Xinning in the plains

[Ben Kenobi]

Esteemed King Shade:

I return from my extended survey of our sprawling empire, which I desire to knit into a cohesive force.

Starting with the buildlist:
/me crosses fingers for the coding

Newton		Marketplace
Imperialis	                Crusaders
Dominion 	                Settlers
Majestica	                Marketplace
Glorificus	                Settlers
Pax Apolyton	Settlers
Desolation	Crusaders
Enron		Marketplace
Cumae		Pikemen
Pestilence	Diplomat
Misery		Settlers
Devastation	Crusaders
Havoc		Temple
Rack 		Diplomat
Ruin 		Temple
Famine 		Pikemen
Apocalyptica	Pikemen

Science:

Techs available:
Navigation
Physics
Magnetism
Atomic Theory
Economics

Engineering
(Sanitation)
Invention

Prereqs to Fundamentalism:
Democracy
Gunpowder
Metallurgy
Conscription

I want to go Fundy so that we can churn troops, quash corruption and extort tithes.

How can we research these 4 technologies quickly? We need to get more cities up to size 5.

Therefore, I'd like a moratorium on more cities, and to consolidate those we have until we research a better government than Monarchy.

City orders:

Imperialis:

Fire elvis, hire scientist to generate 6 science on the non xin turn!

Newton:

Build in two settlers to allow newton to Xin, using the one already there, and rushing another from Pax Apolyton.

Dominion:

Rush temple to quell unrest, instead of settler.

Majestica:

Fire Elvis and hire scientist to generate another 6 science.

Misery:
Build temple, after settler finished.

Havoc:
rush temple, build settler.

Rack:
Fire elvis, place worker on plains.

Famine:
Change from Pikeman to temple.
Rush Temple.
Build settlers.


Buildqueues:

Markets for the size 5 Xinners.
Settlers, than libraries from the size 3's.
Temples for cities without improvements,
Crusaders from front cities, or cities with Barracks.
Barracks for fairly productive cities.

Finally, I want a road from Glorificus to Havoc.
We may wish to build another city to assist construction.

Questions, comments and concerns may be appended to the bottom of the scroll.

All remaining cash may be redirected to projects demanded by the avid SMC.

[shade]

euhm will there be cash remaining?

settler in Newton just arrived there for that goal
and I forgot de elvis of Rack...needed him to be able to capture the barbleader

looks good

1 question...why are there 4 impr shifted to the right in the list?(typographical prob or something important?)

Shade

[atawa]

About the markets: what is the avarage payoff per turn not Xinning for having them installed? How does this compare to Univerity's?

[shade]

at this point they pay of nicely.
On a non-Xin turn we have 4G in the 2 cities which are Xinning now(cost for a market is 1G so we have status quo--> can only inprove when we grow),A uni would cost 2(or is it 3) G/turn and at this moment we have 9G taxreserve(ie we barely get gold)

Newton (or was it Enron) has 7G when it starts Xinning a marketplace there will give us profit

Shade

[Hydey]

Bah Humbug on markets, barracks and soldiers is what we nned to build.

[atawa]

Originally posted by shade
at this point they pay of nicely.
On a non-Xin turn we have 4G in the 2 cities which are Xinning now(cost for a market is 1G so we have status quo--> can only inprove when we grow),A uni would cost 2(or is it 3) G/turn and at this moment we have 9G taxreserve(ie we barely get gold)

Newton (or was it Enron) has 7G when it starts Xinning a marketplace there will give us profit

Shade

Are there any plans to add settlers to the 2 city's allready Xinning? If not the city's wont grow and the markets only pay for themselves eg we wasted 80 shields each.

I agree with the Market in Newton but maybe we should switch to Uni's in the other 2 city's.

[Ben Kenobi]

1 question...why are there 4 impr shifted to the right in the list?(typographical prob or something important?)

Typo, I'm not sure how to solve.

It shows up fine before posting, so your guess is as good as mine.

atawa:

Are there any plans to add settlers to the 2 city's allready Xinning? If not the city's wont grow and the markets only pay for themselves eg we wasted 80 shields each.

No, perhaps when the cities are more developed, with irrigation we can afford to let the cities grow. For now, getting other cities up to size five needs to be done before we can worry about adding to the cities already Xinning.

Look at it this way. One settler added to a city size 5 will add one extra scientist. One settler added to a city size 4 will add 5 scientists. Which gives us more bang for the buck?

[atawa]

I agree, but in that case we dont have to get markets yet, I would prefer having those city's switch to Uni's.

[Sparrowhawk]

I still dislike using settlers to increase city sizes. Newton being the best example, we all agreed before the city was built that this city would need to be increased in size, but I don't think adding settlers is the way to do so. We could change production within the city and by doing so, increase food (the food box is about half full right now) and use the settler that is in the city to start irrigation of the jungle. I think this makes more sense then continually adding our valued settlers to cities for Xinning. Perhaps there should be another poll on this? This being our science city, I would like to see it grow, but rather by increasing family size then by immigration

Is this a poll for the City Planner?

/me the Science Minister who would be most displeased with the use of Settlers for increasing city size without listening first to the voice of the people

[cavebear]

I think it is in our long-term benefit to use Settlers to connect our cities with roads and improve terrain with mines and irrigation.

[Sparrowhawk]

Or to build new cities, as we agreed not to ICS, but there are still abundant city sites available that help to connect our growing empire, without overlapping cities. I use one such example below:



I would hope we take advantage of city sites such as this one to expand, and bring us closer, both physically and in advancement to the Americans.

[Hydey]

On this map we are going to have a large number of cities , we agreed not to ICS but not to limit ourselves to a rediculously low number for this size of map.

[shade]

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
Or to build new cities, as we agreed not to ICS, but there are still abundant city sites available that help to connect our growing empire, without overlapping cities. I use one such example below:



I would hope we take advantage of city sites such as this one to expand, and bring us closer, both physically and in advancement to the Americans.

It might be just a minor detail but I think chances are the population of that city will starve...forest gives 1 food(even silked forest) so we need at least our workers of a founded city(ie city itself and the worker in the field) to work a forest to prevent starvation...but when we do this our city will surely go into disorder since our first citizen will be a black faced one...so if we really would want to do that we would need to transform some of the forest-tiles to grassland-tiles...(can we even do this at the moment?)
IMO we would be beter of if we shifted the location to the grassland-tile next to the gold-mountain and be happy with only 2 specials(gold and oil).at least we would not starve to death immediatly.

Shade

[-Jrabbit]

We need the Markets first, to make the Unis affordable and our ppl happier.

Actually this decision is best based on whether we're going Fundy IMHO.

[Ben Kenobi]

Is this a poll for the City Planner?

There are strong points either way, either to increase population to size five aiding xinning vs. improving terrain to increase the population growth rate of our empire.

It seems to me the best approach is a threshold. At a certain point, corruption reduces the advantage of xinning, and we do not have that many cities close to each other.

Therefore, I propose driving up the population of our core cities so that we can Xin them all.

After we cross this threshold, it then becomes more efficient to use settlers solely to improve terrain.

I do not recommend building more cities until we achieve a more efficient government, due to losses from corruption and unhappiness problems. Remember, we do not have the benefits of Hanging Gardens or Mike's chapel to quell unrest.

Since my official mandate as deputy cityplanner has passed, the sheriff should be taking over in a few days, and I will let him post the poll.

Actually this decision is best based on whether we're going Fundy IMHO.

Hence my choice of poll, JRabbit.
I need to know whether we drive for Communism or Fundamentalism when planning future build queues.