Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lizzy's rise to greatness
Collapse
X
-
First I agree with your #254 post.
Re land jump from 21000 to 35000, is that what you mean. That happened after turn 24. How is that reached.?
Is that how you reckon some civ has now a second city?
Leave a comment:
-
-
small thing, but the cyan SW-NW-N-N route gives nothing compared to W-NW-N except it takes one extra turn which could be spent on fortifying. The dark blue move will reveal that hidden tile anyway.
PS. I already prepared the UPDATED TEST MAP. Next turn after Cerberus' and Apollo's next move I'll post it.
First results:
* both Apollo and Cerberus really need to go to the 2nd city site. Then virtually zero risk for worker and settler. Otherwise especially the worker could be in trouble.
* Bellerophon can continue scouting, we don't need him for city / worker protection. The 4th warrior (built in city 2) can protect the settler for city 3.
* Agree on road placement towards city 2 (shall we name it Aurum (city of gold) ? )Last edited by Calanthian; August 28, 2012, 12:23.
Leave a comment:
-
small thing, but the cyan SW-NW-N-N route gives nothing compared to W-NW-N except it takes one extra turn which could be spent on fortifying. The daark blue move will reveal that hidden tile anyway.
Leave a comment:
-
None of these sites are really spectacular levee-wise. Another workshop at most. Not really worth considering at this point. I think the unhealthiness in the mid-game is a bigger issue from not being connected to fresh water. We're likely to go HRule earl-mid-game to bust out of our happy cap, which means dealing with health will be the big growth issue by the proper mid-game. Increasing the pop cap by 2 would be a lot more useful than a late-mid-game +1 workshop levee. As much as I like the PH #2 spot, those FPs and rapid growth are going to make the +2H from fresh water a lot more important there, especially if we drag out the meet-and-greet and get locked out of resource trades.
Leave a comment:
-
None of the '2's city places are riverside, only some of the '3's and even those are not so great (4 extra production but we would need to build the levee so could not expect fast return
Leave a comment:
-
Appolo should turn back to defend second ciy site, not only the settler, but the worker going there should also be protected.
For long term considerations I like 2.3 and 3.3. I think it makes better use of the space and moves our second city further in the presumed direction of our neighbors. 2.1 is awkwardly spaced since it makes it tough to fit in cities around it to best use the neighboring resources. I think 2.1 is a better location for that one city, and perhaps is best in the short term, but it will end up short changing future city placement in the area. As always I defer to testing on this, but I do think we should seriously explore (and test) the 2.3 option.
The city sites Mz proposes won't (almost) all be at the river, so no levee.. another factor we cannot weigh right now..
Leave a comment:
-
That's what I've been saying. Build towns on the flood plains and get that cash rolling in. The longer we delay that the further behind we'll get so let's keep our eye on the prize; if we can get one city pulling the whole thing in then why waste time building three?
Leave a comment:
-
our "real goldmine" is that flood plain area, we need to cottage them early and grow them up. only 2/1 would give us access to it, that's why I wouldn't even consider more options.
What we can discuss is whether we go for the horse early or expand to the east or north and wait for bronzeworking. on my map RED2 is a good spot for a city and we could get chariots early, I need to check the maintenance cost. it too would be a production city without too much commerce (but with a library it could be still good enough growing to pop 4 it can work on horse and pig and 2 scientist specialists)
Leave a comment:
-
My prefered city spots are 2/1 and south of 3/1
the difference between 3/1 and one tile south of it:
get's deer later (in second ring), but that deer is on tundra, not that good. it would be on plain hill (extra production, better defense) and we save a forest, good for chopping later. also we would leave more space for a possible coastal city there (there might be sea resources north)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by OzzyKP View PostFor long term considerations I like 2.3 and 3.3. I think it makes better use of the space and moves our second city further in the presumed direction of our neighbors. 2.1 is awkwardly spaced since it makes it tough to fit in cities around it to best use the neighboring resources. I think 2.1 is a better location for that one city, and perhaps is best in the short term, but it will end up short changing future city placement in the area. As always I defer to testing on this, but I do think we should seriously explore (and test) the 2.3 option.
As for the warriors, I'd like to see Apollo take the red route and continue exploring while C covers city 2 and the settler.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: