What to do with the settlers?

Bob_Smurf42 · May 10, 2003, 21:59

Right now we have 2 settlers active and 5 in production. 2 are in 0-production cities, and the other three will be completed(barring rushing or worker shifting) in 13, 15, and 19 turns.

On another note, what should we do about Imperialis?

The red icons are possible tiles to switch to. I realize that the grass and tundra are useless and that the game is the same as the shield grass, I just wanted to include all possibilities. Note that with max prod. the city has a 1-shield deficet, and no food. With max food, there would be a 2-shield deficet and 1 extra food, all we need to grow in one turn.
The dilemma as I see it is: If we switch to the grass we can use both the tiles, but we lose two units instead of one. Otherwise, we remain stagnent.
EDIT: We would have to raise lux to prevent disorder anyway(d'oh). We might consider that anyway tho, to use both tiles in Dominion.

atawa · May 10, 2003, 22:51

Just ICS in our core where corruption is low.

SCG · May 10, 2003, 23:35

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa
Just ICS in our core where corruption is low.

although we didn't limit # of cities, the poll at the start of the game was pretty clear against ICS.

I do favor building cities with the settlers though - i never really liked supporting settlers from size 1 and size 2 cities. and we won't get another NON settler until we either build a city with the one we have, or found another 3-4 cities.

rjmatsleepers · May 11, 2003, 02:35

My vote was going to be for building a city this turn with the settler from Imperialis at the most suitable available site. But I've just noticed that it is sitting in Imperialis

I guess that means disbanding the warrior and building a city with the settler as soon as possible, even if it does overlap. 2 moves west appears to give access to some good grassland and a special.

RJM at Sleepers (who should learn to look before he votes)

atawa · May 11, 2003, 05:26

We shouldnt pay too much attention to city's overlapping.
We are playing a wargame and are not allowed to build caravans or wonders, most of our city's wont grow larger then size 5 anyway.

Hydey · May 11, 2003, 06:09

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa
We shouldnt pay too much attention to city's overlapping.
We are playing a wargame and are not allowed to build caravans or wonders, most of our city's wont grow larger then size 5 anyway.

they will get bigger if we manage them correctly

shade · May 11, 2003, 07:24

Oh crap...Imperalis also has a shield deficit!...get rid of the warrior and send an other acher to Imperialis(there are 2 close to the city...

maybe we should also try to make sure we don't build units and so create a shield shortage that makes us disbanding a unit => bad way of using our resources.

Shade

MrWhereItsAt · May 11, 2003, 08:23

Sorry - my bad. Everything was OK until we kept getting those damn mercenaries that get their support from Imperialis. I guess everyone wants to be an Imperium citizen - who can blame them?

CannonFodder · May 11, 2003, 09:01

Don't concentrate the cities in any specific spot, just build them in the best place to do so. They WILL grow if this map is as big as it seems, and we will not want to have overlap.

BruceTheStupid · May 11, 2003, 12:22

I wouldn't worry too much about overlap - both cities need to be sized in the 'teens for overlap to be restrictive, and if we're not building Wonders ourselves, there's no way that's going to happen. I've never been a fan of poncing about looking for the "perfect" city site, just build and move on, get those shields and trade arrows clocking up.

SCG · May 11, 2003, 12:44

its not so much the overlap as its a game restriction we voted to impose on ourselves - no ICSing. I'm not sure what procedures we have for overturning a game restriction, but it shouldn't be done just because it makes it easier on us. We imposed it to make it harder on us.

cavebear · May 11, 2003, 17:39

Disband the warrior. Then use the settler to build a city nearby so it stops using up food and a shield. That way we grow another citizen sooner and the city can support 2 units at no shield cost.

War4ever · May 12, 2003, 00:10

its not icsing if you build a bunch of core cities and then space out the rest

or even disband some later in the game when you want more room for the core....

there is little trade by the heart of our empire, some extra cities around there will do a smidge towards helping out this cause..and again , they can be disbanded later.

a city now is a settler later

Ben Kenobi · May 12, 2003, 16:57

See my post in the other thread, I've listed 6 potential citysites.

War4ever · May 13, 2003, 22:04

all of which are decnt sites.