Our Situation - Page 2

Kingof the Apes · June 18, 2002, 00:49

yes, keep going with the warrior and settler.

*PLEASE NOT A JUNGLE ISLAND*

The Viceroy · June 18, 2002, 03:44

Treck on a few more turns .. If more jungle, settle next to the river/sea .. at least you have a reasonable amount of sea to keep the population going + a river for additional trade..

Explore much more with the warrior for your next city.

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 03:55

Build a city asap with the settler. An early settler is too valuable to explore with it! Don't go north with it. That will only give a corrupt city. Go southwest and found a city at the coast, 3 or 4 tiles straight NW of Apolyton. Mine the terrain there.

beno · June 18, 2002, 04:19

keep those monkeys away from our food!

notyoueither · June 18, 2002, 04:20

Sir Ralph,

Mine what? Swamps?

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 04:39

nye: If the city is built 3 or 4 tiles NW of the capital, there's enough grassland to mine, between this location and Apolyton. A city doesn't need more than 2 tiles early.

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 04:45

I mean one of the "X" locations:

FrustratedPoet · June 18, 2002, 04:49

I agree with Sir Ralph, Apolyton and the proposed 2nd city will have a couple of grassland tiles each to mine for production. In the future we can clear the jungle to support the second city ... the warrior should focus on reaching the edge of the jungle (assuming there is one

) and if the 2nd city can have at least one decent production tile then it can make a more useful contribution than a wandering settler who could be killed by Barbs at any moment.

EDIT: I notice that I'm a Prince now ... wow ... those 300 posts went quick.

notyoueither · June 18, 2002, 05:04

Sir Ralph,

Sorry. I went straight North when evaluating your suggestion.

I too proposed that plan, before I considered the possible size of the banana expanse. Would it not be better to penetrate to the other side and found our second city there? Then Palace jump immediately to get the ball rolling in good terrain?

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 05:10

The palace jump is a good option, if "The Promised Land" is there. I would propose to build the 2nd city near the captial (as described above), build more warriors and send them scouting. If there is a good site, we still can move our capital early enough. To send a settler exploring is a mortal sin, sorry for being harsh, but I try to be constructive. The city should already have been built 2 turns ago. This would have done a better job for the empire as a whole.

EDIT: bad english... although it's still bad, oh well

notyoueither · June 18, 2002, 05:42

No. Not too harsh in any way. You speak well.

Yes, perhaps the settler should trail the warrior for protection.

Unfortunately, if "The Promised Land" is not there, we are doomed. We must find it or we will perish. Even now the Persians are settling Iron deposits. The Iroquios are finding Horse. We must have a viable homeland beyond the swamp!

MrWhereItsAt · June 18, 2002, 06:02

There is no alternative. Either we settle where we are and slowly expand beyond the jungle, or we get to the other side of the jungle. In the first case we will be relegated to a minor role in this world - NOT fun. In the second we either find the land we badly need for settlement, or we are out of luck on this island. We must know NOW how much we can make of this parasite-infested death-jungle land, and what our options are, if any.

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 06:05

notyoueither:

You have a point, but your position seems to be a bit "va-banque" playing to me. I don't think we need this, at least not yet. And what shall we do if we are "doomed"? Abandon the game? I would try to make the best out of the situation.

2 productive cities early are an asset. Both can build units, then settlers to go towards the meanwhile discovered promised land. Or, if we discover another civ, more units to secure their capital, which hopefully is located better.

If we are stuck at a jungle island, this game will be fun indeed. I didn't vote "random" for a game that should last about a year. I hope those, who played "iron man" in these votes, will show a way out.

disorganizer · June 18, 2002, 06:11

we should build the cities in the jungle.
we could with this secure the lands from our neighbors, as our capitols borders will soon expand.
the cities can produce warriors and workers as well as more settlers. if we wait too long for our first city (maybe we already did), then the ai will overrun us at this difficulty-setting

notyoueither · June 18, 2002, 06:40

I do not favour abandoning any game. Let them come for us! We have KruX, we are invincible!

However, I evaluate the odds as being in our favour for finding the Promised Land on the other side of the rainbow.

If we wait to settle it, we wait to grow strong. The sooner we settle it, the stronger we will be. If it is not there... we will only be delaying the use of a free city to find out.

The Viceroy · June 18, 2002, 07:02

I favour a city drop sooner rather than later.., so you can pump out some more settlers/workers .. that will give us more quality land sooner, rather than later, just in case we have actually got ourselves a jungle Island .. wouldn't be the first time.

The rivers give a nice trade bonus, even on jungle .. using that +sea could give some additional trade ..although thinking about it, this would be a good thing to do once we have a few workers available, to start clearing.

Keep the warrior exploring the coasts, as you often find 1 or 2 grassland area's next to the sea.

Alex · June 18, 2002, 07:43

Let's colonize that damn jungle. It is the only thing we can do to improve our chances. More cities = more units = more power.

The Viceroy · June 18, 2002, 08:09

In the long run that may be a bad move, especially if we need to move our capital at some point. We only get to build so many cities, before Corruption makes them cost more than they are worth .. last thing we need is a pile of useless cities in the middle of the jungle.

Obviously, if all we have is jungle, then I would at least build a few, if only to churn out workers to remove the jungle.

The river is the obvious place to build within the jungle (as it stands).

reefer addict · June 18, 2002, 11:50

my suggestion is to build a jungle city and have it just make workers. gonna need alot of workers to clear that mess and disease wont hurt a size one town. if all of our settlers have to cross 20 jungle squares before settling, we could soon find our neighbors knocking on our democratic door. why build a road across it when its gonna have to go anyways?

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 12:07

Pure jungle cities can't build workers effectively, since they have only 1 food surplus. That makes them grow every 20 turns, while in 10 turns the shields for the worker would be ready.

Spiffor · June 18, 2002, 12:20

A jungle city is exactly twice as slow producing workers than a grassland/shields city :
In the latter, you need 10 turns to have growth, and 5 turns to build warrior or worker
In a jungle city, you'd need 20 turns for growth, and 10 turns to build the units.
In the very early game, a jungle city can have some merit, as it produces warriors and workers at an acceptable pace.

Harovan · June 18, 2002, 12:25

True, but we have a shielded grassland tile to spare, NW of Apolyton, or we could mine a simple grassland for it. This would produce warriors+workers at double speed, compared with a jungle city.

Timeline · June 18, 2002, 12:41

Quote:

Originally posted by The Viceroy
In the long run that may be a bad move, especially if we need to move our capital at some point. We only get to build so many cities, before Corruption makes them cost more than they are worth .. last thing we need is a pile of useless cities in the middle of the jungle.

Obviously, if all we have is jungle, then I would at least build a few, if only to churn out workers to remove the jungle.

The river is the obvious place to build within the jungle (as it stands).

You forget jungle cities make for the absolute best city sites after they are cleared. We will not be hindering ourselves in any way by colonizing this jungle....if we have to. Besides, where els are we gonne go, do see a better place?

We will develop our area here at home first, and if our scouts detect anything useful in the future we will go there.

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 12:43

Grrrrr, double post.

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 12:43

How I hate that submit button!

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 12:43

Keep another thing in mind guys. We have as little or as much time as we want. As long as we have a few workers, some cities in the jungle will eventually be the strongest in the world. Exploration, and finding spots where resources may be at (and one or two really fertile cities) will be important now, but in the long run we'll have an advantage if we keep our workers busy.

Timeline · June 18, 2002, 12:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
Keep another thing in mind guys. We have as little or as much time as we want. As long as we have a few workers, some cities in the jungle will eventually be the strongest in the world. Exploration, and finding spots where resources may be at (and one or two really fertile cities) will be important now, but in the long run we'll have an advantage if we keep our workers busy.

What he said

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 12:47

Linney agreeing with me, say it's not so!

Timeline · June 18, 2002, 12:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip

but in the long run we'll have an advantage if we keep our workers busy.

Agreed, but we have to build them first. I hope Punkbass accepts my plan.......

Jon Shafer · June 18, 2002, 12:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
Agreed, but we have to build them first. I hope Punkbass accepts my plan.......

So far everyone agrees, so I don't think that will be a problem. There's not really much else we can do that's all that feasible right now.