10-12-2004 05:14									#1
	Border discussion Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

http://cookieexchange.proboards36.c...&num=1102626869

Here is a link to the thread started on our mutual forum. Password in case you forgot is b@n@n@

Post your ideas here.

Your (not so) humble MOI, GK

	10-12-2004 06:11									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...181#post3489301

I decided to post some pics, but wanted PAL to have access, so I took over the old Balderdash PBEM thread (the game was abandoned 8+ months ago).

	10-12-2004 07:57									#3
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Here is my proposal:

Fade to Black goes to us as soon as feasible / reasonable. Until it does, it will be producing units or improvements useful to us. Such items as workers and settlers do NOT count towards any agreement. Actually, we would want a courthouse, but as that is a high shield item…..

The red dot is the city I propose we place our FP in. Blue dots are our city sites. Black dots are PAL city sites. The border will fluctuate with culture as it normally does, without anybody *****ing about it one way or the other. The white line is what I estimate it as being once stable. PAL may, on their whim, place another city on the hill south of the mountain. However, PAL has had fairly large city spacing to date, so I would estimate that they would not want to do this. We may consider allowing them to move the Silk city one square to the South. This will NOT adversely effect our city placement, but may change the border. I do not remember if a city on top of the Silk will affect the gold count produced by the tile or not.

PAL provides us with 3 settlers AND 6 workers. The settlers are to be produced within the next 30 turns, or earlier as their production permits. The first 2 workers are to be produced in the next 10 turns. The second 4 are to be produced in the next 40 turns, the earlier the better. The worker option is a good one as it can allow them to use their UU on barbs if they so choose instead of making them in cities. We have a great need of workers as well as settlers, so this is a great benefit.

Pumpkin is to remain as a PAL city, with no more than 5 units within it, until our FP is constructed OR PAL decides to turn it over to us, OR it flips due to culture, whichever occurs first. PAL may, of course, petition to have more units within it for good cause. PAL will use Pumpkin to produce items at our request. This may include settlers, workers, and non culture producing improvements. Any workers and settlers produced out of this city will NOT count towards the above agreed amount.

From the point that all of our cities on this continent (NOT the islands) are formed, and upon formal notice to PAL (how else will they know), PAL will estimate the amount of gold the city is producing (exclusive of science, which benefits both of our cultures), and will give us that much gold. They may upon request delay the transfer. This city will be horribly corrupt for both of our civs until our FP is produced, but will be a huge producer of food products. The settlers and/or workers produced from here will be larger than the amount above, so it is a good deal for us, but not great. The gold is to help offset what we would be making anyways, and our unit support that we are giving up.

We will be allowed to place up to 5 units on the mountain at what PAL is calling the Crudetown Line. We may also build a fort there if we desire.

I think that this proposal will be acceptable, with some hard negotiation on our part, to both of our teams. It utilizes the strengths of both of our teams, and gives each of them what we both are looking for.

PAL has growth and land improvements potential. With the pyramids, it is going to grow like mad. They will have more than the ability to produce workers and settlers FAST.

PAL is concerned about security of their little bay that goes into their swamp, which is half the reason they want to keep Pumpkin. The other half is that they are worried about being able to trade lux with the other continent once contact is made. The silk (and until Pumpkin is turned over to us, the ivory) will allow them the ability to trade.

We are interested in creating a well defended core that is highly productive and profitable. Our FP location will be key to this.

OK, most of the stuff I can keep saying is obvious. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE comment. I wish to post this (modified as necessary) on our joint forum as soon as possible.

	10-12-2004 21:07									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Agreed with the future border, city locations, and FP location.

	10-12-2004 22:39									#5
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Excellent work GK.

You know my thoughts on this issue. I'm somewhat bent out of shape about it, so it would be wise for me not to comment or discuss it with PAL.

But I fully support your proposal.

--Togas

	11-12-2004 00:26									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

no problems are evident to me.

	11-12-2004 01:19									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I think the plan looks great. What is the concensus on the islands? Are they ours?

	11-12-2004 02:33									#8
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Ya, PAL has agreed that both islands count towards our totals, and have included them in our calculations. We ahve agreed that the island north of PAL and any near them (None we know of) are theirs.

	11-12-2004 15:27									#9
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The plan seems very good. I think we will get almost everything we wanted since the beginning of these negotiations.

I just wonder how long will it take to build the FP in this site - the city will be corrupt and we don't have military leaders now.

	12-12-2004 03:32									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well that goes even BETTER than what I planned! PAL still has the superior land, but hopefully we can make the most of what we've got which is at least the right size.

	13-12-2004 01:32									#11
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I will be posting the pic above in the public thead soon, and over on our joint board. Now comes the time for negoations.....

	15-12-2004 04:47									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Here is PAL’s response to our proposal.

quote: After much thought and careful deliberation, here is the response of the People.... Gentlemen of Apolyton: Obviously, some significant philosophical differences have occurred between our teams, and these need to be resolved before further progress can be made. In short, it is time for a reckoning. PAL wishes to enter the next round victorious, and we know that the route to doing so is through cooperation with an ally; one cannot be strong in the face of many, standing alone. We recognize that, as the clearly dominant power on this continent (as well as the game,) in order for us to assist a partner into a status which might result in a nearly equitable contribution, we must give up certain advantages to assist them. We have no problem with this, and never have. We do, however, find certain conditions to be exceedingly frustrating and in need of immediate redress. When the nation of PAL offered the four proposals, we were not offering bargaining chips – these four proposals represented long, heated, and serious consideration on both sides of the issue. We presented what we felt were four excellent “best offers.” We presented all of them, even in recognition of the fact that we were not particularly happy with the outcome of at least two plans, because we felt that in recognition of the importance of the alliance, sacrifices would need to be made. What we have gotten in return concerns us gravely. Instead of a reasoned discussion of this or that proposal, Apolyton has chosen to “mix and match” the best bits of all four proposals for them, and then has deigned to add on even more conditions which – especially in the case of the gold of Pumpkinland – we find downright ludicrous. Even though Currency, Construction, and Polytheism have all flowed from the coffers of PAL to the coffers of APO, and despite the fact that assuredly, early Feudal research will be heavily conducted by PAL, you wish to quibble over the produced finances of one town? Such penny-pinching is most unpalatable. PAL has time and time again offered absolutely no threat of military force towards APO – in fact we have, time and time again, done everything we can and then more to prevent APO concerns. In return, APO dictates to us that they shall place multiple military units in an extremely secure and potentially fortressed location near a key commercial route for our empire? In return, APO dictates to us the precise disposition of the town that served as the launching point for the entire war against CDG? Despite the fact that we have repeatedly suggested that we would like to keep our borders very lightly guarded – if at all! – and have for some time allowed your units within very close range of our most important cities… all of this is for nothing. APO still does not trust us militarily. This gravely concerns the nation of PAL. There is a saying that those who do not trust are those who are likely to betray. What more can the nation of PAL do? Our patience with tokens of trust is quite exhausted. In fact, the only military concern the nation of PAL has ever offered that might have been of concern to Apolyton is the Bay of CDG, which offers a direct route to the heart of our empire. This concern is dismissively referred to as “PAL’s little bay” and indeed, is ignored in your “proposal” as you tell us that the town of Pumpkinland shall become yours as soon as it is wished, and if it flips earlier, c’est la vie. The nation of PAL is still committed to an alliance with Apolyton. We still feel that the strongest possible outcome – and the safest – is to work with extreme closeness to Apolyton, united in cause and direction. We will not, however, allow ourselves to be taken advantage of, or dealt with poorly. As was once said before: PAL deals directly, and not in diplomatic games. The proposals we offered you were not bargaining chips – they were fair, equitable, and final proposals, with an eye to the strengths and trust of both teams. We do not wish to thingyer and haggle. Please reconsider our four proposals, and get back to us with a more reasonable and balanced response, recognizing that not only your nation, but ours as well, wishes to serve its own interests, and that these interests are ultimately what must be served. As one united voice, The People of the Army of the Ladder

And here is my heated initial response to them that I posted. (slightly edited to account for the poly word editor)

quote: So, in summary, you say – Fu--ck APO and their concerns of security (We choose hoplites for a reason, in case you still haven't figured that out). Fu--ck the fact that APO will want a FP. Hell, what does it matter? Why even build one. Or go ahead and plop it down wherever, as your corruption doesn't mean sh!t to us. Screw the idea of using each others traits to the best of their ability. Equality, who cares? We will get to the land first; after all we are agricultural and have the pyramids. Squatter’s rights. Here are out ideas, take them and shove them. The fact that there are only minor differences in them is nothing. We don't want to discuss anything with you, we will just tell you what to do. Do you want our password for this game, so you can play our turn also? Much easier that way. Well, before I truly say something I will regret, I will post your answer on our forum and calm down. Obviously, you don't wish to discuss sh!t, but dictate. My mistake. I thought we were in a partnership and would discuss things. Next time, I will just drop my shorts and ask if you want me to lube up my arse before you ream it.

	15-12-2004 23:41									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

So, can we SEE a copy of these 4 proposals? I don't think we should require this team to log onto the other web site. Please post their proposals here so we can discuss them in our own private forum.


As for GK's remark. He's is right on the money.

FP is a wordy, selfrighteous bastard.

He uses rather sophicicated guilt tactics that work very well on Con, it seems. The letters drone on with whining and complaining about how we don't want to do what they tell us to, and then exaggerate our requests and dismiss our interests.

If they're going to say no, then say no. Don't ***** and moan about how we're hurting your feelings because you're "being so generous."

These are negotiations. They offer a proposal, we offer a proposal. We add and substract things until both sides can live with the final result. That's how it works. Keep working it.

--Togas

	16-12-2004 00:05									#14
	Suffering from ads?

Godking had posted great pics in one of the pbem threads but he has removed them.

I wonder if we can handle the things without that much settlers and workers form PAL. We can settle the lands, we just need to be sure it is OUR land, not PAL's or disputed or whatever. If they want to help us to grow faster - OK. If they don't we will handle on our own. But we need more the land than the settlers IMO.

	16-12-2004 00:13									#15
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Ok, sorry. I understand now why we haven't posted the proposal here.

I'm a lawyer. I know all about writing long, wordy, dull, very specific language, but this stuff just blows me away. I'm going to save us all the time and effort and try to summarize their 4 plans that they are VERY inflexible on. We take one of these options or we get scolded by FP in a long, pompus diatribe about how big of jerks we are.

All Plans: We get Fade to Black. We get our islands. We get our core and CDG lands.

Plan 1: They keep Pumpkinland and build a temple to take the floodplains grain. They get a big chunk of land:

quote: using the PAL silk colony as a reference and starting point: East, Southeast (following the road thus far), SE, SE (to the hill on the coast), and then south along the coast directly to the city of Pumpkinland. PAL would be considered the "owner" of the border itself, and so can settle on that line. Please note however, that under this proposal APO may crowd cities as close as minimum distance to PAL domain on the coastline

PAL will give us 8 settlers if we go with this plan.

Plan 2: They give us Pumpkinland eventually, after it builds settlers for us.

quote: The specific border would be a straight east-west line. Using the PAL silk colony as a reference point, it would start SW,S of the silk colony on a hill, and move directly east, over bonus grass, roaded grass, and another hill. This land is to be considered Apolyton’s land, and the 4 tiles north of it (grass, grass, forest, forest from west to east) are to be considered PAL’s. Neither team may settle ON these border tiles.

PAL will bribe us with 4 settlers if we agree to this plan.

Personally, I can live with this proposal. I'd prefer we ask that the line start SE of the silk and run E-W, so that the line runs just south of the hill. But if they cry about us being jerks for trying to modify their proposals and threaten to cut off negotiations, then I can ultimately live with their silly line.

Plan 3: They keep Pumpkinland, but we get the border up where I want it, one tile SE of silk, straight E-W. Note: If we take this plan, they will only give us 2 settlers. Wow. How generous!

Plan 4: They keep Pumpkinland. But the border moves further north:

quote: The specific border in this case moves further north. Again using the PAL silk colony as the point of reference, the border starts in the same SW, S location, on the hill. However, now it moves E, NE, NE, NE, NE. These tiles are hill, Bgrass, grass, roaded grass, forest, forest, respectively. As before, these tiles are to be considered Apolyton’s land. However, owing to the much deeper penetration of this border to several critical PAL cities and planned city sites, PAL can and will settle on the hilltop chokepoint as a defensive need, despite the fact that this would be considered part of PAL’s border.

We can't settle eastern shore. They only give us one settler if we agree to this plan.

	16-12-2004 00:25									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Upon further reflection I think we should ask for Plan 2, but with the line moved slightly north to where they put it in plan 3, and NO settlers (since that seems to be a big deal for them) to compensate them for getting less land.

Yeah, I'd like free settlers and all, but I don't like the notion that they're buying land from us by giving us settlers. It makes no sense. The land needs to be settled, period. I don't care if they build the settlers or we build them, but it's counter productive for them to slow us down if we get more land, or speed us up if we get more. The most important thing should be a fair split that fits both of our defensive concerns.

They have concerns about the east bay. We can respect that. We can promise not to build coastal cities there until the very end. We have concerns about having a small, easy to defend border. They seem to be respecting that, but in all but one proposal, they leave Pumpkinland in their hands because they love that city's growth potential so much.

So long as we get Pumpkinland ('cause it's on our side of the freakin' line) and we get a simple border, I'll agree to most anything else they want regarding security. They can build a city on the hill above the line. They can also have bay security.

Tell them they can decide, regardless of what we eventually agree on, how many settlers to gift us. Eight. None. Whatever. It's their call. They're the ones GIVING them to us. If they want to be generous, we will be gracious. But they should not hold their generosity over us conditionally, making us jump through their hoops before they decide it's ok to give us something. A gift should be a gift.

--Togas

	16-12-2004 00:37									#17
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Togas He uses rather sophicicated guilt tactics that work very well on Con, it seems. The letters drone on with whining and complaining about how we don't want to do what they tell us to, and then exaggerate our requests and dismiss our interests. --Togas

You know this is really uncalled for. It really makes me sad you would actually say something like this Togas.

We obviously have very different opinions on how this should be handled.

I would appreciate it if you would just leave it at that.

This might be kind of cool in court but it sort of sucks in a demo game.

On the issue of settlers, I find it hard to believe we wouldn't jump at 8 settlers. Having cities built rapidly around a capitol and an FP is going to be a lot more important than getting a few more cities built ultimately the hard way by doing it ourselves.

We are getting 16 pop points. Population is power. I wouldn't dismiss that so lightly.

Even with 8 settlers over the space of the next 30 turns my guess is we would still have a tough time getting the reduced amout of land we have filled.

GK have you run any numbers? How long would it take us to REX out on our own the maximum amount of space PAL will give us with 1 settler vice the 8 settlers PAL will give us with less space?

Can we make some assumptions on settler production and do a best guess?

	16-12-2004 00:43									#18
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Togas Tell them they can decide, regardless of what we eventually agree on, how many settlers to gift us. Eight. None. Whatever. It's their call. They're the ones GIVING them to us. If they want to be generous, we will be gracious. But they should not hold their generosity over us conditionally, making us jump through their hoops before they decide it's ok to give us something. A gift should be a gift. --Togas

Do you really want to do this? First you say we need to negotiate, then you say you dont want settlers as part of the negotiation?

I dont get it from a rational viewpoint. They are increasing the amount of settlers we get to compensate for them getting more land. Its as simple as that.

I think you maybe underestimating how quickly those 8 settlers can get us back into this game.

Population is power. Just ask Dom.

	16-12-2004 00:45									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

BTW I see no reason why GK couldn't post the pictures here.

They just shouldn't be posted in an open thread for all the world to view.

	16-12-2004 00:46									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

It may make Con sad to see me post my opinion of him, but it makes me frustrated to see Con post a picture of the power graph as a means of convincing us to do what PAL tells us. But the whole team knows that Con and I do not see eye-to-eye about PAL.

It's clear we disagree on some key issues with how to handle PAL, but we'll get past that eventually. Ultimately, we're on the same side, and we need to determine what THE TEAM wants to ask from PAL, and ultimately what we can live with.

I would like to see the opinions of the ministers and members of the team on the border and these proposals. I want to know what Con feels we should do. Thus far, the only minister who's opinion is known is GK. I also ask the Consuls and others members of the team to POST THEIR THOUGHTS in this thread so that we can get a consensus.

--Togas

	16-12-2004 01:38									#21
	Tired of ads?

Unfortunately, I am at work, and am limited to what I can do right now as my boss expects me to actually perform work instead of have fun on the boards.

I will attach the images here in our thread (I wanted them open earlier as I wanted PAL to have access as well), as well as giving the links to Con so he can send them over to the Admin for approval.

Please look at my proposed letter and comment in the mean time. In essence, I apologize for insulting their team, and ask a simple question. Do they want us as friends and allies, or as a b!tch to order around? In doing so, I called them out (but in some long drawn out language). Lets see how they respond to something like this, and go forward from there.

I should be at home in 2-3 hours, so then I can spam as much as we need to get ourselves organized.

The good thing is at least I think with the few screw ups I have accomplished in the past week, our team is coming to life again. Smile folks, it is just a stupid game.

	16-12-2004 01:40									#22
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I am not rying to convince anyone of letting PAL tell us what to do.

Examine the proposals, which there are four, and pick one you like.

If we dont like any of them then tell PAL that.

What I am trying to convince everyone of is an arrogant shove it up your arse attitude is not going to get us what we want. On the contrary. They WILL begin dictating to us, and again just what are you going to do then?

Its seems like the perception here is different. One perception seems to think that PAL by taking the initiative putting together four plans, and presenting them is them telling us what to do when we basically didn't have enough gumption to do anything. Soory Im not buying it.

They took the initiative to lay out four plans and basically give us more settlers the more land we were wiling to give up.

Mixing and matching and taking the best points from each plan probably arent going to go over to well.

But then again maybe that isn't our concern. If so then so be it.

For the record, the more settlers we can get the better. I lean towards any plan that can get us REXed out as qucikly as possible. IMHO thinking that getting more land is going to make us stronger without being able to populate it quickly is not taking the power of population seriously enough. So thats my call as a minister which Im stating right now.

Now if we can do some type of study making some assumptions based upon how quickly we can REX out under all four plans, and that study proves my assumption wrong, I reserve the right to change my mind. I learned that trick from my wife

	16-12-2004 01:44									#23
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Great GK again I think your motives were good, its just the delivery sucked

If you can take a quick look at how we could REX out under the four plans I think that would help us out immeasureably, at least it would help me out.

Im still of the mind get me more settlers and less land and let me develop what I have quickly and efficiently.

	16-12-2004 02:31									#24
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by conmcb25 Its seems like the perception here is different. One perception seems to think that PAL by taking the initiative putting together four plans, and presenting them is them telling us what to do when we basically didn't have enough gumption to do anything. Soory Im not buying it.

Thanks Con. You are doing a great job yourself in attempting to do damage control. I know that I, and I believe the team, does appreciate what you are doing.

I want to correct this statement, however.

We offered to propose a plan first. PAL, and specifically FP, asked that we wait as he indicated that he wished to propose something to us first. He indicated that he had some ideas that he wanted to incorporate (it ended up being the fact of offering us settlers, which I wanted to keep out of this completely, and if I had known that was going to be his offer, I would have beat him to the punch).

So the idea that PAL put a lot of work into starting this is false. Both teams started it. PAL decided to change the discussion from a simple border agreement into something more. I followed suit. If it had been up to me, I wouldn’t include anything to do with settlers, workers, and so forth. But we are here now, so it is best to just deal with it.

	16-12-2004 03:12									#25
	Inflate your Upload Space

OK fair enough

But a while back, a good while before the war I tried to get a consensus going on where we wanted the split and recieved minimal input.

i am willing to consider taking settlers out of the issue and telling F-P that.

But someone tell me first we really dont need them and prove it because intuatively I think we do.

They are trying the old carrot or stick approach. And you must admit trading more settlers more additional land is a novel approach.

Just because its different then what we would have proposed doesn't mean its wrong though.

	16-12-2004 03:50									#26
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It's not "wrong" to trade settlers or build cities for us. It's very helpful. It's also a clever tactic by them to take more land in the deal and give us something in return. I respect that. But all of this settler talk is missing the point.

What needs to be understood by PAL is that in this negotiation, we have needs and interests. Maybe that hasn't been made clear to them. It does seem that they are giving some consideration to what they think our needs and interests are, but they are clearly not listening to GK when he told them what we wanted.

(NOTE: due to the lack of input from the team, I am assuming that I understand what we want. Please say if you agree or disagree)

We want security. We want a fair split. We want it to fit our FP plans. We have never WANTED them to give us settlers. Sure, it's a very nice idea and we'd be overjoyed to get them, but when we came to the table to bargain/negotiate, we didn't come with a demand for X settlers to be made by PAL and given to us. They decided that, in order to shortchange us on security, fairness, and build plans, they could give us settlers and we'd be happy with that.

I'm not happy with that.

It's like I went to the car dealership and told the guy my primary issue is a good price and he told me he'd give me a leather interior, or a sunroof, or special tires, or a snazy stereo, but I still had to pay his price for the car.

Our needs are not being met, and Con is unhappy at us because we're not OK with that?

That is what boggles me the most. Con, what do you think our primary goal is from this negotiation? What is it that Apolyton most wants from this deal? What do you think we should be asking for? What deal do you think is best for Apolyton? Are we even coming from the same place with this thing?

I can understand the opposition. They want to keep as much land as they can. They want to keep Pumpkin because it's a mega growth city with Ivory to boot. I understand that. But I'm not on their team, I'm on our team, and I want our team to get as much as we can. I want our team to feel confident that we got a fair deal.

Con, I know you feel that being polite to PAL is in our best interest. I cannot disagree. But I do not understand why you continue to push us to concede and post reminders of just how big they are and how small we are? The message I'm getting is that we should take what they're giving and like it. Is that what you really want us to do?

And which of their proposals do you think we should accept and why?

--Togas

	16-12-2004 04:09									#27
	Put an end to popups!

I think we should accept the proposal that will allow us to get growth as much as possible as quickly as possible. Thats why I have asked GK to look at the options and which one can ensure the most rapid growth.

Security is an illusion.

Security for us with PAL will come with cooperation and trust, not a couple of Hoplites at a choke point.

As I said earlier in a different thread I believe, they can out produce us, they can breed like rabbits and they can out research us.

Do you REALLY think a couple of well placed cities along a choke point that is what 5 or 6 tiles wide is going to stop that if they did want to attack?

I mean come on, they had there horse army built and ready to go and waited for us struggling to produce an army to keep up.

My goal here is to advance. Right here and right now I believe that goal will be satisfied thru cooperation and trust with the "big kid on the block" to our north.

I dont disagree on the Ivory Town, I would like to have that as well but not at the expense of screwing up cooperation and trust.

But hey if that is a show stopper then lets just say so.

I have already said I would go with a plan that gets us a lot of settlers. If the 8 settler plan is too unpalatable then go with the four settler plan.

Thats my position unless GK comes right out and says, hey I dont need those settlers we can do it ourselves.

I just dont think thats the case however.

	16-12-2004 04:20									#28
	Inflate your Upload Space

OK. I am home. I am updating my spread sheets (at least those that count). I am looking at the settler counts, making assumptions on the numbers of cities we need, so on and so forth. Give me a bit of time.

Gut instinct - we don't need the settlers from PAL. Yes, it would be nice. It would be in the interests of both parties, however, that once PAL has REXed out their lands, if they have the capability and desire to help us settle ours (they have 1 city with a settler every 4 turns, and all cities with graineries, so they should be able to rex out their lands within the next 25 turns, including travel time).

	16-12-2004 04:28									#29
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

If thats true GK I will change my opinion.

Take your time, this can wait 24 to 48 hours and we will hopefully get some more team input as well.

	16-12-2004 05:29									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

PAL needs 18 settlers I estimate in order to finish REXing out their lands. Knowing that they have the pyramids, and estimating that it will take them an average of 1.5 turns per settler, they should have their uncontested landmass settled within the next 28 turns. Travel time to new city sites is assumed to be irrelevant. Development of the land around the city sites is assumed to be irrelevant. Density is assumed to be consistent with previous PAL settling patterns (they are using a far looser settling pattern then we are).

APO, per our current settlement plans, needs 16-17 settlers. This assumes we settle the lands similar to our proposal to PAL for our territory. We already have 3 settlers on the road. Poly and Olympus, combined, can produce one settler every 2.5 turns. If we add in another city here and there, and use all our pop towards settlers and not workers, we can probably reduce it to 2.2 turns. 3 of our settlers are on the islands, and those will be excluded from our counts as PAL would not consider settling them I would assume. We will use the same general assumptions in terms of travel time. That would give us 25 turns to produce the settlers needed.

I would recommend for the mutual benefit of both our teams, that PAL does not send us settlers until after all their land was settled first. After all, they need to develop themselves as well.

Conclusion, it would benefit us to have settlers (of course), but the benefit would be small. It would, in the long run, actually hurt the team effort I think. The biggest assumption is that they are only producing 1 settler every 1.5 turns. I would think that they would be producing workers while they are also making settlers, as they have lots of clearing to do on top of just land development, so this is a reasonable assumption IMHO.