City Management

[ruff_hi]

Here is our capital ...



Grassland Cows: 1
Plains Wine: 1
Grassland River: 7
Grassland: 3
Plains: 2
Grassland Hills: 3
Plains Hill: 2
Mountain: 1

Grassland Forests: 8
Plains Forest: 1 (wine)
Grassland Hills Forest: 3
Plains Hills Forest: 1

Observations

• Once the cows and wine have been improve, pre-biology and no windmills, we have a 5 food deficit (+2 from city center) if we want to work all of our tiles
• This means we will need 5 farms, leaving 5 grassland tiles for cottages (obviously river grassland tiles).
• To me, this suggests that we run a specialist economy at first.
• For defensive purposes, we should also chop all forests in the inner circle.

I read in one of the map scripts that a good capital is placed in a poor region and a poor capital is placed in a good region. We should reach out to Sirian to get the low down on his Terra.py map.

[darrelljs]

Nice work Ruff...I would say early on (because I love production capitals) we would want to improve the Cows and on Farm, then three grassland hills and one plains hill. Uh...is six tiles the happy cap? Anyway, that is 17 hammers, not too shabby.

Darrell

[Sullla]

I think the happy cap is 5 for the starting capital with no luxury resources (not 100% certain though). As an alternate path, we could go with cows/two grassland hills/plains hill/grassland forest at size 5 for 14 shields/turn. Also a good idea to farm at least one grassland, to have the option for a 3/0/1 tile instead of a 2/1/0 tile.

We may be getting a little ahead of ourselves here. I also think there's a good chance that another resource (copper/horses/iron) is sitting under one of the tiles to the south of our start.

[Qwack]

This is a pretty weak capital in general. One thing I would mention is possibly farming the wine tile until we get monarchy. 2/1/2 is not going to be a bad tile for our capital right now (Its better than a grassland forest).

If we go with the cows, farmed wine, 2 grassland hills and a plains hill, that gives us 14 hammers and some extra commerce early.

[Zeviz]

My preference would be to work cottages, rather than farms. Especially with such a low happiness cap. A couple early cottages + an academy + Beurocracy can be very nice, and we have plenty of food thanks to the cows.

[Qwack]

The problem with working cottages is this is a multiplayer game, I'm not sure if the other teams are going to play it aggressively but in multiplayer hammers and units are much much more important than teching quickly.

If we are isolated cottages would be a better idea ofcourse. If we have another team on our continent units should be a priority without much doubt in my mind (Both to defend ourselves and attack )

[Kylearan]

Hi,

Originally posted by Qwack
The problem with working cottages is this is a multiplayer game, I'm not sure if the other teams are going to play it aggressively but in multiplayer hammers and units are much much more important than teching quickly.

I have no idea about normal multiplayer, but I think this game might be played less aggressively since whole teams are playing instead of individuals. That's also my experience from the CFC demogame, although distances between civs were greater there which made early aggression less appealing.

The main problem here is the meta-game: Any team that plays long-term by putting emphasis on growth and which gets attacked will lose. Any team that plans short-term by focusing on hammers and will not attack will lose as well - against the third kind of team, which plays long-term and which gets lucky by not getting attacked. And in case this makes focusing on hammers and attacking a neighbour look like the best option: The diplomatic penalty by attacking another civ might make that team lose the game as well... Ugh.

-Kylearan

P.S.: I still suffer from sleep deprivation induced by our newborn daughter, but will try to take part in the discussions here again. Even though the setup process for this game was really terrible (and I better not start to imagine what flaws and mistakes will surface as the game goes along...), this might be fun nonetheless.

[darrelljs]

Originally posted by Kylearan The main problem here is the meta-game: Any team that plays long-term by putting emphasis on growth and which gets attacked will lose. Any team that plans short-term by focusing on hammers and will not attack will lose as well - against the third kind of team, which plays long-term and which gets lucky by not getting attacked. And in case this makes focusing on hammers and attacking a neighbour look like the best option: The diplomatic penalty by attacking another civ might make that team lose the game as well... Ugh.

Heh-heh...the only response to that is to become paralyzed with inaction. I have no experience with multiplayer whatsoever, but my preference would typically be aggression so at least we have some control.

Darrell

[darrelljs]

I just took a second look at the map script info:

Map Type : Terra

# of Old World Landmasses : 2 Old World Landmasses - Inter-navigable by workboats, galleys or triremes.

# of New World landmasses : Random New World Landmasses - A variety of large and small landmasses, number and size to be decided by CyberShy, the mapmaker. New world navigable from the old world only by Caravels and beyond. Not to be reachable by massive cultural borders and coastal vessels. New World landmasses can be inter-navigable either by coastal or ocean going vessels, depending on the whim of CyberShy, the mapmaker.

I guess I'd rather make mean on our home landmass and make nice on the other one. Is that even possible?

Darrell

[Zeviz]

Originally posted by Kylearan
...
The main problem here is the meta-game: Any team that plays long-term by putting emphasis on growth and which gets attacked will lose. Any team that plans short-term by focusing on hammers and will not attack will lose as well - against the third kind of team, which plays long-term and which gets lucky by not getting attacked. And in case this makes focusing on hammers and attacking a neighbour look like the best option: The diplomatic penalty by attacking another civ might make that team lose the game as well... Ugh.
...

The optimal strategy in this case is to make a deal with your neighbors to focus on economy and later compete for the New World and the other continent, whose inhabitants will be backwards due to early military buildup. (I would even favor a disarmament agreement for our starting landmass, with location and size of forces monitored by inspectors using Open Borders.)

I think the diplomatic penalty for early agression would be too high. And I personally would rather not play "us against the world" kind of game.

However, this also depends on who our neighbors are. PAL will probably do an early rush. Rabbits (and the rest of Apolyton forum teams) seem to enjoy the game too much to give any team an early exit. I have no idea about Imperio.

EDIT:

Originally posted by darrelljs
...
I guess I'd rather make mean on our home landmass and make nice on the other one. Is that even possible?
Darrell

Not really. I wouldn't trust a team that attacked its neighbor early farther than I could throw them.

[sooooo]

OK, we are about to switch from worker to warrior next turn. Normally I would still work the high growth tile (cows) while doing this, do others agree?

[Sullla]

I would certainly work the 3/0/1 cattle tile over any of the others in the starting radius. I can't see any reason why we'd want to emphasize shields over food at this stage of the game...

[mostly-harmless]

Definitely food, to catch up in city growth.
mh

[Zeviz]

I agree.

[sooooo]

We'll grow next turn.



Our plains mine will be done in 4 turns. I assume we will build another warrior next. Which other tile should we work next turn?