28-12-2002 19:02									#31
	Increase Your PM Length

I'm not so sure, Alva... it seems like it is becoming more and more a continent. We should know in some 10 turns, though, and the way we are going now it doesn't matter very much if we would find ourselves on an island.

DeepO

	28-12-2002 19:08									#32
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I'm not saying it is an island, but east and west are narrowing again.
(sometimes the editor shows just a little more (the way forests and jungle pan out))

The island thing holds as many advantages as it does negatives...

	28-12-2002 19:12									#33
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Hmm.. Site 2 does look like a promising production house, and it doesn't chew much from EotS-which we need in full shape for those next few settlers. I say we put the city on #2, and work on the pyramids. And if we are on an island, we sure need it to catch up.

	28-12-2002 19:24									#34
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Okay, apart from the question whether we should go for the pyramid on #2 or not (and thus move our gift that way), there are a few questions left before I could update the proposal screenie. Please indicate your choices, so I know the proposal reflects the group, and not just me

#1 and #13: Theseus suggested to move #1 towards the river, whereas Nathan suggested to move #13 SE. Both wanted to create a settler pump (or at least have a city that could be turned into a pump). We can't have both, as it will shrink the room for #1 too much. I favor leaving #1 where it is now, and move #13 SE. It would mean that #13 is farther from #11 (which will be moved a bit too), but at least we don't lose a shielded grassland. We also lose the opportunity to make another desert coastal city, at least not if we don't find more desert. What do you think?

A further change would be that #11 moves 1 tile SW, moving it out of 1-move range from #12 and #13, but also away from the mountains and closer to the hills. Other then that, it seems the initial proposal was alright, so if anyone has something more to comment to: please do now!

DeepO
[edit: I'm not awake yet ]

Last edited by DeepO on 28-12-2002 at 19:40

	28-12-2002 19:27									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I should try the editor more often... could someone tell me if the tile 8-7 from where #12 is now is certainly a coast, and not a desert?

DeepO

	28-12-2002 19:31									#36
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Oh, BTW, one more thing: site #11 would be my choice for one of the first settlers (after #3, #6, #9 and possibly #13), certainly if it would start on a temple early on. We need a temple to get to all the good land, but the border expansion should fill in many blanks between other cities, and it could become a second coastal wondercity (even if it would be corrupted a lot more then #2).

DeepO

	28-12-2002 19:32									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

This might have been mentioned but why not go 1 tile SE/3 with city #2
(It will as many coastal tiles (7), and less overlaping (4 tiles as opposed to 5) with EotS)

plus it will have better sea reconissance

	28-12-2002 19:37									#38
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well, I placed #2 there because it would be closer to #1, and could (temporarily) use more of the tiles of EotS... our capital has enough workable tiles, so that's not the problem. I guess that other then the closer position to #1, there aren't many advantages once wonderbuilding would be over.

DeepO

	28-12-2002 22:18									#39
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

If we don't go for the Pyramids in #2, moving it to the southeast would be a good idea. If we do, leaving it where it is gives it access to an extra fur (at EotS's expense, unfortunately), which would shave about three turns off the building time. That might not matter at all, but it could be critical in a close race (and could also boost an attempt at back-to-back wonders).

I strongly oppose moving #1 onto flood plains. The flood plains are more valuable helping cities grow and, eventually, work the low-food tiles we have far too many of in that area.

I'm a bit concerned about what corruption would be like under Despotism in #11. Actually, the whole corruption issue is another thing we'd do well to game out.

No guarantees, but to me, the tile 8-7 from #12 is just screaming "I'm coast." I may even see hints of water on the edge in the larger version of the picture (from the "North" screenshot).

Nathan

	28-12-2002 22:40									#40
	Remove this text

Hmm.. you're right on the coastal tile: if you look closely enough, there is some blue on the edge of the FoW.

Even if #2 wouldn't build the pyramids, I would set it aside as a wondercity, so I guess it should stay where it is now, just to be sure

Corruption in #11: you might be right, we should try it out I guess. But under despotism, there isn't a really good wonderspot closer... we could use #4, but then we can't make #3 into a settlerpump, and I love that idea.

DeepO

	28-12-2002 22:42									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by nbarclay No guarantees, but to me, the tile 8-7 from #12 is just screaming "I'm coast." I may even see hints of water on the edge in the larger version of the picture (from the "North" screenshot).

* Shiber slaps nbarclay
It's just a mirage. Get yourself back together man.

Seriously though, I think you're right. I think I can see beach sand... but that may just be flood plains. Both have the same color.

	28-12-2002 22:54									#42
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by DeepO Hmm.. you're right on the coastal tile: if you look closely enough, there is some blue on the edge of the FoW.

Just your imagination. I enlarged the north screenshot and I saw nothing but large yellow and brown pixels.

	28-12-2002 23:11									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Huh? I enlarged that same picture, and saw some blueish pixels for sure!

... after rechecking, I still think it's kind of blue. I agree it's clearer on the other side, there isn't any doubt on the Eastern side of our continent (I refuse to call it an island, yet )

DeepO

	29-12-2002 00:47									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Very good plan.

#1, I would leave in the desert. We need each and every one of those flood plains to maximise our use of the desert, hills, and mountains.

#2, I will do some gaming tonight and let you know what I find.

#11, 1 tile SW is OK for now. It may be a frontier town and Theseus is right about the mountains. OTOH, it will be forever before we can get irrigation up there, so it will only be able to use 2 of the hills for a long while.

#13, onto the desert she goes. We need to maximise food in the area. Shields will not be a problem, but that grass is needed to feed miners.

A note about #3. It occurs to me that we could use 3 as a settler/worker/unit pump. In the end it could be disbanded to give the southern cities more growing room with no loss of tiles. If this were the plan, then we would only build a barracks there when we switch to units.

	29-12-2002 01:42									#45
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

ok, this is making things complicated, but, if we do plan on disbanding #3, shouldn't #7 move one tile SE/3 to keep the hill?

	29-12-2002 02:06									#46
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Disbanding #3: I'm not sure. It might seem kind of pressed in between the other cities, but it can work 12 tiles, if the other cities focus on sea tiles later on. If we would disband it later on, we get 3 cities which can use more land tiles, but waste sea tiles... I think that if we want to use all available tiles, we should put 4 cities on the grass in the South, not 3.

I don't particularly like taking the hill for #7 either, but to avoid that, it should move 7, city #6 move 3, and on the coast between the two an extra city (or an empty space which can be filled once #3 gets disbanded). In total there would be a bit more production, but it's kind of a long shot for just one shield... disbanding a city which gets rebuild one tile away... I think just using the hill would be more efficient.

I guess everyone agrees on using #3 as a settler pump, though, settlers every 4 turns sure look promising.

DeepO

	29-12-2002 02:11									#47
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Have we decided anything short term yet, Jack-www just sent the save to nye

	29-12-2002 02:28									#48
	Put an end to popups!

Well, I think that NYE's first thing was protection for our settler, on his way to #2. That leaves us a bit of time on what to do with the city once it is build

DeepO

	30-12-2002 18:52									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Updated proposal sent to our e-mail address. I also tidied the boundaries between the cities... note that the boundaries are flexible, and not perfectly final: e.g. city #3 and #9 have too few tiles, but once we'll need them, we can move #2 and #4 more onto the sea, so that will create some breathing room for EotS and thus for the neighbouring cities.

Remaining problems are that it seems #11 has a bit too much tiles, and that #1 has permanently too few (certainly if we want to give one of it's fps to #13). But I don't think anyone will expect #1 to grow to full size anyway.

DeepO

	30-12-2002 20:29									#50
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Have we decided where the settler is going yet?

I say we either send it to the gold hill or along the river north of EotS, and build a city asap. The first settler from EotS can then head south to the nice coastal spot w/wheat and bonus grasslands.

I haven't looked at the proposed city layout... can someone email it to me at mishlea@msn.com ?

-Arrian

	30-12-2002 20:36									#51
	Tired of ads?

Arrian, I just mailed it to you.

It looks like we're heading for city site #2 with our first settler, and probably (but this is not final yet) to site #3 with our current build. It would make a great site for a settler pump, with game, wheat, and shielded grass.

DeepO

	30-12-2002 20:37									#52
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I like the new plan, except for #3. I'd remove it and move #4 one tile west.

	30-12-2002 20:43									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Oops... I just noticed a mistake: when exporting the new file into jpg, I lost a number, it seems. The unnumbered city above #1 should be #13, like it was in the old plan.

Shiber: I don't think many will agree. If we would move #4 one tile West, it isn't a coastal city anymore, and thus can't profit from the sea. Further, it would waste a shielded grassland... if we don't want that, the first possible site would be #3 again.

Just think of #4 as a city which later becomes a pure harbor city, and #3 as the powerhouse you'd want, and everything will be fine

DeepO

	30-12-2002 20:47									#54
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

DeepO,

Thanks! I'll check it out tonight. Can't wait... I feel like a student who hasn't done the required reading for class. You guys are talking about numbered city sites and I haven't a clue.

-Arrian

	30-12-2002 22:06									#55
	Tired of ads?

DeepO, I suppose that if #3 will get the tile SW SW of EoTS (which currently has 13 tiles to work) then I won't complain.

	30-12-2002 22:59									#56
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Yes, #3 has only 8 tiles to work now, but that has more to do with not knowing how to put the boundaries. There won't be any problem giving it 12 tiles, as #4 also uses too many tiles, and #7 could swap one tile with #6 as well (giving #3 another one from #6). I'm sorry that the borders aren't clearer, but it isn't simple to cope with the changing situation: I tried to put them like this to proof that all cities can have decent production (ideally at least 6 land tiles), and that eventually all can get 12 tiles (apart from #1, which won't need it).

In reviewing, I saw I forgot 2 tiles as well (onbe of them the 13 tiles from EotS), but that is not that important. We will need to puzzle a bit to fit all the pieces together, this layout certainly is not the final and only solution. But I think the cities are placed so that we can puzzle, and don't lose important tiles in doing so. E.g. note that we lose very few sea tiles, which in itself is not simple to do

DeepO

	30-12-2002 23:06									#57
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

First of all, great job in working out this plan.
I am usually in favor of tight city placement like this, but this time I would like to play devil's advocate because we are lacking two fundamental reasons for this strategy: bad terrain and close neighbors. It doesn't look like we have either of these.

Also, given the time we have to micromanage in this game, I think it's a plus if we have more flexibility in the tiles that can be worked by each city. Otherwise you almost always end up in situations where you wish you could switch worked tiles to save wasted shields or food.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should have 4-tile spacing either, but I tend to agree with Shiber that #3 is not necessary. It increases corruption of all cities that are farther away from EoS than 3 tiles. If #3 could grow to size 12, then it would be worth it. But right now a max-size-6 city is increasing corruption in most core max-size-12 cities.

In a smaller point, even though it is more dangerous because of the mountain, I like #11 in its original position so that we can have #10 in the hill. That way #10 can work a grassland tile instead of having only desert and hills.

Anyway, I'm e-mailing a screenshot with an alternative city placement.

	30-12-2002 23:31									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Nice plan, alexman... it was more or less the alternative I was looking into. It seems there are 3 changes: the deletion of #3, and shuffling of the cities surrounding it to compensate, the movement of #13 to the coast, and the #10 & #11 move.

#3: I wouldn't do it. We started from the assumption that no city would grow beyond size 12, and needed to work as much tiles as possible. My plan didn't lose tiles, and #3 was not supposed to be a size 6 (or even size 8, like in the last screenshot I sent) city. It is merely like that for as long as it can work as a settler pump, after which the neighbours need to work the sea more, and give some of their tiles to #3. Instead of looking to it as a growth constrained city that led to more corruption, I was thinking of it as one of the most productive cities we have, fortunately enough with very few corruption. Moving #1 NE whould be better when it came to battling corruption (in fact, I think I'll make that change in a next iteration).
I don't like that the southern cities lose too many sea tiles in your plan...

#13 to the coast: I thought about it, but because of the mountains, we would lose too many tiles, and access to a fp. I agree that it is a choice: in your setup we have more sea tiles, although I was hoping to recuperate by settling #15 one tile North of your #13. This should make two cities possible where you placed 1, and no matter the corruption level it should be beneficial. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't #13 about half way corrupted under despotism? which would mean that an extra city does not have a great impact on future cities, as we should be thinking on keeping that the border of our capital influence, where next cities should (if possible) be in our FP influence. Not much to say about it, I'm afraid, until we know more terrain.

#10 & #11: another thing I thought about. But #11 already has a grassland (with currently a forest on top) to use, and moving it would mean that we lose a bunch of sea tiles to use. However, we could cramm in another city (purely for commerce) after all the rest is settled and we are in a corruption friendlier gov between #10 and #11, which I like. I guess it is contrary to what you had in mind (lesser, but better cities), but it surely is an option.

DeepO

	31-12-2002 04:20									#59
	Tired of ads?

I prefer Alexman's proposal, though I would change a couple of things:

Move city #4 a tile south (I view that spot as a potential powerhouse city: lots of bonus grassland. Wonder city, perhaps. Building it on the forest tile drops 2 bonus grass, IIRC).
Remove city #5 (if you move #4 to the south, then #5 is hopelessly cramped).

I guess one could leave #5 in there, and make it primarly a harbor town. But in order for #4 to be the production monster I want it to be, it needs to move 1 south and have priority on use of bonus grassland tiles.

-Arrian

	31-12-2002 05:01									#60
	Put an end to popups!

Could someone forward alexman's and DeepO's updated shots to me?

username at hotmail dot com

Thanks.