Ministry of Imperial Expansion - 2590 BC

[Jonny]

Hello from Jonny, your new Minister of Imperial Expansion.

This thread the place for all questions, comments, complaints, ideas, suggestions, etc. concerning the Ministry of Imperial Expansion. No spam, please.

The poll in this thread concerns the city sites proposed in "Case Pink." They are two good possibilities for city sites, offering low corruption and maximize use of our grassland. So, I am asking you if we should build there. The picture attached at the end of this post shows the two possible city sites. The red and blue dots indicate the city sites themselves, while the red and blue lines around them indicate beneficial squares that they will be able to work. This is an offical poll.

Question: Should we build cities at the sites proposed in "Case Pink?"

Options: Build cities at both sites, build at red site only, build at blue site, build at neither site.

Duration: 3 days.

One note: I will be on vacation over the next week. (Jun 30-Jul 7.) Although I will have Internet access there, I probably won't use it much, if at all. I will take care of any things that may need my attention when I come back. So, don't be worried if you don't see me much.

[notyoueither]

Yes to both.

Just a note though. Blue city could go 1 square further NE. That would make it a more viable long term site due to it being on the coast and having more 'unique' squares available. It would still be able to use 2 tiles of the Apolyton plain.

It would also be built 1 turn quicker with a settler from Banana HQ.

[Spiffor]

I feel Red City should be built one tile NW of its current location. This way, it would have a river in its immediate surroundings, and will still have 2 grasslands in its radius by the time it expands to 2.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I feel Red City should be built one tile NW of its current location. This way, it would have a river in its immediate surroundings, and will still have 2 grasslands in its radius by the time it expands to 2.

If we're going to use 'Red City' for our Archer army buildup, then we won't be able to make it expand to radius size 2 for some time, and until then, it will be fairly useless.

[notyoueither]

I would leave Red where it is. For at least 2 reasons.

1. It will have access to more of the Apolyton plains.

2. With the capitol stuck at the end of a peninsula, it might be better to use a 3 spacing for cities to maximize the number of less corrupt cities.

[kring]

A problem with this poll is that it doesn't offer the option of which city to build first. Unless you are pumping out 2 settlers on the same turn, or real close together, then which one to build first? It may or may not matter, but it would have avoided another poll if the both option wins.

[spicytimothy]

i'm not that gd at playing Civ3... but y build them so close??? it'll just overlap the city radii... i think u should build the third city far far off over to the Dyes that i saw in the bigger pic in the other thread...

spicytimothy

[Harovan]

Build both. First the Red, where it is. Then the Blue. Its location has yet to be discussed.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by spicytimothy
i'm not that gd at playing Civ3... but y build them so close??? it'll just overlap the city radii... i think u should build the third city far far off over to the Dyes that i saw in the bigger pic in the other thread...

The reason we want to build them so close is because of short-term advantages we couldn't get in the long run. We want to be able to use the good land (i.e. NOT jungle) with our new cities so we can produce Archers in quantity for our attack. If we build far off the problems short-term are that: 1: corruption and waste would cripple the city, and 2: the cities would produce next to nothing in the first place in the order of food and production, which would make them useless for some time.

Needless to say, not a good thing to do if you plan on going to war.

[Jonny]

IMO, we should build at the red city first. It will immedately have access to a mined grassland/shield tile, and will be much more productive. Then, we will build at the blue site second.

[jordie]

Originally posted by Jonny
IMO, we should build at the red city first. It will immedately have access to a mined grassland/shield tile, and will be much more productive. Then, we will build at the blue site second.

I think that is the way to go. Although I agree with the blue city being 1 tile NE.

[Vlad Antlerkov]

Build the Red city right where it is.

As for the blue city, as NYE suggested, move it one tile NE. This gives us another coastal city (always nice), still gives it access to tiles on the Apolytonian Lowlands, and can be reached in the same amount of time as the old Blue site from Apolytonia.

Later on, as Tim suggested, build near the unclaimed dyes (if the Yanks haven't already claimed them )

[Spiffor]

I meant, we should move Red city one tile to NW, because it will have 2 grasslands by the time its population expands to 2, which will only take 10 turns. I know we won't culture-expand it, that's why I think it would be better to place it in such a way that its immediate radius encompasses river tiles.

Red city will probably never have more than 3 population (except if we decide to keep it, once Case : Pink is over) , and enough jungle shall be cleared by the time this 3 population comes. If Red City is only size 3, I don't see how "having more of Apolytonia plains" matters.

Placing Red City NW of its current location will also allow us to gain 1 more tile in direction of the French, meaning one less jungle tile to road.

Except corruption problem (but I'm almost sure we won't suffer from corruption in our second town 5 tiles from our capital, because the map is huge), I don't see any valid point of keeping Red City where it is.

You'll probably say "the polls say so, and the polls are God". But you'll notice that a ready to use project is easily accepted by people, who feel they don't have the ability to discuss it. I'm not sure if NYE and SirRalph pondered the position of Red City as much as I did. I'm curious to hear their feedback about my opinion.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I meant, we should move Red city one tile to NW, because it will have 2 grasslands by the time its population expands to 2, which will only take 10 turns.

If we move it 1 tile NW (closer to the river), it will have access to only 1 unshielded grassland. I don't know where you take the second from.

[Spiffor]

The worker who is currently clearing the jungle, and who will be done in 8 turns, when Red City is founded (original location), or 1 turn before (my location).

[Harovan]

Argh. Who let the worker clean jungle? We need a road to the Red city, to lower corruption.

Where it is, the Red city has access to 3 grassland tiles, the Blue city also 3, and Apolyton 2 plus 2 forests. This is optimal placed. If the cleaned tile won't be a bonus grassland, the Red city will be pretty unproductive (maximum 3 shields). It can make 5 shields where it is now.

[Spiffor]

SirRalph : don't forget we're industrious, and roadmine 2 grasslands will take only 12 turns (including moves). The clearing of another tile of jungle will begin 2 or 3 turns after Red city gets to pop. 2.
These 12 turns will have to be taken, whether we place Red City where you want, or where I want.

But placing Red City one tile NW will save us 5 turns of road building. The relative time cost of clearing yet another jungle (next to the river) becomes only 7 turns, which we can afford in time Red City pop. grews to 3.
With lack of luck, Red City NW will produce 4 shields max. With luck, 6 shields max. In any ways, 1 more gold (cleared jungle next to the river), and one more tile in direction of the French.

You'll probably say "clearing jungle is stupid", but it's the top priority of the workers, as I could see in the Turnchat : almost everybody agreed the worker should clear a jungle.

[notyoueither]

Red City is going to need that shielded, mined tile to stay on the schedule for Case Pink. I think (I'm not at home right now so I can't verify).

Also, a 3 spacing is going to be very much to our benefit re corruption as the empire builds up. That means placing cities every 4 tiles. Do you wish to address this point Spiffor?

Do you think we should use a 4 spacing (cities every 5th tile) with our capitol at the end of a peninsula?

[Kuciwalker]

Both. Plan Pink needs them.

[joost1110]

I voted non of both, because I agree with moving red 1 NW and blue 1 NE. Maybe set up a new poll about where to place it exactly?

[Inverse Icarus]

red city wont move. we voted on it and these are where they're supposed to go. would you like to complicate the game more by voting more and more? go ahead.

[buzzbat]

i propose building blue on the river to the n-nw on the other side of the river this may waste a few turns in the short run but in the long run it could help us...

also i would get a galley going to explore a little, especially to the south of apolyton where the sea tiles extends farther out... island, or does the continent wrap back around or is it a waste of time and turns?

[Jonny]

Originally posted by buzzbat
i propose building blue on the river to the n-nw on the other side of the river this may waste a few turns in the short run but in the long run it could help us...

I'm afraid we can't do that. The point of building these two cities is to let them be able to use the grasslands, so we can get the most benefit from the grasslands. Where you propose it, it would have access to no grasslands.

also i would get a galley going to explore a little, especially to the south of apolyton where the sea tiles extends farther out... island, or does the continent wrap back around or is it a waste of time and turns?

We don't know what our continent does yet. We will definitely get a galley out there as soon as possible, but we are somewhat far off from getting Map Making at this time.

[Jonny]

Since I am leaving on vacation tomorrow, I have to plan what we will do. I'm very sure that we will do this:

We shall build cities at both sites. We will build at the Red Site first. We will build at the Blue Site second, but the Blue Site will be moved one square northeast. See the picture.

[Inverse Icarus]

you wouldnt reach that tile N of apolyton.

[notyoueither]

What does that mean?

[Jonny]

Originally posted by UberKruX
you wouldnt reach that tile N of apolyton.

Ooh, true. My bad. The city radius of Blue City wouldn't reach that tile. But at least Red City and Blue City won't have to fight over the grasslands now. There is no overlap of the grasslands between those two cities. Just one jungle tile overlaps between those two.

[notyoueither]

Ahh. I see.

OK. However, the long term benefit of Blue being a coastal city may very probably outweigh the number of the grasslands from the Apolyton plains that can be reached.

Case Pink assumes that Blue City has only 2 useful pop to work 2 grass tiles. A worker can easily come along and add another grass tile to keep it productive at 3 working population.

[Franses]

I agree with Jonny regarding moving the blue city as indicated. Voted both.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Red City is going to need that shielded, mined tile to stay on the schedule for Case Pink. I think (I'm not at home right now so I can't verify).

Also, a 3 spacing is going to be very much to our benefit re corruption as the empire builds up. That means placing cities every 4 tiles. Do you wish to address this point Spiffor?

Do you think we should use a 4 spacing (cities every 5th tile) with our capitol at the end of a peninsula?

Indeed, having Red City not use the mined grassland would make us behind on schedule for Case Pink. You have a point, and Red City should be placed at its original location for the sake of fast unit production.

However, once Case Pink is done, we'll have to dismantle Red City, because its placement is extremely bad reguarding long term : it hinders Apolyton from using its full productive potential, which will be extremely bad for wonder building (Apolyton is probably the best city spot that we know of, better than Orleans, and dare I say better than Paris).
Plus Red City would hinder us placing a city next to the river (yes it means twice NW, or three times), because of proximity with Orleans. And, middle-term-wise, having cities next to rivers is a must : no aqueduct needed, magically more money, defense bonuses, ability to build dams and nuclear plants.
That's why we should dismantle Red City as soon as possible, as soon as it oulived its usefulness. If we don't, we'll keep it (because of its culture etc.), which would mean a very bad investment for middle and long term.

I thought placing Red city one tile NW was a good compomise between short and middle term, but I agree it's not enough for Case Pink. Red city where it is can be optimal for case pink, but keeping it thereafer would be dramatic for long term development of Apolyton.