November 24, 2000, 19:43
|
#1
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 09:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 72
|
road rage
I have two cities with borders 2 tiles apart. I can build roads to the edge of the borders but that's it. I can't connect the cities with a road without building another city in the narrow neutral corridor between the two. I tried building a fort there to see if that would do the trick but it just wasted 1000 production. Arghhh! Do you absolutely have to build another city to solve this or am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
November 24, 2000, 19:59
|
#2
|
Guest
|
One possibility: Are you certain the Fortress is finished yet? It takes several turns, and the borders aren't adjusted until it's done.
|
|
|
|
November 24, 2000, 20:31
|
#3
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 09:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 72
|
Ahhh yes! Thanks. Didn't realize it took several turns to complete fort. I had a unit on the fort which obstructed the "under construction" look.
So now I'm wondering, all else being equal, is it better to solve a situation like this with a settler (740 + loss of 1 pop.) or a fort (1000)? Sure are expensive ways to get 120 worth of road across. And there's also the issue of a city being built right away and having to wait a few turns for the fort.
[This message has been edited by ak (edited November 24, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by ak (edited November 24, 2000).]
|
|
|
|
November 24, 2000, 21:55
|
#4
|
Settler
Local Time: 09:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 13
|
My own strategy thus far in resolving road rage -- and I sympathise with the syndrome -- has been to build fortresses rather than new cities (I've tried both). With two nearby cities, unless there's some *very* potentially productive land in between, I tend to feel that a "bridge city" would either be at a disadvantage or would "pirate" from the established cities; and the cost for bringing a settlement up to snuff is fairly hefty in the long term, so the return on the investment is a serious consideration. I also like to place cities based on long-term development and/or strategic plans, rather than simple game mechanics. And, finally, from the standpoint of game mechanics, I find it quicker and simpler to call up emergency troops from fortresses than from cities. This is just my style of playing, of course.
|
|
|
|
November 26, 2000, 14:47
|
#5
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 09:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA.
Posts: 67
|
Both work, but the real question is which takes you longer? Creating a settler or creating the Public Works for the Fortification? You can tweak your production and Public Works to increase either one of these.
Smooshies
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2000, 17:30
|
#6
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 10:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Schertz, TX
Posts: 37
|
Somebody in another thread suggested settling a new city to extend your border, build your road, then disband the city in the same turn. If ya got a spare settler just hanging around, that is.
|
|
|
|
November 30, 2000, 12:40
|
#7
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 09:05
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sandy, UT
Posts: 64
|
Do you keep your border extension if you disband your city? If so then this ability might go-away in a patch.
I think you should be able to build a road if within the vision of a unit when outside of your borders. I'd suggest this to Activision.
quote:

Originally posted by Captain_Dave on 11-29-2000 04:30 PM
Somebody in another thread suggested settling a new city to extend your border, build your road, then disband the city in the same turn. If ya got a spare settler just hanging around, that is.
 |
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:05.
|
|