Turn 6, 3800BC

[vulture]

I'd prefer 4-spacing too, unless there is a compelling argument to go for 3.

4447 is a good site, but has the disanvantage of ruling out a significant port on the north coast IMHO. I'd prefer a straight 4444, leaving room for a port at EotS777 (or 7774) which still has the ability to grow to size 12 or more with decent production.

[Harovan]

Good point about the port, but 4447 would have a better production due to more hills and the opportunity to provide the food for working them (food resource). If we're out for a port site, it would be 777, which albeit is not on the river, but would have a good production (important for a port city, as only these can build ships), as it has cows and sheep in radius and one floodplain to help out. 4444 would be a more financial oriented site I guess.

I would prefer a city with a good production as second city. Our capital is weak in this regard (while being strong in food and cash) and we'd better have a factory to quickly spout out those skirmishers, if necessity (or opportunity!) arises.

[Blake]

8887 is another possibility. It has 4 floodplains. That's plenty for a 6-pop lashery. Unfortunately no free river connection.
(okay I am kind of assuming there will be seafood in the fog)

Also a 777 to 8887 city will seal our borders to the north.

If the city is across the river then travel in one direction will take an extra turn (for an even distance) until a road is built.

There are 9 floodplains outside our capital, and I suspect another 2 in the fog. Enough for 2, maybe 3 cities.

It is good that our city site dicussions will be "which of many good places". We are going to have no trouble finding places to put settlers.

[Arrian]

EotS is weak in production now, but won't be in the long run - there be some hills to mine.

As for the 4444 site... it's really low on food until border expansion.

The reason I like 777 is that it gets us the cow right off, shares the fp and sheep, and furthermore doesn't "waste" the coast. It'll become a solid port.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Yes, it's nice to have this sort of "problem" to work with.

And I sure do hope there is seafood under the fog! Extra health for the empire plus a monster poprush site.

-Arrian

[vulture]

4444 would be fine for food - it has 2 flood plains (currently in EotS's borders) which it will be able to use without a border expanasion, which will be plenty in the short term. Plus the river connection gets health bonuses there (once they are connected) without having to build roads.

I like 777 for the first site though, particularly if there is a seafood bonus hiding out there in a good place. Even without it the cow (and possibly use of the sheep) will enable us to get some decent production at that site and get some boats out to explore quite quickly, which would be very useful.

[Arrian]

My bad. Doh. I was looking at 44444.

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Arrian
What do you think about my 777 idea?

I think it's hard to decide without further exploration, in particular the four tiles SW of the Cow and the coast NE of it.

777 is a bit awkward, as it would not be able to use all those Hills (assuming Mines) even if every flat tile were farmed. A seafood resource would definitely help, but we cannot see it yet (if it's there). I also dislike founding on Grassland Hills.

Right now I like Sir Ralph's 4447 idea, coupled with 8888. It's annoying not to work the Cow immediately, but thinking long-term when placing cities is important too.

My original suggestion, 477, is perhaps the greediest of them all, which I would still recommend if there were not other great sites available for our second city (like the Wines).

Any site working the Cow (and potentially the Sheep) is our best bet for early sustained Hammer output without whipping.