Where do we want to settle first?

[Noldodan]

There are two explored areas for us to settle, currently. One is the hills/gems region, and the other is the forest/grassland region. We also have two unexplored areas which look to be viable for settling, but we can’t be sure of that yet. Discussion begins in this thread at the end of page 3. This poll will run for 24 hours. Here's the map for reference:

 

[Provolution]

I will ask for Fien Canadien, Epithemius, Cyc and all the others that has posted these fine
screenies to present their proposals in the government threads under "City Proposal Thread", and write in their proposed locations respective tile values, and optionally what they have in mind to use this city for, and the government will grade the proposal based on the value of it, and let the Domestic Minister select the two best options and poll them. Multiple options is not the best way, only two options would suffice.

 

[Noldodan]

I will ask for Fien Canadien, Epithemius, Cyc and all the others that has posted these fine
screenies to present their proposals in the government threads under "City Proposal Thread", and write in their proposed locations respective tile values, and optionally what they have in mind to use this city for, and the government will grade the proposal based on the value of it, and let the Domestic Minister select the two best options and poll them. Multiple options is not the best way, only two options would suffice.

Provo, we don't have time for that. There's 25 1/2 hours until the chat starts, and I wouldn't be surprised if it took that long to get in touch with everyone, let alone have time for polling. We can do that for the next city site, but not this one.

PS: If you can pull such a miracle out of your bag o' tricks... Good for you!

 

[Provolution]

Noldo

I agree that this may be difficult, but an advisory grading would be sufficient guideline this early in the game in addition to this poll. So next city we can run the procedure through 100 %. Yet this time, I am satisfied with those small proposals and grades.
The issue is to place accounability where it belongs, so yelling and persistence in the chatroom will be met with hard facts when we get to the forums again.

The more thorough ones may lose the location to yelling, but the facts will be there when we get out. This will optimize city localization.

 

[Comnenus]

There is not enough information to make an informed decision. If we were going to build a settler this tc, I would say go for the gems before someone else gets them, but as you can see from the screenie, we are building a warrior, and it will take some time before we get a settler. In the meantime we will have explored quite a bit more territory.

 

[Provolution]

Comnenus

That is EXACTLY why I decided to move on to turn 15, so we would have enough information to build the next city, but the chatlog tells you who decided to stop that oo early, we could at least have had some more tiles SE mapped. I would recommend that next turnchat generates enough map data to actually have enough info to have a city discussion, not this confused and agitated berbage to get a half-thought will through just to save personal egos. Still, four diamonds are too many to ignore, these should be settled at once.

 

[Comnenus]

Comnenus

That is EXACTLY why I decided to move on to turn 15, so we would have enough information to build the next city, but the chatlog tells you who decided to stop that oo early, we could at least have had some more tiles SE mapped. I would recommend that next turnchat generates enough map data to actually have enough info to have a city discussion, not this confused and agitated berbage to get a half-thought will through just to save personal egos. Still, four diamonds are too many to ignore, these should be settled at once.

Has somebody had too much coffee today?

I was at the tc. I know everyone's position on the issue. While I don't have any part in the decision making process and I was ambivalent about going past 10 turns, I came to agree that we should stop. Just because we don't have enough info now, does not mean we won't have enough info later. If we continue with the warrior, by the time we get a settler we should be able to repoll for a new city location. That is why I am all in favor of letting that warrior build (besides which we will be able to explore north). I know that you are frustrated, but since this game has to take many peoples opinions into account, decisions are made that may or may not agree with our own, and may or may not be the best. They are just decisions. We live with them and move on.

 

[ravensfire]

Abstain, public poll.

-- Ravensfire

 

[invy]

Comon please people not gems immediately . Go for production. If someone takes our gems we go to war immediately so we'll have them anyway
3rd city gems in my opinion.

 

[zorven]

Other: not enough info on the unknown terrain.

 

[superpelon]

GEMS!! we will need the happy faces when our capital reaches size 12, and are good for trading with other civs.

For any other settling moves, i think a bit more exploration is needed.

 

[Black_Hole]

Originally i suppored going NE but now the grassland/forest seems to be the best:

Proposal #1 for Second City Site

The black circle is where we should she place the city, the blue line is the originial city boundary and once we get enough culture the red line shows that.

We have:
3 Grassland
1 Hill
4 Desert
1 Possible Grassland

I would suggest first mining the grassland to NE and then building a road. This city would then be able to produce military while our capital pumps settlers. Once we expand our cities will culuture lines will be touching making these cities very nice.

A zoomed out map can be found here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=95906

We can settle the gems next, but this is a very good spot

 

[GenMarshall]

As Trade Deputy, I would like to advocate on setteling close by to the gem resources. Hopefully when we grow our culture in that city, we could have a possible monopoly on gems .

 

[Gregski]

My view is that we should not go for gems straight away. This would slow the growth of our glorious empire too much. We need 2 or better still 3 cities that can quickly produce settlers and workers. The gems will be really handy when cities grow beyond 6, but till then, we can manage without them. If Warrior-san who's exploring the area discovers another nation in the area, we need to reconsider.

 

[Fier Canadien]

DO NOT vote for the gems.

As I said many times, founding the second city in that area could be fatal!

Anywhere else but not the gems!

We are on 3450 BC, people. We're maybe the first civ to pump out a settler and we want to waste a potential production increase into these sterile mountains?

We cannot afford it, and we'd get it anyway within 15 turns, if we send the next settler there.

 

[Cyc]

That is why I have proposed the location 3 tiles South of the Capital City. Not only will we get a Diamond Mountain after the borders expand, but after the Temple is built, the city will be primed for Settler production.

 

[Epimethius]

That's my idea, though I'd actually move the teal one SW, though. We would settle the gems first, and mine the hills. That would give us ****-loads of money and production. I know that dissapoints all you people who want a China-like populous empire with no luxuries, production, or money, and a lot of unhappy poor peasents, but I think that getting this now will more than make up for using an oportunity to have another settler factory, what with all the trading, happiness, wealth, and production that could take place.

And currently the city will be named Furukawa, since that is what Chieftess requested. If Chieftess consents, however, if could be named Yatsubishi, as Provolution recommended.

 

[Provolution]

Dear Epimethius, I hope you can post (cut and paste this proposal) to the City Proposal Folder, so we can keep track of all cities there. Your colleague Noldodan is also into trying out a review system with standardized facts. I think your Yotsubishi vision has a lot of potential, and should be graded/reviewed. As we were not allowed to map farther south, I recommend that you set up the non-explored zones as conditional, if it is desert, then A and if it is grasslands then B for example. But I hope you see the need to standardize the format of city locations so people can compare.

 

[invy]

DO NOT vote for the gems.

As I said many times, founding the second city in that area could be fatal!

Anywhere else but not the gems!

We are on 3450 BC, people. We're maybe the first civ to pump out a settler and we want to waste a potential production increase into these sterile mountains?

We cannot afford it, and we'd get it anyway within 15 turns, if we send the next settler there.

Agree! As the poll goes it will be 2nd city gems. We see now problem of democracy :/
We're still in despotism so let the president decide not to settle gems yet
I hate gems

 

[Epimethius]

Then we can always trade gold per turn for them with the Zulu after we lose them. But at least we'll have a bunch of settler factories full of unhappy people.