City-Planner Recommendations

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 03:51

OK, a way to show a possible reccomendation to the President about city actions...

Comes in 4 parts, so be patient while I post them.

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 03:52

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 03:53

Third:

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 03:57

Last:

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 04:02

It will not surprise me if there are alternate suggestions for the actions in some cities. That's why I'm presenting specifics...

Ben Kenobi · February 7, 2003, 08:00

Very clean Cavebear!

It's much better than my old lists.

Prolly quicker for you as well.

My only question is with the city walls in Cremona. Why do you suggest this build?

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 12:53

Because Cremona is so close to an enemy. I don't mean to dabble in the concerns of the Minister of War, but I thought it would be OK if the city looked to its own defense just a bit.

cavebear · February 7, 2003, 13:00

Quote:

Originally posted by obiwan18
Very clean Cavebear!

It's much better than my old lists.

Prolly quicker for you as well.

In earlier times, I could just go through the cities on the game map geographically and list what I thought they needed to do. But now, with 35 cities and having to figure out the needs of the other Ministers, I had to build a tiny database. It wouldn't help much if I went through the list one time for the Minister of War and entered "needs Rifle to defend from Celts, and then went through later and thought, "Gee they need an Aquaduct".

This is the only way I can keep track of things. I'm getting old; my brain only works well on alternate Wednesdays.

Ben Kenobi · February 7, 2003, 18:33

In that case, it would be better to produce ships for Cremona, to guard the sealanes. Citywalls aren't going to stop ships sent by the Celts to batter down the defenses.

Another option would be to build a Coastal Fortress.

Both of these would be better from a defensive standpoint than citywalls.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 7, 2003, 19:21

[broken record] Where's the Freight?[/broken record]

SCG · February 7, 2003, 20:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
[broken record] Where's the Freight?[/broken record]

here's the 15 highest trade cities that can build freights in demand that don't have freight in its build queue - the number is the current max # of trade arrows, not the current trade arrows

Avila 72, (GEMS)
St. Pratski, 58 (GOLD)
Leon 57, (GEMS)
Cadiz 56, (GOLD, SILK, SPICE)
Malaga 46, (Wool)
Vigo 44, (SILK, Wool)
Granada, 41 (Wool)
Cordoba, 37 (GOLD)
Obladi, 35 (Wool)
Amazon Island, 32 (GOLD)
Whale Island, 31 (Beads, GOLD)
Naples, 30 (WINE)
Cavebear City, 21 (SILK) 0 trade routes
Cremona, 21 (SILK, SPICE) 0 trade routes
Quinsay, 18 (WINE) 0 trade routes

*ponders what his reports will look like as we currently have 3 freights built that are in demand of the 33 in stock*

SCG · February 8, 2003, 15:44

Disclaimer: "A couple of these suggestions apply only for 1-2 turns, so would require a bit more micromanagement than is currently being used. Use as you see fit."

Amazon Island: (79/80) move worker from forest to ocean - increases tax and science by 2 and still allows library to be completed next turn. Put back on forest after completion of library

Avila: (full food box) assuming we rush to 160/200, remove forest worker, move grassland worker to ocean (3 elvi). This leaves 21 shields (enough for a 2-turn completion of superhighways). moving the worker from the 3-food to the 2-food will make the game place the worker on the 3-food trade space next turn when it grows. We currently have 5 unhappy people converted by 5 structures (max 5). the 3rd elvis ensures that the next pop (16) will be content instead of unhappy next turn and will celebrate. for the 2nd turn, when it grows to 17, we have our superhighways, put all elvi back to work using the forest or ocean depending on needs.

CAPITOL: use all available trade squares - current structures and tax rate makes the use of extra scientists from trade workers less productive rather than more productive (same science, lower production, gold and food)

Cartena: move worker from unroaded grassland to roaded, irrigated plains (gain 2 trade arrows)

Malaga: remove worker from forest - city will celebrate (if we rehome destroyer in st pratski or let sit for 2 turns) and will place worker back on the forest after growing, place elvis back on ocean after growing

Pamplona: put elvi to work in the fields

Saragossa: (61/80) move the grass worker to mines, move 2 plains workers to ocean, this leaves 10 shields per turn - once aquaduct is completed, rearrange

Seville: (assuming rushed to 160/200) Elvis to mines for 1 turn - after first turn, remove mine worker so when grows will not have an unhappy face (same discussion as for avila) and will celebrate from 10 to 11, next turn replace workers as desired

cavebear · February 8, 2003, 17:16

You mean that of all the Freights we have, only 3 of them are for demanded goods?

(edit: I see from another post that there are indeed only 3 demanded Freights. I had no idea. I will change some cities to Freights)

SCG · February 8, 2003, 17:30

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
You mean that of all the Freights we have, only 3 of them are for demanded goods?

And one of them a gems freight seen in the picture by Darkness Fort, presumably headed there?

That was one of the reasons i started the WIA town poll

cavebear · February 8, 2003, 18:23

I now have Freight for Leon and Cordoba immediately, and "Freight Next" for Amazon Island, Avila, Cadiz, Capua, Cavebear City, and St Praski.

6 cities are building Superhighways, with a rush order for Cadiz. I suggest that the others be allowed to build a couple of turns then rushed at the President's discretion.

Will that be more satisfactory? Our aim is to please all Ministers and Citizens.

H Tower · February 8, 2003, 19:47

the arguement that convinced me is that A: we aren't saving the money for anything else. and B: We would recoup our losses within 3 turns with a steady stream of

cavebear · February 8, 2003, 19:52

But we don't have demanded Freights from which to get gold and beakers, so Superhighways won't pay off yet (though we are indeed building some) for that eventual purpose).

But here's an idea... We have Oil Freights sitting around IIRC, lacking a destination. Why not gift Automobile to the Chinese so we have somewhere to send Oil. Am I correct in thinking that Automobile creates a demand for Oil?

Would that give the Minister of Trade some Freight to use?

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 8, 2003, 20:21

We could gift it to the Chinese - that's not a bad idea because (IIRC) they're Rational and not Aggressive. The Aggressive AIs wouldn't ask for that, they'd want Advanced Flight or something that we don't want them to have

IIRC Automobile (and SH) creates oil demand.

At least talk to them - it's worth a shot. And in my experience Oil tends to repeat a lot

SCG · February 8, 2003, 20:24

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
But we don't have demanded Freights from which to get gold and beakers, so Superhighways won't pay off yet (though we are indeed building some) for that eventual purpose).

But here's an idea... We have Oil Freights sitting around IIRC, lacking a destination. Why not gift Automobile to the Chinese so we have somewhere to send Oil. Am I correct in thinking that Automobile creates a demand for Oil?

Would that give the Minister of Trade some Freight to use?

According to Samson, Automobile initiates demand, but city size is also a huge factor (especially over size 12), as is superhighways and to a lesser extent factories and greater # of techs. I'm not sure i want the AI to start tossing around battleships with our atrocious reputation any sooner than we can help it. If we finish the superhighways in key cities, as well as grow them a little more, we may be able to create demand within our own cities.

Too bad it's against the rules to see what sort of deliveries we get in CAPITOL vs other cities

cavebear · February 8, 2003, 20:24

Do the Ministers of War, Foreign Affairs, and Trade agree? Would this be a good idea?

cavebear · February 8, 2003, 20:31

And, for the sake of clarity, may I suggest that new posts on this idea be placed under the "Revised City-Planner Recommendations" thread.

Thanks...

H Tower · February 8, 2003, 20:54

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
And, for the sake of clarity, may I suggest that new posts on this idea be placed under the "Revised City-Planner Recommendations" thread.

Thanks...

do you want me to close this thread?