Turn 1-50

[DaveShack]

The '55 pop' thing appears to be the total of population across those turns?

I also support building something to grow before settler. Not sure if the exact numbers are best, but generally agree with that plan. To be honest, I thought growing first was better before but thought I might be wrong with so many pushing so vehemently for settler before growth.

 

[YossarianLives]

The turn has flipped. I haven't seen any objection to 7 with the warrior.

The micro plan looks good. One thing I wanted to ask about was unhealthiness. I seem to remember getting one sick face at size 5, even with the corn connected. Is that correct? Does it factor into the numbers that were posted earlier?

 

[bcool]

RE: health at pop 5
If you look closely you can see from our starting screenshots and the current screenshots that a forest grew in our capital's BFC. So with corn we are healthy at pop 5 due to that lucky forest growth.

 

[YossarianLives]

Oh wow, I completely missed that forest growth one south of the corn. That's amazingly lucky for us!

 

[Caledorn]

So, do we want to move our warrior 8, or do we want to move him 4,7 next turn?

 

[cav scout]

We should move 9 to see more of what is around the gold and then continue our loop.

 

[YossarianLives]

Woohoo for the gold! That land looks great over to our east.

I prefer 8 over 9, just because it looks like flatland north of those hills, so the best move after 8 will be 7 to put the warrior into the forest and keep him protected from animals. Either way, we should definitely go north of that lake.

 

[bistrita]

o yeah gold its great . Me likes gold.I think we can get our third city there.

 

[grant2004]

Very excited to see the gold over there. That's certainly looking like a strong location for our 3rd city. I think we see enough land in that area to make a smart decision about placing that 3rd city. Moving to 9 would show a few more tiles, but I doubt we'll be considering those tiles for city placement in the near term because they are far away. A move to 8 seems best because it will allow us to remain in good defensive terrain in the next turn.

 

[RegentMan]

I like 9-7.

 

[bcool]

I like 8-7 since with the hill we should see 2 squares around the gold and we will be next to the forest for the next move for protection from barb animals (basically I agree with YossarianLives and grant2004)

 

[2metraninja]

...

Re: tundra tiles
Really I'm not worried about having 3-4 tundra tiles in the wheat-cow city. They really won't affect the cities output until late late in the game.

Not to mention that later on with Biology/Levees farms and/or State Property watermills those riverside tundra are perfectly fine tiles to work.

settling south from capital city 2 (wheat, cows area) is wrong direction imo.

we need helper city either north or west from capital, thus I wanted to move the warrior clockwise to the west.

I tend to agree that down south it is not the most strategic right direction for us to expand. This comes from my belief that we must expand towards the other teams (what if the Gold area happens to be disputed sooner than later ?) I like to think about the south tundra as our backyard. IF we can make as much productive second city in any of the other directions, strategically it must be the right choice.


Now, doesnt the gold showing change our possible second city location? Or it is firm third (fourth) city location?

 

[Aivoturso]

I like 8-7 too because if we move 9, we'll either leave unexplored tiles or we lose some speed.

 

[cav scout]

I tend to agree that down south it is not the most strategic right direction for us to expand. This comes from my belief that we must expand towards the other teams (what if the Gold area happens to be disputed sooner than later ?) I like to think about the south tundra as our backyard. IF we can make as much productive second city in any of the other directions, strategically it must be the right choice.

Remember that as of right now the precise nature of the map and the locations of the other teams are just assumptions. For all we know it could be a thin strip of tundra with another team just to our South. With that said, I totally agree with the principle of saving the backyard for later.

 

[bcool]

Settling cows/wheat advantages...

The cows/wheat city advantages
1) give us trade routes with only 2 roads (or no roads if we settle by the river)
so from the turn we settle with will have 2 more comerce
2) has a small amount of maintenance
3) is easier to defend
4) can be settled 2? 3? turns before a pigs/gold city
5) can help develop at at least 1 riverside cottage for the capital (2 if we want to cottage the riverside plains)
6) can share the plains mine with the capital so that worker investment continues to pay us back
7) can help build early workers so that we are in better shape to expand rapidly to places like the pigs/gold.
8) workers can move back and forth from capital and cows/wheat easily


Disadvantages
we lose a good settling spot to another team?
keep in mind
(the 2nd settler for the 3rd city is coming out pretty quickly T46? from our capital)

I think it makes sense to get a small empire with overlapping cities early that can expand out effectively to more attractive settling locations.

A wheat/cows/ shared corn / maybe copper in warrior's plains hill city is a very strong early city that can help pump out settlers/workers/military units
It can also help develop 2 cottages for the capital if really want to focus on commerce.

 

[bistrita]

Like advantages for wheat is that we improve a resource imediately, can share with capitol, fatser to setle.If we setle for gold, where that city will go?

 

[2metraninja]

Have few ideas for the gold city, but your arguments are pretty good. I agree that City2 can go best the tundra wheat. To the river or not to the river?

For on the river:
- For a secondary city 7-8 hammers later with levee cant be that bad
- gets 1 more green tile which otherwise will be hardly used by any city

Off the river:
- 3 more hills in the BFC
- 2 more forests in the BFC

 

[YossarianLives]

I think that based on what we can see right now, settling next to Wheat is our best option for city 2. However, it's really important for us to stay flexible depending on what else we find in our explorations. Our settler won't be ready to go for another 20+ turns, so a lot can happen between now and then. We might find something up north or northwest that allows us to get a second city up and running just as fast as the wheat, with the added benefit that a city in that direction could help us grow the cap's FP cottages. We might stumble across some city borders to our east that puts much more priority on settling the gold ASAP.

As for the exact location of the Wheat city, I prefer off the river for the immediate production bonus of the extra hills and forests. Also, settling off the river gets the cow in play without a border pop.

 

[cav scout]

I think that based on what we can see right now, settling next to Wheat is our best option for city 2. However, it's really important for us to stay flexible depending on what else we find in our explorations.

I agree.

As for the exact location of the Wheat city, I prefer off the river for the immediate production bonus of the extra hills and forests. Also, settling off the river gets the cow in play without a border pop.

I prefer next to the river as getting the cows right away isn't that important to me and another city will get those hills and forests if the wheat city doesn't. It will be nice to create a dot map for all our planned cities once the initial exploration is complete.

Also: if we go 9, 7 with our warrior to explore the gold fully we will stay on safe tiles and still have time to complete a full loop down to the wheat city area before we finish our first settler.

 

[Caledorn]

The turn has flipped.

I see there is a majority for moving 8, and not 9. Both moves are good, but I'm leaning slightly towards 8 myself too. I won't do our move until tomorrow though, so feel free to argue some more about it here if you'd like.