I've just seen something horrible. Remember that Persian Settler-stack roaming in our territory ?
I've just imagined it's going to settle in citysite #1 as per Jonny's plans (I think Will5001 considers it a valuable city as well). Here's a picture :

The stack will be there in 10 turns.
I imagined solutions to avoid that. Among them, we have :
- Building a settler in Termina, rather than a spearman. It won't work, because we'd need 14-15 turns to get there
- Building a settler in Tassagrad. 10 turns needed just to build it. Too late already.
- Building a settler in BHQ instead of a Temple. According to my calculation, we'd have 2 turns ahead. But the operation is risky, because Persians could settle in a slightly nearer location, before us. Plus, we'd lose all our work on BHQ's temple, which is bad for our culture and border cohesion.
- Building a settler in Del Monte, instead of a barracks. We'd waste 2 shields, but the settler will be ready in 3 turns (because our pop will expand to 3 in 3 turns). It will settle in 5 turns. This will also help preventing the Greeks going there).
Among all these solutions, only 2 are working (BHQ and Del Monte), and only Del Monte's one offers enough guarantees, and won't cost us a much needed temple (it will cost us a less needed barracks in this remote city).
So I say the next city planner should change production in Del Monte to settler at the very beginning of next turnchat / thread.
Edit : taken Del Monte's population growth into account.
I've just imagined it's going to settle in citysite #1 as per Jonny's plans (I think Will5001 considers it a valuable city as well). Here's a picture :

The stack will be there in 10 turns.
I imagined solutions to avoid that. Among them, we have :
- Building a settler in Termina, rather than a spearman. It won't work, because we'd need 14-15 turns to get there
- Building a settler in Tassagrad. 10 turns needed just to build it. Too late already.
- Building a settler in BHQ instead of a Temple. According to my calculation, we'd have 2 turns ahead. But the operation is risky, because Persians could settle in a slightly nearer location, before us. Plus, we'd lose all our work on BHQ's temple, which is bad for our culture and border cohesion.
- Building a settler in Del Monte, instead of a barracks. We'd waste 2 shields, but the settler will be ready in 3 turns (because our pop will expand to 3 in 3 turns). It will settle in 5 turns. This will also help preventing the Greeks going there).
Among all these solutions, only 2 are working (BHQ and Del Monte), and only Del Monte's one offers enough guarantees, and won't cost us a much needed temple (it will cost us a less needed barracks in this remote city).
So I say the next city planner should change production in Del Monte to settler at the very beginning of next turnchat / thread.
Edit : taken Del Monte's population growth into account.
). We should go with the Del Monte plan, and settle there before the Persians do. We should also keep an eye out for any other settler stacks, especially since persia's got a ROP (though a lack of one never seemed to stop the AI from settling wherever it wanted before).
Comment