CP orders 1620AD

shade · September 17, 2003, 06:20

No more Xinning(so I know someone who is very happy

.

but what will we do now?

What will be our primary building concern?
Weapons and troops?
or
Welfare and growth?
or
a good combination of both?

also do we want new cities and/or new settlers/engineers?

You have 3 days to cast your vote

shade · September 17, 2003, 07:08

2 citylocations that would connect parts of our territory

shade · September 17, 2003, 07:09

Update for the American Highway
I suggest we build also a new city along that way... but there is to much black at the moment to make a good choice

shade · September 17, 2003, 07:11

and finally we also have a NONE settler near the Greek imperium and near an other city(cfr irrigation)

Should we use this settler to build a new city which could be used as stronghold in that area, to haras our enemies?

Sparrowhawk · September 17, 2003, 09:29

Quote:

Originally posted by shade
Weapons and troops?
or
Welfare and growth?

not sure what you mean by "welfare" but by my use of the word (meaning social assistance), it seems you have it backwards, we are now in Fundy

so it is the people giving us money...not the other way around

Anyhow, just to let you know, you gave me a laugh reading that...but now to work!

Zedd · September 17, 2003, 09:54

I think the two city locations you show are

And as for the city of foreign annoyance.... Build it on the middle mountain to the right, there are enough river areas to provide food and there would be a buffallo and a iron special for shield production/unit support.

shade · September 17, 2003, 11:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk

not sure what you mean by "welfare" but by my use of the word (meaning social assistance), it seems you have it backwards, we are now in Fundy

so it is the people giving us money...not the other way around

So what is the problem? We are the ones in need of the money, so we build banks where the ppl can give us their money.

You really thought I would let them build banks and stuff for themselves.

Shade

atawa · September 17, 2003, 13:53

Around Imperalis are two further good citysites.
The grasslands are allready irigated so these might be 2 good settlerfarms.

shade · September 17, 2003, 17:11

looking good.
The north one should be given an immediate defender(if Greeks show up and just walk in, some ppl might find that frustrating

.

if you move the south one 1 square south to the shielded grass you get the skins on the tundra.

btw never worry I might want to hold you back of building more cities than I suggets

... I would never do such a thing.(unless the citizens really ask me to do so)

Shade

cavebear · September 17, 2003, 20:02

Why build more Settlers now that we are researching Explosives to get Engineers? They both cost the same, so there is no trade-off of value vs cost.

Let us build things that are newer, like Fanatics, and infrastructure as needed individually by cities.

Any new cities we build should have defensive units ready to move in on the day the city is built. Any new city is vulnerable to getting destroyed or captured by a wandering enemy unit if it isn't well-defended from the first turn, and we could lose some valuable techs.

When we start getting Engineers to replace Settlers that establish cities, and Fanatics or Musketeers to move into new cities, THEN we can build new cities.

I don't like the locatiions of the proposed cities near Imperialis. There is too much overlap, and it begins to feel like ICS, which we *did* agree not to do.

The 2 cities NE of Flood don't seem too bad, especially the one next to the river.

The one NE of the Greeks seems risky. Unless the Settler irrigates some river squares, the city will basically starve. And I see some irrigation near the Diplomat, so there is likely a city very close nearby. It is probably Zulu; they have 10 cities, and we can see some to the east of this area. It would be easy to lose that one almost as quickly as it is established.

Ben Kenobi · September 17, 2003, 20:42

Cavebear:

Overlap does not equal ICS. I have no problem with the additional cities near imperialis, so long as we move the second city a square to the south.

As for the annoying city, we will be a Fundamentalist government. When was the last time you successfully bribed a fundy city? I am fully confident in our smc to successfully protect the city from Zulu incursions.

Edit:

And let us have 2 engineers/city.

shade · September 17, 2003, 20:49

Quote:

Why build more Settlers now that we are researching Explosives to get Engineers? They both cost the same, so there is no trade-off of value vs cost.

because it will take us 29 turns to get there

Quote:

And let us have 2 engineers/city.

Shade

cavebear · September 17, 2003, 21:35

I am perhaps too patient for what will fall into our laps eventually (Engineers) when there are things we can build now that won't become obsolete, like Fanatics and Dips that we can throw against Washington now that we have no need to worry about keeping units in cities for Martial Law.

I want us to take Leo's so we can gain from the upgrades. While we are waiting for the Engineers to come available, the Settlers will do. But it will take some time to take Washington, and I'd like to see us getting prepared to do that ASAP!

Sparrowhawk · September 18, 2003, 00:19

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
I don't like the locatiions of the proposed cities near Imperialis. There is too much overlap, and it begins to feel like ICS, which we *did* agree not to do.

While I agree that overlap does not mean ICS, I think Cavebear is right that we should not overlap any of our cities (I don't think we have yet, and I don't think we should start now). This is a huge map, surely we don't need to overlap city sites?

I suggest a city be built to the North...

Bottom line, I think new cities are the way to go, as in order to have a decent science rate in Fundamentalism, we will need a lot of cities, and we have to room to grow, why not make use of it?

Respectively submitted,
/me Foreign Minister

cavebear · September 18, 2003, 00:22

That's a great spot for a new city. When we are ready to build one, of course...

atawa · September 18, 2003, 10:47

I dont think we should worry too much about city's overlapping. Even if we grow our city's size 12 there are still a lot of unused tiles in the city radius.

The reason I proposed these two city's is becouse they allready have a couple of shielded grasslands so they will grow rapidly

MrWhereItsAt · September 19, 2003, 08:14

Well I see no problem with that much overlap (we should be concerned with cities that will have any more overlap than those two proposed though), and also concede that the huge map means we should aim to get as many bonuses in our radii as possible. If we've got a few different good places, we should go first and foremost with the one that will be the most productive, and second with the one that is closest to our settler(s). All city sites seem like good ones, especially the one near the river NE of Flood and the one Sparrowhawk proposed.

-Jrabbit · September 19, 2003, 12:11

--I like the idea of getting some new cities started. Most of the suggested sites look fine.
--In cities1.jpg, I especially like site #1.
--In cities2.jpg, the dotted grass that covers both the beaver pelt and the silk looks juicy, but we should probably explore the black area first.
--In cities3.jpg, my first inclination was to go immediately south of the wheat, but the isolated location suggests it may be better to irrigate a couple river plains and build directly on the coal.

--BTW, now that we're in Fundy and science will be slow, I curious as to how are our tax/science is set?

cavebear · September 19, 2003, 18:37

1620AD TaxRate: