21-01-2003 08:49									#1
	New Expansion Plan? Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Here's what I've just worked up:



The numbers are just what the priority would be if we're really very concerned about people stealing our land. If we're not concerned about people stealing our land, then we change the order to go for the better spots first. If we're concerned about keeping our empire compact for defense, we change the orders for that. etc, etc, etc.

What I'm thinking more about here is what we want the final picture to look like.

Personally, I don't have a problem with stacking, I have more of a problem with unutilized tiles. That said, I'm willing to sacrifice the occassional mountain, hills, or desert tile (as few as possible, though).

I also like coastal cities because you effectively get more utilized tiles overall (since coastal and sea tiles can be utilized for food and trade).

That said, we're somewhat stuck with some patterns of arrangement because of where our current 3 cities already are (which might be differently placed with the information we know now, but that's a pointless topic of discussion because we didn't know it when we placed those cities - especially Madrid ).

So please comment on the above.

	21-01-2003 09:33									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

As for city names... using my region names and stuff...

#1 = Oviedo (capital of Asturias)
#2 = Saragossa (capital of Aragon)
#3 = La Coruna (in Galicia)
#4 = Valencia (capital of Valencia)
#5 = Leon (capital of Leon)
#6 = Toledo (in Castile)
#7 = Cadiz (in Andalucia)
#8 = Salamanca (in Castile)
#9 = Santiago (capital of Galicia)
#10 = Murcia (capital of Murcia)
#11 = Malaga (in Andalucia)
#12 = Seville (capital of Andalucia)
#13 = Lisbon (capital of Portugal)
#14 = Bilbao (capital of the Basque Country)
#15 = Valladolid (in Castile)

Last edited by Arnelos on 21-01-2003 at 11:27

	21-01-2003 09:37									#3
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I like your plan for the most part

i just think, maybe city cites 1 and 2 should be switched?

other teams are less likely to plant on site 1, as it is further and on desert. and 2 has a resource they might think they could deny us of.

so thats my ONLY recomendation.

	21-01-2003 09:40									#4
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

This should have been posted in the Map Room thread.

Move #1 N one tile.
Move #3 SE one tile.
Move #9 N one tile.
Move #13 NW one tile.
Move #5 N one tile.
Move #7 SW one tile.
Slip another city in there between 13, 7, & 5 that has direct access to the iron.

#10 should be moved, perhaps one tile N, because all of the grain is 2 spaces from the city. #12 may also be adjusted to better fill the used space.

Yes, Cow Valley is crowded under this plan, but this plan takes into consideration military readiness in the event that Cow Valley comes under attack.

These changes do not take into effect river placement.

Order to build them: 2, 3, then 1.

--Togas

	21-01-2003 10:02									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Togas This should have been posted in the Map Room thread. Move #1 N one tile. Move #3 SE one tile. Move #9 N one tile. Move #13 NW one tile. Move #5 N one tile. Move #7 SW one tile. Slip another city in there between 13, 7, & 5 that has direct access to the iron. #10 should be moved, perhaps one tile N, because all of the grain is 2 spaces from the city. #12 may also be adjusted to better fill the used space. Yes, Cow Valley is crowded under this plan, but this plan takes into consideration military readiness in the event that Cow Valley comes under attack. These changes do not take into effect river placement. Order to build them: 2, 3, then 1. --Togas

I'll go work on this now.

	21-01-2003 10:31									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Ok, when I was placing your changes, I realized that I had originally wanted what you suggest... I changed it to what I ended up suggesting because you CAN'T move #13 NW by 1 because that's a mountain tile

Thus it makes little sense to move #9 N by 1, as then you're just over-lapping with #3 and losing mountain and grassland tiles to the south.

As for moving #3 SE by 1... why? That just makes the city non-coastal, causes more overlaps, and utilizes less total tiles (as keeping it where I suggested gives more sea tiles and overlaps less along with being coastal).

Moving #1 and #5 north by one each along with moving #7 SW by 1 only works if we want to throw a city into hills west of #5, but it IS possible to do that.

Given that #13 can't move NW, here's all of Togas' suggestions:



FYI: I don't have enough webspace to keep too many of these up at the same time... so I'll take down this "working copy" and replace it as needed.

	21-01-2003 10:34									#7
	Put an end to popups!

Looking at the changes again...

Moving #5 north and #7 SW means that a whole section of that river isn't being utilized... if the citysite I have marked as "?" is put next to the iron tile as suggested, that doesn't help... we'll still leave 3 river tiles unutilized...

Moving "?" 1 to the SE would utilize all of those tiles, however. Since #13 can't move 1 NW anyhow, that might be the best move.

All things considered, I'd rather build an extra worker to use for a colony on that iron tile than mess up our city plan for the rest of the game...

	21-01-2003 10:40									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Another idea...

If you're concerned about #3 being north of the river because of the defensive value of it being south of the river (though, in my experience, this will be meaningless since a smart human opponent will know to the cross the river first ), you can move #3 1 south rather than 1 southeast. That keeps it as a coastal city and if you don't move #9 north (which is pointless considering that #13 can't move NW), then it still works out (though there is more over-lapping).

Personally, I don't think it would make much difference if #3 is north of the river, but I could be wrong.

	21-01-2003 10:44									#9
	Increase Your PM Length

Gave you the wrong place for #1, sorry. Move that SW.

You're right about #13. That may be the only place possible for it. Keep 9 where it is, as #13, 7, & 11 are already coastal.

See if you can't tuck a city in there between 13 & 5, then see how that affects 7 and 12.

Move #10 either N or NW if you can scoot 12 over a bit.

--Togas

	21-01-2003 10:47									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Ok... doing another change...

	21-01-2003 10:48									#11
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

As for an attack on #3 ... it'll take an invader an extra turn to cross the river NE of the city before attacking. They would be foolish to attack across a river, so we know they'll move to this point. We attack them at that point, on grassland (clear the swamp), where they have 0 defensive bonuses prior to their entry into the city. Furthermore, units in cities 1, 2, and 3 can all attack this location.

--Togas

	21-01-2003 11:11									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ok, here we go:



I don't like moving #3 off of being coastal. Then we don't have any cities coastal on the whole western side of the country and we're giving up a whole bunch of extra food (harbor) and trade (docks) later in the game. But I can see your point about defense. It will depend on whether the city ever has to defend itself and whether that one turn is really that crucial. Needs more debate.

As for the others... the problem I see with moving #5 either north or northwest is that it won't have enough food to utilize all of those hills and mountains tiles... we have to leave it where it is so it can use the wheat and the river as a foodbasket to feed all of those miners.

As for #7, moving it SW is definately the right move and sneaking the "?" city in there works even if you dont' move #5 north, but it's a squeeze (but I'm fine with that!).

As for moving #10 and #12, it's just too hard to find a workable arrangement... I'd WANT to put #12 SW and move #11 to correspond, but there's a mountain there

#10 will obviously be another harbor+docks city and it will need to mine a lot of those grassland tiles to have production (just like Solace or Shiberport on Uber Isle in the Civ3DG). As a harbor+docks city, it will utilize more sea tiles where it is anyhow.

Last edited by Arnelos on 21-01-2003 at 11:38

	21-01-2003 11:14									#13
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Togas As for an attack on #3 ... it'll take an invader an extra turn to cross the river NE of the city before attacking. They would be foolish to attack across a river, so we know they'll move to this point. We attack them at that point, on grassland (clear the swamp), where they have 0 defensive bonuses prior to their entry into the city. Furthermore, units in cities 1, 2, and 3 can all attack this location. --Togas

Then the logical move is to flank us on the west by crossing the river out there or landing troops by boat out there.

	21-01-2003 11:18									#14
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

btw... we probably (if we can get away with it) want to put another city north of #6 to better protect Madrid and get more of that river valley...

That said, certain allowances for ND need to be made.

	21-01-2003 11:28									#15
	Full PM-box? Change here!

#1 is still wrong.

Move it north of it's CURRENT location to that desert tile that has Flood Plains to the S and SE of it.

--Togas

	21-01-2003 11:33									#16
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

moving #1...

	21-01-2003 11:36									#17
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Arnelos Then the logical move is to flank us on the west by crossing the river out there or landing troops by boat out there.

If so, then city #9 and City #1 can still reach that tile to the SW of the city in a single turn and attack the enemy units in the open.

--Togas

	21-01-2003 11:36									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

#1 should be moved... refresh your page

EDIT: Ok... that didn't work... lemme try uploading that file again

EDIT: Ok, refresh your browser and you should see the new #1 location

	22-01-2003 03:03									#19
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Many good plans here!
Site 2 and 3 are important to reach very soon.
...but shouldn't site 6 and 8 have a higher priority?


Those sites are pretty close to our capital so thats good, and we need a buffer zone up north... Landing at the West-coast would be an option for our opponents later, but not now i guess.


Close the northern area right after settling site 2 and 3. :doitnow:
And why not move site-2 just one tile to the NE ?


Then we can "curtain" down the South-West coast with our later settlements. Remember, an aggressive foe would be sure to exploit any openings in the west and north!
So why the priority of 4 and 5 then?



BTW: Its pretty bad if Demogyptians settle site- 3 while we
are doing 1 and 2, so this may be improved upon.
(if they are REXing south too, they can probably do that soon)

Last edited by ThePlagueRat on 22-01-2003 at 03:16

	22-01-2003 03:12									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by ThePlagueRat Good plans! Site 2 and 3 are important to reach very soon. ...but shouldn't site 6 and 8 have a higher priority? Those sites are pretty close to our capital so thats good, and we need a buffer zone up north... Landing at the West-coast would be an option for our opponents later, but not now i guess. Close the northern area right after settling site 2 and 3. :doitnow: Then we can "curtain" down the South-West coast with our settlements. Remember, an aggressive foe would be sure to exploit any openings in the west and north! Ok, see ya.

Yeah, I agree when it comes to sites #6 and #8... they probably should be swapped for #4 and #5... only problem is that then we'll leave our bottom area COMPLETELY open for naval "inchon landings"

If we move quickly, though, perhaps it won't be much of an issue... we'll see.

	22-01-2003 03:15									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

btw, if we plan to build another city NE of #6 and NW of #8, #8 should be moved 1 tile to the SE (making it coastal and utilizing more tiles) and the new city should be placed 3 tiles NE and 1 tile N of #6.

We probably can't get away with that, though... which is why I put #8 where it is.

	22-01-2003 03:22									#22
	Increase Your PM Length

Ok, my suggestion...

Settling in the order of sites: 2,3,1,6,
will close foreign access to the south until they get the Bad-boat.


Then draw the curtain down the westcoast or settle near needed resources.

	22-01-2003 03:52									#23
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I would move #3 one east from the original position and set a 3A city north of the river on the coast. It would not be the most productive in the long run but would be ok, and would fill in the gap nicely.

	22-01-2003 04:16									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Olà compadre!
------------------

Arnelos just told about planning to build later settlements NE of #6 and NW of #8. Thats interresting...

I said earlier that we should draw the curtain down the westcoast after settling 3, 2, 1, and 6,



Now, look at the blank-spot north of #6...
Perhaps it would be better to get foothold up there, prior to
all the cities on the westcoast ??!


I guess our opponents will be sure to get a foothold up there sooner than down the westcoast. (ehh, depends on when they get their s(t)inking little boats)



Ok, this is time for long term strategical decisions.
And we have to think carefully about them.
I trust you my dear Señores and fellow Españoles.

- Sanchez "El Niño" de Plãgíates.
, brother of the deceased explorer Pedro "Peligroso".

	22-01-2003 06:50									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

2 should be first priority for the horses
then 9 for the iron
then 3
then 4

There’s no point in having luxuries if we can’t defend ourselves and keep other civs, such as GoW, from taking our luxury cities. Defence first.

What is the purpose of 1?

	22-01-2003 06:54									#26
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by pikesfan 2 should be first priority for the horses then 9 for the iron then 3 then 4 There’s no point in having luxuries if we can’t defend ourselves and keep other civs, such as GoW, from taking our luxury cities. Defence first. What is the purpose of 1?

The cities aren't really ordered in the order that I necessarily think we should build them, at this point there're more ordered in the order that I thought of their locations

So pay no attention to the numbers other than as terms of reference

I agree that #2 and #3 should go first.

	24-01-2003 02:14									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

ooc:

I agree we settle the horse-site #2, first.
Horsemen are very good for offensive-defence!

The iron-site, should only be guarded with a sharp eye for now. We need them later, certainly if there is gonna be a great war in medieval times. So settle and close the outermost borders first.

[edit: I just looked upon the blurred map-image, I didn't see well, but am I right there are two iron-sites there? One of them on the west coast? In that case it would be well fit to "curtain" down the west coast soon, anyway... ]


For defence, numerous spearman+horseman combos are sufficient now, and might do great harm, provided a proper hit and run tactic is applied. I've seen it before.

Last edited by ThePlagueRat on 24-01-2003 at 02:38

	24-01-2003 03:01									#28
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I sugest we go for number 2 first. Meanwhile I would instruct my workers to build a road to the horses, connecting Pamplona with the new city at the same time.