actually will not work it until size 4 with 6 food in the bin (we cannot work it until it is mined, and the following turn is the turn the mine will complete). Net result stacking gains us 1 gold.
Second issue is shields. The mine will be done 1 turn earlier using the unstacked approach, but either way the mine will be completed in time to keep the factory running. Net result none.
Third issue is worker turns. I think we lose a worker turn by stacking. If we look 10 turns out (arbitrarily), under stacking, worker 1 spends 4 turns mining, 1 turn moving across the river, 2 turns mining, and 3 turns moving to/working on next project. Worker 2 spends 3 turns roading, 4 turns mining, and 3 turns moving to/working on next project for a total of 6 worker turns on next projects.
Unstacked, worker 1 spends 4 turns mining and 6 turns moving to/working on next project. Worker 2 spends 6 turns mining, 3 turns roading, and 1 turn moving to next project for a total of 7 worker-turns on the next project.
Since I think 1 worker turn is more valuable than 1 gold, my conclusion is we should continue to look for opportunities to stack, but in this case, the river crossing makes it unproductive.
As I see it, we will have 3 food and 5 shields at the start of our next turn. We can grow in 3 by working cow + forest for another turn (3 food and 5 shields again), then change to cow + wheat for 2 turns (7 food and 3 shields plus 2 shields on growth). If we stick with warrior->warrior, then our second warrior will be done at size 3 with 7 food in the bin. We can then start the factory slightly larger than necessary, but we lose the masked settlers. The end result compared to the original plan is our factory is 2 turns behind, and we lose the masking, but we have 1 warrior more than we would have had.
I think a better result may be to change to curragh now. We can complete the curragh in 3 turns on growth easily and be ready to build a warrior to start the factory. The end result compared to the original plan is we start our factory 1 turn later, but we have a curragh instead of a warrior. It may even work out better for us.
If we go with the curragh, then forget working the forest. We will overrun by 2 shields so instead of working the forest, we should work the elephant for some extra coins. Ill post a summary if people agree on the concept and can accept a curragh from Athens instead of a warrior. We still have a warrior coming from the Black Hole, and we will get a warrior from Athens after the curragh (in 5 turns total), then every 6 turns thereafter.
We need to decide this before our next turn if we stick with warrior, he will complete on the next IBT.
Now, regarding worker turns to compare the stacked approach (worker on BG roads then mines, other worker comes to help mine as soon as he finishes his mine) vs. the unstacked approach (worker on BG mines then roads, other worker does other projects). First, Ill look at commerce. The road will be completed 6 turns earlier using the stacked approach, but we will not work that tile until size 4 in any case. If we use the stacked approach, we actually will not work it until size 4 with 6 food in the bin (we cannot work it until it is mined, and the following turn is the turn the mine will complete). Net result stacking gains us 1 gold.
Second issue is shields. The mine will be done 1 turn earlier using the unstacked approach, but either way the mine will be completed in time to keep the factory running. Net result none.
Third issue is worker turns. I think we lose a worker turn by stacking. If we look 10 turns out (arbitrarily), under stacking, worker 1 spends 4 turns mining, 1 turn moving across the river, 2 turns mining, and 3 turns moving to/working on next project. Worker 2 spends 3 turns roading, 4 turns mining, and 3 turns moving to/working on next project for a total of 6 worker turns on next projects.
Unstacked, worker 1 spends 4 turns mining and 6 turns moving to/working on next project. Worker 2 spends 6 turns mining, 3 turns roading, and 1 turn moving to next project for a total of 7 worker-turns on the next project.
Since I think 1 worker turn is more valuable than 1 gold, my conclusion is we should continue to look for opportunities to stack, but in this case, the river crossing makes it unproductive.
fe3333au
Deity
Again superb analysis as usual ... in fact I am getting sick of the constant accolades ... therefore just consider that they are being constantly thrown each time I respond to your big picture projections ...
I like Athens changing production to Curragh ... means we get the minimum 2 ship navy all that quicker
I like Athens changing production to Curragh ... means we get the minimum 2 ship navy all that quicker
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Indeed!
Thanks for taking this in stride.
I would certainly support switching to curragh. (Frankly, I'm surprised that I beat Fe to saying I support it!) This will allow us to explore both directions around our continent - and get us some badly needed intelligence on what's to the east of Athens.
(so that means switching to curragh and working the wheat next turn - Correct?)
As for the worker turns I'm not sure I completely followed that (my own fault trying to read and type fast on a break here at work)
But giving you assumed credit for being right I want to make sure I've got the bottom line of what you're advocating here:
No stacking. Send the 1st worker off to do something else? ie - Road to Black Hole? 2nd worker mines first, then roads.
Did I get it right?
EDIT: Cross post with Fe - I thought it was odd that I beat him!! Guess I didn't! (laughing)
fe3333au
Deity
Mr. Prez I think that this smilie says it adequately 
Regarding the assignment, movement and placement of workers ... would it be easier for all and reduce the confusion level if our workers were renamed to Worker I, Worker II ... etc?
Regarding the assignment, movement and placement of workers ... would it be easier for all and reduce the confusion level if our workers were renamed to Worker I, Worker II ... etc?
General_W said:
If we switch to curragh, we want to work:
Cow + Wheat
Cow + Wheat
Cow + Elephant
over the next three turns. The order doesn't matter. We should grow in 3 and complete the curragh on growth.
General_W said:
Exactly right. People can certainly express opinions on what other task the first worker should do, but I think starting a road to The Black Hole would be a great use for him.
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Sweet. I like it. Make sure you post the essentials from this in the "instructions" thread sometime before the next turn comes around.
Can you do that for every unit? I've only noticed this ability when I spawn a Great Leader.
Or are you just referring to having names for internal reference in our threads?
(I also noticed Rambuchan is advocating a whole system of naming in another thread)
If there's a way to do it - let me know, and we'll get started naming!
Thanks!
Can you do that for every unit? I've only noticed this ability when I spawn a Great Leader.
Or are you just referring to having names for internal reference in our threads?
(I also noticed Rambuchan is advocating a whole system of naming in another thread)
If there's a way to do it - let me know, and we'll get started naming!
Thanks!
fe3333au
Deity
Yes every unit can be renamed ... if you go to preferences on main menu
>Main Menu
>Preferences
>Game window/Show Advanced Unit Action Buttons
>Icon with ABC
There may also be a CTR + ??? option
>Main Menu
>Preferences
>Game window/Show Advanced Unit Action Buttons
>Icon with ABC
There may also be a CTR + ??? option
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Can't believe I didn't know that!!
Thanks Fe!
Thanks Fe!
Meleager
Stoned as a Statue
Finally got around to these big posts i am allergic too (covered with hives now)...
Your doing a good job Chamnix. How long do you think it will be till we meet someone? Those barbarian moves do sound suspicious and we have almost explored a quarter of the land (i think).
We should also start thinking about connecting our cities to that tobbaco (i know still a while away), just make sure the hospitals can handel the incoming flux of lung cancer patients.
Your doing a good job Chamnix. How long do you think it will be till we meet someone? Those barbarian moves do sound suspicious and we have almost explored a quarter of the land (i think).
We should also start thinking about connecting our cities to that tobbaco (i know still a while away), just make sure the hospitals can handel the incoming flux of lung cancer patients.
General_W said:
Athens needs 5 spt and at least 6-7-7 fpt for the factory. We need to work the cow, the wheat, and the forest next turn (6 food, 5 shields). The following turn we need 5 shields and 7 food, so we should work the cow, the wheat, and the BG that Jarom will have just finished mining.
General_W said:
They have no idea how close or far they are from our land. I would think they are planning to follow the coast around until they get to Heron. Not sure this will really come up in the initial talks.
General_W said:
Well, I dont think this is a Domestic Ministry issue, but my opinion as a citizen is we stick with the factory. The KISSers seem to be planning to spam the continent with settlers so they should not be able to mount an effective attack for some time. Also, I am allergic to building regular units other than warriors, and building hoplites in Athens would also lead to too few settlers.
General_W said:
I need some time on this one.
General_W said:
Something for our Defense Minister to chew on
I suspect the Celt warrior will most likely continue to follow the coast around until Heron (reaching the outskirts of Heron in about 10 turns). We obviously want a warrior able to reach Heron in case the Celts get cute. After that, he will likely turn north and will possibly see our goody hut and reach it in about 4 turns. We definitely want to have it popped before then if the Celts pop it, they get the benefit of the potential free tech, but we still have the potential barb problem.
We have 1 warrior in The Black Hole now, and we will have 1 warrior produced in Athens in 3 turns and another in 9 turns. We will have at least 3 workers within range of the potential barbs who are need protecting. One warrior each and one warrior to pop the hut means we might need our western warrior back home.
Although I hate to bring an explorer back, the good news is that we will have a curragh along that coast soon, and our warrior can probably locate the barb camp on the way back home.
Im not sure how we should handle this, but it is clearly a puzzler for our Defense Minister.
I will also post in the instructions thread after some time for discussion.
