Change the Capital of Spain?

[Togas]

This is a very important vote. The decision is too big for a young King to make on his own, so the nobles have been asked to provide their thoughts on this matter.

IF you vote to move the capital of Spain to Madrid, you are voting to:
build 2 settlers in Madrid (possibly 3 if necessary), SELL the temple and barracks, and then ABANDON and REBUILD Madrid on the same turn.

All culture from Madrid will be lost.

The capital of Spain would move to Pamplona (we'll ensure that no city is larger at the time).

RP wise, we will DESTROY Madrid and rebuild a better Madrid on it's foundation ... perhaps due to plague or fire.

Justino Togas will have his palace in Pamplona, and a new governor will be appointed to rule over New Madrid.


If you vote against this idea, we will instead fight corruption via courthouses, Forbidden Palace, and WLTK days.

Please cast your votes.

--Togas

[Hot Mustard]

As I said in the other thread, I'm starting to warm up to the idea, but I would like to see some numbers and dates on the matter before deciding.

[Togas]

note that if you are in favor of a more conventional palace move at a later time by building the palace, vote against the palace jump.

--Togas

[Hot Mustard]

I would like to motion that all future polls list the "abstain" option as something to do with "Squid".

[OliverFA]

I've voted "Do not change it", understanding that this option includes the "Could be changed later".

Though I agree that sooner or later the capital should be moved from Madrid to another place (preferibly Pamplona) I see Madrid too much valuous to loose it.

We would lose 6 culture points per turn, out of a total production of 10 at the moment. Remember that ND has 10% more points than we have, and we must keep the production up to culturally defend our cities in the border.

We would lose 12 commerce per turn at size 5, 18 commerce at size 5 after the marketplace.

We would lose control over a very wide portion of land due to the size 3 influence of the city right now. Including some tiles of land that can help us see if enemy ships come to visit us. We would also lose the 287 acumulated points that we have now and the influence 4 (with more control of more sea tiles) would come much much later than the 119 turns we will have to wait now.

We would lose a barracks and a temple, having to rebuild them later. And honestly I don't think the money we can get from it pays that.

We would lose the highest production center. The only suitable to build a wonder at the moment. After the refundation many turns would happen until Madrid is in form again to build, because as far as I remember the excedent food is not carried over when city grows. Also have in mind that Toledo is using now the Madrid's wheat.

In conclusion: We would lose a great income in money, production and culture. Later, we would have to rebuild again what we already have in terms of city structures and influence, and we would probably lose the chance to build a wonder at the most suitable (by far) city in Spain

[Hot Mustard]

Are we planning to start a wonder in the near future? I haven't heard of any such plans, and the point is moot if there is none.

I'm fairly confident this game is not going to be decided by culture, so a one time loss at this stage in the game doesn't concern me. I also strongly doubt that either either Marlowa or Santiago could flip each other at this point. Does someone know for sure?

So we're left with temporary production and commerce lost in one city, versus increased production and commerce everywhere else. Like I said earlier, I'd love to see some numbers on this to help make the judgement. Additionally, what is the time frame for the plan - when would we do it, and how long before Madrid fully recovers. I know that someone said in the other thread that Madrid's population would recover in 20 turns, but what about the infrastructure?

[CiverDan]

I don't like this idea. The other cities have better things to do than build a palace. Madrid is a best culture producer and one of our more productive cities in general. IMHO place jumps this early in the game, while expansion is still going on is bad unless its in a bad location production-wise, which it isn't.

[ruby_maser]

Burn it to the ground. I'll light the match.

We don't have time to let sentimentality or short-term consequences cloud the reality that victory over human opponents is not a late-game affair.

We act decisively to win, or we greet our new masters when they come knocking.

[GodKing]

The capitol needs to be moved, but I am not sure this is the time. War may be approaching fast, and we will loose such a high production center at a potentially crucial time. I will hold my vote for now until I have had time to think about this some more.

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by GodKing
The capitol needs to be moved, but I am not sure this is the time. War may be approaching fast, and we will loose such a high production center at a potentially crucial time. I will hold my vote for now until I have had time to think about this some more.

Ah, GK makes me think of a dangerous possibility...ND may see the palace jump as an opportunity to attack - while one of our top production cities is rebuilding.

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by dejon
Are we planning to start a wonder in the near future? I haven't heard of any such plans, and the point is moot if there is none.

AFAIK the only wonder that has been suggested has been the Sistine Chappel, sugested by myself in the plan for fighting corruption. I would like to start this wonder as soon as the marketplace is finished.

I'm fairly confident this game is not going to be decided by culture, so a one time loss at this stage in the game doesn't concern me. I also strongly doubt that either either Marlowa or Santiago could flip each other at this point. Does someone know for sure?

I'm concerned not by the lose of the global culture, but the lose of the only city with influence 3. I think we will be safer after Madrid grows to influence 4 and we control much more sea tiles so we can see enemy ships coming.

So we're left with temporary production and commerce lost in one city, versus increased production and commerce everywhere else. Like I said earlier, I'd love to see some numbers on this to help make the judgement.

Hope this helps:

Currently, Spain produces 39 shields. 10 of them (a bit more than 25% by Madrid). Only 7 shields are lost by corruption, 1 in Pamplona, Barcelona and Vigo, 3 in Zaragoza. However Zaragoza is not very likely to increase its production because it doesn't have many shield rich tiles near.

Currently, Spain produces 64 commerce, 12 of them at Madrid (18 after the marketplace is built, more when the city grows). That's 19% of the total commeerce production.

So yes, we are winning some commerce and shields but... are they enough to compensate for the great amount we are about to lose for many turns? Also, the capital shift won't have such a radical impact. It's only moving it 4 tiles. Santiago will continue as much corrupt as it is now.

I agree to change the capital city, but I think it's too early, and I would do it throug less radical ways.

[BigFree]

Originally posted by dejon
Additionally, what is the time frame for the plan - when would we do it, and how long before Madrid fully recovers. I know that someone said in the other thread that Madrid's population would recover in 20 turns, but what about the infrastructure?

Madrid would fully recover (to it's current size of 5) in 13 turns.

Size 1 --> 2 in 4 turns
Size 2 --> 3 in 7 turns
Size 3 --> 4 in 10 turns
Size 4 --> 5 in 13 turns
Size 5 --> 6 in 16 turns
These turn numbers are inclusive; it would take Madrid 16 turns to go from size 1 to size 6


The infrasturcture of Madrid was a Barracks and a Temple. A Barracks would take 40 shields and a temple is 30 shields. A Temple could be built in 9 turns. The Barracks could be finnished in 7, if it followed the Temple.

The '20' turns was what the whole plan would take from the point of implication;

Madrid building 2 settler's then being abandoned and rebuilt on same turn= 7 Turns

Madrid regrowing to original size= 13 turns

These two items are additive in that one follows directly after the other; hence the '20' turns

If we were to include the rebuilding of Madrid's infrastructure; Madrid would have it rebuilt in 16 turns after it was abandoned and rebuilt.

So, in conclusion, if you take the into consideration that Madrid is building a settler for another location, as well as it's own, you can conclude that 3 turns are not lost on productivity in Madrid, this bringing the lost productivity turns down a bit.

We could also just keep that 2nd settler at the Madrid site and add him to Madrid when it is rebuilt; instantly having a size 3 city that would grow to size 5 in 6 turns! The Temple and Barracks could then be rebuilt in a total of 12 turns from the point of being rebuilt.

I hope this gives some of you a look at the kind of numbers we are talking about. The loss of production from madrid is real. But it is far outweighed by the gain in production and commerce throughout the rest of Spain. Please vote for the "jump, " it will help us to become less dependent on others for Technologies and we'll be better able to maintain our current military force while building Spains infrastructure.

[Hot Mustard]

Thank you OliverFA and BigFree for the numbers and additional information.

Lots to consider...

I would like to hear what E_T and roadcage think of this idea, as I think of them as top quality Civ3 "analysts".

[Fibrizzo]

I think that it would be better to finish the REX and then build a palace at Pamplona, instead of losing now all that has been invested in Madrid.

[OliverFA]

Can someone tell how much are we gaining? Honestly I don't know the exact formula right now, but I don't see that moving the capital a few tiles would result in that amazing gain of shields and commerce. What I see now is that our main production center (1/4 of shields and 1/5 of commerce) is lost for some time and we have to rebuild the temple, the barracks and our area of influence.