The Triumvirate city-state of the Apolyton Imperium! 3150BC

[MrWhereItsAt]

Turns have been played. I have had issues with uploading, but I have managed to resolve those so here are the results of the latest set of play.

It is now 3150BC.
The hut popped ended up another Archer, which was homed to Imperium (doh - I should have popped that sooner). Further exploration revealed Iron and another tundra special East of the lake - good for production earlier on. The settler turned back to the West to what looks like the best place for a city - access to the lake, multiple shielded grasslands and two specials with 4 resources each!

Meanwhile the new Archer stumbled upon an advanced tribe to the East of the lake, named Dominion (once again I make up the names on the spot - must start a city naming thread now ), fortunately located in grasslands

Meanwhile Majestica was founded and the NONE Archer found and popped another hut - Barbarians! There is jsut the one Horseman, but he certainly poses a threat to Majestica. I expect he will attack the Archer and die a death of 1000 piercings, but we must be ready to buy a warrior or two anyway.

Horseback Riding was discovered, and we have just started this turn on the way to Alphabet.
I realise I haven't changed the builds to Horses, but we haven't lost any time there.

Here come the screenshots...


The bulk of our lands


Lands around the capitol Imperialis


The Big Five


Demographics


There are only a few questions - which directions do we keep exploring? The northwest, being all grassland, appears to be a good option once the barbarian is dealt with. The east may be good, but it is looking somewhat mountainous.... Do we need to rethink our tech strategy with more knowledge of the terrain? And once we've got some Horses exploring, what to build next?

[cavebear]

Well, for starters, we obviously want to attack the Barb horse with the Archer.

I like the placement of the cities. Even that advanced tribe one is OK.

[atawa]

explore and expand NE, we should use the gold asap as we are 7th in trade

[shade]

Originally posted by cavebear
Well, for starters, we obviously want to attack the Barb horse with the Archer.

I think that might be difficult(I guess the hut just got popped?)...but the horsemen will probably attack(and die )

Nice work...an advanced tribe

Shade

PS: Trimuvirate...???I know a Triumvirate(although that means ~ 3-men-chip...=> Triumurbate )

[MrWhereItsAt]

Er, Triumvirate is what it was supposed to be - a Rule of Three, as at certain times during the Roman Empire.

[H Tower]

I see triumvirate

[Dre of Compton]

hmm, two consuls and an outsider, i wonder if we could fit that into this game......

[cavebear]

Triumvirates were usually a military leader, a rich person, and someone with a good political network.

But that's just a point of fact, as we are a democracy.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Well, it sounded good, and I was feeling very into it, so that's where the name came from... :shrug:

Oh, and I'd like to play again Tuesday pm my time = Tuesday am US and Europe time. Having suffered enough delays, I want to do as much as possible in these early easy goings before being ousted by an election or military coup!

[Dre of Compton]

Originally posted by cavebear
Triumvirates were usually a military leader, a rich person, and someone with a good political network.

what do u mean usualy, there were only two sets of triumvirs, the first led by Iulius caesar, and the later by Octavinus caesar, but yes i do see ur point, but atleast in the first trimvirate the triumvirs were either consuls or ex consuls, so each of them in had ur three qualities and in the second trimvirate all of the members were dynasts and exconsuls if not consuls at the time

but my origional point was, why couldnt we have a roman style democracy (even though they were a republic...) where we elect three leaders (even though the romans elected two...) i Know we couldnt do it in this game, it might be possible to do it in the next

[MrWhereItsAt]

An idea worthy of discussion Dre - keep it in mind for the next game.

But remember those rules of three were not without plenty of disagreements. We would need to find a way to get over any such hurdles. There's something to be said of having one final authority, even if I do say so myself.

[CannonFodder]

I think having a single civilian commander-in-chief has been one of the keys to the United States working as well as it has, though obviously not without abuses. But overall it has been good. Keep that authority in the hands of the President.

[Dre of Compton]

hmm, well if u ever need help with creating an unusual constitution, im ur man(no self flattery intended, im just stating a fact)

[CannonFodder]

Originally posted by Dre of Compton
hmm, well if u ever need help with creating an unusual constitution, im ur man(no self flattery intended, im just stating a fact)

Don't worry, I think we can find plenty out there already

[Ben Kenobi]

Actually, we run on the UK style of constitution.

If it works, use it again.

Otherwise we don't bother with a written, fixed constitution.

[cavebear]

Yeah, "common law" works here.

[cavebear]

Originally posted by Dre of Compton
hmm, well if u ever need help with creating an unusual constitution, im ur man(no self flattery intended, im just stating a fact)

I suspect that anyone writing "im ur man" isn't going to be someone producing a good constitution or deathless inspiration for the ages.

[CannonFodder]

UK style of "constitution," meaning hardly any at all

De facto rules have worked well enough so why bother messing with the system?

[atawa]

The discussions on it were nice though

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Actually, we run on the UK style of constitution.

If it works, use it again.

Otherwise we don't bother with a written, fixed constitution.

The US "written" constitution is not all that different. The supreme court over the years has shown itself to be adept at "interpreting" what the writing means.

RJM at Sleepers

[Dre of Compton]

Originally posted by cavebear
I suspect that anyone writing "im ur man" isn't going to be someone producing a good constitution or deathless inspiration for the ages.

well u suspected wrong didnt u, or, it could be that im the only good(or close to good...)15 year old constitution maker where i live but....

anyway, i have no idea how common law works in the way of law changing works, so could someone inform me

[Ben Kenobi]

A quick summary is in my post.

If it works, use it again.

If we run into a new situation, then we discuss about possible options.

That's pretty much all you need to know for this game. This way we don't have any judges 'intepreting' the constitution to find lots of new stuff not there before.

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by obiwan18
A quick summary is in my post.

If it works, use it again.

If we run into a new situation, then we discuss about possible options.

That's pretty much all you need to know for this game. This way we don't have any judges 'intepreting' the constitution to find lots of new stuff not there before.

It may be worth adding that we don't have to be slaves to precedent. If the circumstances are different, we don't have to do what we did the last couple of times.

But these sort of situations are pretty rare.

RJM at Sleepers

[Ben Kenobi]

Saves time.

Who wants to spend time arguing over a constitution when one could be playing the game?

[BruceTheStupid]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
There's something to be said of having one final authority, even if I do say so myself.

[Dre of Compton]

Ahh, cood point obiwan, nothing other than that statment could sway me from the path to constitutionalism(i hope i spelled it right....)