Where to build our 3rd Viking City?

[Asmodeus]

Now we have formed an adequate militia to deal with the barbarians and archers are being equipped to hunt them down and fire pointy sticks at them, we need to consider further expansion.

Looking at the Turn2 map there appears to be a juicy spot to the west of Valhalla. There is a hill overlooking the plains, adjacent to a nice river and right next to diamond rich mountains. There will also be an additional sea resource bonus with cultural expansion. This spot gets my vote.

I know this breaks from the 4.5 city plan but the other 4.5 spots on the map appear to be long term investment cities, they will do little to benefit us without consirable working of the land.

The juicy spot by the diamonds will give us (as well as the diamonds), good defence on the hill, improved trade and fresh water from the river (i.e. no aquaduct required) and good resource shields from all the plains and hills. The only downer is there isnt much in the way of good farmland but this less so than the 4.5 spots which have jungle to contend with. There will be slightly higher corruption later in the game but hardly crippling.

Any thoughts?

[Madcaptn]

um I don't think we should get away from 4.5, i think we should build the 3rd city to the west since there's a plain with a shield

[Torkkeli]

NW of NA as described here.
There the river runs...

[Panzer32]

Somewhere where you are proposing might be good for the second ring of cities, but let's get the first one up first.

[mrboo123]

on the river, near the fish, (4.5)

[Torkkeli]

Originally posted by Panzer32
Somewhere where you are proposing might be good for the second ring of cities, but let's get the first one up first.

What???

Originally posted by 123john321
on the river, near the fish, (4.5)

This is exactly what I mean!

[GodKing]

Lets stick with the ring plan.

BTW, the AI rounds down all distance calculations in terms of corruption calculations. Therefore, all the 4.5 is actuall to the computer a distance of only 4.... let me look and see if I have that picture showing the rings.... nope. Gonna have to do some digging for it.

[GodKing]

Here is the ring placement diagram. vulture originally made it I think.

[GodKing]

Oops. Sorry. Here it is as a .jpg

[G'Kar]

I think we should stay with the ring placement diagram Niessuh posted. The spot on the hill, NE of the diamonds is too close to the other cities (Valhalla and the other planned city).

We should build directly S of the diamonds. This will be consistent with RCP; this will let us mine the hill; the city will be surrounded by river thus no aqueduct and huge commerce bonuses.

We should skip the other two mainland cities in the first ring and build the river/commerce city right away for the sake of expansion.

[joncnunn]

I'm thinking W-W-W-SW might be a good spot for a city. (this shoud use the whale.)
This is assuming there's no shield in that grassland (can't tell on the screen shot.)

[G'Kar]

Originally posted by joncnunn
I'm thinking W-W-W-SW might be a good spot for a city. (this shoud use the whale.)
This is assuming there's no shield in that grassland (can't tell on the screen shot.)

That is shielded grassland.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Something to think about is the use of temporary cities. We could found some cities to make the most use of our terrain (terrain will go unused for many cities until we get much larger populations), and then disband them when we are able to grow larger. We could keep the RCP for our long-term cities, but also have some other cities located off this Ring for temporary terrain use.

[Niessuh]

Well. We will need a whole bunch of workers for jungle cleaning. If we do that temporary city, it should be build on a jungle tile, cleaning it. I suggest the place where the river turns, making easy a road to the East city

[Panzer32]

Originally posted by Torkkeli


What???

I mean use the city proposed as part of the second ring of cities instead of the first.