Why'd we settle THERE?

[Kuciwalker]

We moved the scout first, right? So we would have a) known that there was a coasal tile one tile south of the settler, and that it had a fish. Was it decided that the river (which won't benefit us until later, especially as we're going to be building several settlers) was more important than giving our capitol and first city access to the sea and a fish?

[OPD]

I dunno capital near a coast is a bad idea IMO, much better to have capital in the centre than to the side. In the current spot a ring of suburbs can be built around the capital.

otherwise the start location looks great, lots of grassland and not much jungle. A few cows/wheat would have been nice but at least theres not much jungle.

[BigFree]

I like where we settled; the second city should go at the mouth of the river SouthEast of our Capitol. The fishies will feed it nicely!

[UnOrthOdOx]

Yes.

Access to the sea gains us nothing until mapmaking unless you are going to go for the Colossus, which IMO is insane on Diety. The Fish, also would not benefit the capitol until later, since it produces only 2 food under Despotism. Also, personally, I prefer my capitol away from the sea, it is generally the most productive city and I want as many land tiles, and thus shields, used as possible.

I am more than willing to hear your ideas of why having the sea and fish were a better option, though.

[Kuciwalker]

Well, it would allow us to just build a harbor (when we can) and *poof* sea trade. I didn't know the despotism restrictions applied to bonus resources .

You're right. It was better to build it where it is

[Togas]

Originally posted by OPD
otherwise the start location looks great, lots of grassland and not much jungle. A few cows/wheat would have been nice but at least theres not much jungle.

There's no jungle near you. Those are forests.

Yes, you can and should feel free to thank us profusely.

--Togas

[WhiteBandit]

Originally posted by Togas


There's no jungle near you. Those are forests.

Yes, you can and should feel free to thank us profusely.

--Togas

I think you should of put just one jungle tile nearby to screw with us

[Panag]

Re: Why'd we settle THERE?

Originally posted by skywalker
We moved the scout first, right? So we would have a) known that there was a coasal tile one tile south of the settler, and that it had a fish. Was it decided that the river (which won't benefit us until later, especially as we're going to be building several settlers) was more important than giving our capitol and first city access to the sea and a fish?

hi ,

indeed , why did we settle so fast , ...

have a nice day

[OPD]

Originally posted by Togas

Yes, you can and should feel free to thank us profusely.

--Togas

Yes a big thank you to BFM for making us this exellent map thus sacrificing early involvement and to anyone else who may have helped. I dunno I remember some one else helping in some slightly significant way but their contribution can't have been that important. I can kind of remember some guy called Lorgas or something helping but not enough to be acknowledged.

But seriously nice map so far of course there will be plenty of island hopping and the lack of cows will be made up for by the excessive iron and horses we are soon to find.

[joncnunn]

I think the capital was founded in the optimal location.
Having the capital be in a site where no aquaduct is needed is much prefered to the capital being a harbor.

Plus the capital is far enough from the ocean that the first ocean city (at least) will be in a natural location for tight city spacing instead of being shifted.

[BigFurryMonster]

Originally posted by OPD
I can kind of remember some guy called Lorgas or something helping but not enough to be acknowledged.

But seriously nice map so far of course there will be plenty of island hopping and the lack of cows will be made up for by the excessive iron and horses we are soon to find.

Eh... Lorgas? Did you put horses in the map?