Should I abandon Oea and its GW to move the FC?

Aramis · March 22, 2003, 23:13

Ah, one of those novice questions, eh? Perhaps, perhaps. Here's the situation:
Huge game; me as Carthage; just passing out of the ancient era.

My original intent was to expand east & west. Lovely ground. South were the Celts (expanding south) then two more civs below them. I remained on good terms w/ Brennus so I'd have a peaceful buffer state below me & others. Then I spotted the only available iron in Celtic lands and so took them out (Regicide is on). Now I'm expanding into the south, which is even Lovelier ground.

Problem: Forbidden City was placed in Oea, to the west, assuming continued westward expansion. Now I want it in the better, Celtic lands in the south, where my new cities are incredibly corrupt. Oea and its neighbors are very productive (it's where my military units are produced). Oea has several city improvements, and one GW (Hanging Gardens).

Possible solution: I sell off Oea's improvements, abandon it, and rebuild the FC in the south (I'm assuming I can). Then resettle Oea's tile later (good tile improvements around it). Sounds OK to me, but I lose the GW. So what do I do now?

My idea: Say I go slow--put one southern city to building a palace, then a well established northern city (near my capital) doing the same. Once both are very well along I abandon Oea, switch the southern palace project to the FC, and the northern to the GH. Then replace Oea later.

Sound good? Am I missing anything? Yer thoughts Most appreciated. --R

Jaybe · March 23, 2003, 02:55

How about just moving the Palace?
... Or once you get steam power, which renders Hanging Gardens obsolete you could abandon it, but the culture loss would be substantial. Personally, I have never abandoned a city (yet).

CerberusIV · March 23, 2003, 07:36

In the end the Palace and FP will only deal with corruption in a limited number of cities. If you have a decent number of well developed cities with low corruption then a move probably isn't going to be worth it overall.

You don't mention map size or government type. If you can get into republic and build some courthouses those cities in the celtic lands should at least be able to develop their improvements to the point they become useful. Your original cities will be the ones to produce military units but a good road network and careful planning will overcome any problem of getting units into position.

Provided there is a good distance (at least one, preferably two, intervening cities) between your palace and FP a move is not worthwhile. If you really have to move a palace jump may be a more cost effective option.

A screenshot would make it easier to advise.

Spec · March 24, 2003, 12:10

Let the FP finish, if it hasn't already and build the palace somewhere else. And if you are very picky, just rename your cities afterwards.

Spec.

Sava · March 24, 2003, 14:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Spectator
Let the FP finish, if it hasn't already and build the palace somewhere else. And if you are very picky, just rename your cities afterwards.

Spec.

I agree

Spec · March 24, 2003, 14:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava

I agree

Of course you do, is there anybody who disagrees with me?

Spec.

Aramis · March 24, 2003, 15:10

Quote:

Originally posted by CerberusIV
You don't mention map size or government type. . . If you really have to move a palace jump may be a more cost effective option.

A screenshot would make it easier to advise.

Huge map--despotism (researching monarchy) at the time--now a democracy (skipped republic)--courthouses dealing w/ corruption to an extent that makes me happy--screenshot if I have another question like this in the future.

Palace jump! So obvious. Why didn't I think of that instead of overcomplicating the issue

Thanks --R