Turn 10 - 3550 BC

[Hygro]

I still will advocate building a city 3 tiles southeast on the forest.

 

[Ankka]

I agree with Hygro, but let's see first what the Western warrior reveals: we should try and expand towards our enemies first.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

As an Agricultural civ, we get Aqueducts at half-price so we shouldn't be too focused on every city being a river city. I still think that the forest tile is too close, plus we would lose a nice production option in what looks like primarily grassland.

 

[Emp.Napoleon]

I also think that the forest tile is a little too close.

 

[Ankka]

But 3 tiles is optimum: We can move 1-move units from ciy to city in 1 turn.

 

[Hygro]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
As an Agricultural civ, we get Aqueducts at half-price so we shouldn't be too focused on every city being a river city. I still think that the forest tile is too close, plus we would lose a nice production option in what looks like primarily grassland.

Dude! In despotism as agricultural, the only way to get the third food tile in the city square is to be on fresh water. That extra, constant food tile is so useful! It's not the aqueducts at all.

 

[akots]

Must completely agree with Hygro. Especially amazing is the build of capitol on the gold hill. Not only the extra food from agricultural trait is lost by doing this, this also forfeited any additional commerce of working this gold hill not on the city square. For this defeat would be a too easy punishment.

 

[Hygro]

Actually the tile has no effect on the fact that we get 3 food a turn on the city square. Also, when settling on a resource the only part that gets cancelled is the bonus food. Shields and commerce stay. This is why we have the highest GNP in the world.

 

[Ankka]

Yeah, so actually IMHO that was the best spot anywhere near...

 

[akots]

Originally posted by Hygro
Actually the tile has no effect on the fact that we get 3 food a turn on the city square. Also, when settling on a resource the only part that gets cancelled is the bonus food. Shields and commerce stay. This is why we have the highest GNP in the world.

Ok, let me put it this way. If there is a new settler 4 turns earlier which builds a town on a river you are essentially getting back all this commerce lost by not settling on the gold hill gaining more territory earlier. Now, what you suggest and what is the only right thing to do is build a settler and march back to where the starting settler came from. Looks at least strange but good because acknowledges the mistake made by moving the starting settler and corrects this mistake. The most significant power of agricultural trait is rapid growth after all. Anything that delays growth should be avoided unless there are severe happiness problems. IMHO highest GNP on turn 12 is not something to be proud about playing with agricultural civilization. It should be highest population which it is not.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

akots, have you ever heard of offsetting your strong points?

The fact that we have the best GNP in the game will ultimately enhance our science research as well. We discover Warrior Code in 5 turns, and will then be able to produce our UU if we wish. Had we not settled on the mountain, we would never be able to research as quickly because it would be harder for an Agricultural civ to justify using a gold hill that only produces 1 food.

So now we have the Gold hill for the remainder of the game, and are exploiting that tile for 3 food to boot. Besides the initial delay of 2 turns(not 4), I really don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[Ankka]

Yes, only 2 teams even did settle on the first turn, which also evens up, if it is what you are concerned about.

 

[akots]

I'm not saying it is not possible to build a city on the gold hill. Delay is indeed 4 turns because for marching 2 turns we lose 4-turn worth of food being agricultural hence delaying settler 4 turns indeed versus non-agricultural civilization. Second settler could have built a town there as well with very similar gains. And I don't understand the point about unique unit. Do we want Golden Age in Despotism that early with only a handful of cities? IMHO, building unique unit should be delayed and avoided as long as possible at least to Republic or Monarchy. Warrior Code is only useful as a step to Monarchy and for barracks which is still too early because building them would severely impede expansion. Therefore, this early research boost may be rather useless.

Edited: To illustrate the point about 4-turn delay. To grow to pop 3 city need to accumulate 40 food at +3fpt which makes it 42 food in 14 turns. It cannot be 39 food in 13 turns because this is not enough to grow. That is why delay is 2 turns for the move and +2 turns for growth.

However, there are some positive points of building on gold hill: 1) More central location of Palace. 2) Some early research useful for trading (if we meet someone early and they are willing to trade). 3) Better opportunities to explore the map. IMHO they do not seem strong enough to justify the settler march. Well, it is done and there is little point to argue about that.

 

[Gainy]

hence delaying settler 4 turns indeed versus non-agricultural civilization

But we are agricultural, hence it's 2 turns

And I don't understand the point about unique unit. Do we want Golden Age in Despotism that early with only a handful of cities?

No. Barbs are set to be roaming or something, and with a Javelin Thrower, we would be likely to get a few workers out of 'em, and some gold

Warrior Code is only useful as a step to Monarchy and for barracks which is still too early because building them would severely impede expansion. Therefore, this early research boost may be rather useless.

It is still a boost. No matter how you look at it, we are still going to be ahead in techs (assuming no techs are gotten from huts)
We also get the Jav throwers -- which will be useful as i've explained above.

 

[Peri]

Can I request that future screen shots are posted with the grid on please.