City Planner's Tentative Plan

[Sparrowhawk]

I am not sure I follow all the posts in this thread, we seem to be talking together about a number of different issues.

One in particular I am commenting on is Xinning. Wasn't there a recent poll (in the last regime) that rather then adding settlers to cities to increase Xinning, we were to use settlers to found new cities? Surely the new City Planner isn't suggesting that we abandon that poll of the Citizens of Apolyton?

[CannonFodder]

I'm not suggesting we use settlers to build up population in existing cities. Just that many cities are already close to being size 5 and we should immediately use them for xinning when it's possible to do so.

[CannonFodder]

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
I am not sure I follow all the posts in this thread, we seem to be talking together about a number of different issues.

I agree, this has become much more complex than I expected it to, most of these topics have little or nothing to do with my buildlist.

[CannonFodder]

Here is the slightly modified new version of the buildlist. Hopefully this will address some of the SMC's concerns.

[-Jrabbit]

Using settlers for growth only makes sense in non-representative gov'ts. In Democracy, you should celebrate to grow, and use it as an opportunity to build more settlers, to the food/shield limit of the city site.

[CannonFodder]

I wasn't aware we were under a representative gov't.

[Ben Kenobi]

JRabbit:

The whole purpose of this game is to forgo representative governments in favour of the more reprehensible Fundamentalism.

Cannonfodder:

Would it be more advantageous in the short term to crank up taxes so that we can increase the city infrastructure, and to bribe enemy cities with diplomats?
IMHO, this is the most important decision, to figure out what we will Xin for.

[-Jrabbit]

obiwan -- When I D/L'd the save last night and glanced at it, I thought we were in Democracy. (I was in and out of several gamefiles, so could easily have been confused.)

Per my previous post, if we're in a non-representative gov't, using settlers to speed the otherwise-glacial growth from size 4 to xinnable size 5 is, perfectly viable.

[Hydey]

we are a monarchy and Shade is our King

[cavebear]

I agree with using some settlers to get some additional core cities to size 5 to give us greater flexibility and impact in Xinning. But the cities near our enemy civs should be left to focus on offensive military units.

[CannonFodder]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Cannonfodder:

Would it be more advantageous in the short term to crank up taxes so that we can increase the city infrastructure, and to bribe enemy cities with diplomats?
IMHO, this is the most important decision, to figure out what we will Xin for.

It might be advantageous in the short run, but I believe we would be doing ourselves a disservice in the long term. If we concentrate on science instead then we can reap the rewards of our new technology sooner rather than later.

[cavebear]

Investment in a civ's infrastruture and tech always pays off in the long run. Just because we have deliberately forbidden ourselves some forms of investment doesn't mean we should not do our best to use those remaining to us.

Even as Minister of War this term, I am more concerned with the resources we need to achieve our final victory over our enemies than I am about the benefits for the next individual battle. I see one and only one goal - success by the end of the game!

[-Jrabbit]

Spoken like an ex-President!

[cavebear]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Spoken like an ex-President!

And possible future one...

[Ben Kenobi]

Cavebear:

Success in the end term is often the result of a series of wise decisions made by the preceding ministers. So in concentrating on our immediate concerns, we can avoid many potential problems.

Cannonfodder:

I agree, I just wanted to hear your thoughts.