10-03-2003 19:18									#1
	Barelona: Temple vs. Settler Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

About this decission of building a settler in Barcelona: I have my doubts. I don't want to disagree just for the sake of disagreeing, I want to start a constructive discussion about this. For that reason I will try to explain why I think that it's better to build temple and then settler than settler and then temple.

Option A: Temple + Settler
Temple is built in 8 turns, just the same turn that BCN grows. Then the new WF goes to #6, and BCN production (after corruption) is 4 shields. The Settler is done in 8 turns.
Temple + settler: 8 + 8 = 16 turns

Option B: Settler + Temple
Settler is built in 8 turns. BCN drops to 1, and its production drops also to 1. (WF #5) Temple built in 17 turns (10 BCN size 1 plus 7 BCN size 2)
Settler + temple: 8+17=25 turns

Option C: Settler + Temple
Like B, but after building settler WF is set to #8. Temple is built after 15 turns.
Settler + Temple: 8+15=23 turns

Option D: Settler + poprush temple
Like B, but temple is poprushed when BCN get size 2 (10 turns)
Settler+Temple:8+10=18 turns

Among all these options I prefer option A. It gives us culture production sooner, which we need because ND has aprox 10% more culture than us, and would help us in culture fightings in the border.

Of course there still many more options like building a Galley. I would like to know BCN Governors opinion about all that.

	10-03-2003 19:22									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

The option A sounds good to me.

Btw, if we are getting MapMaking we should build a galley ASAP after the temple and the settler are done.

	10-03-2003 19:41									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Actually, with getting mapmaking soon, we should consider building a harbor before we build a temple, for these reasons:

1) until the irrigation is completed, the city is limited to size 3 and has a slow growth while in size 2.

2) once the irrigation is completed, the city will be limited to size 5 and have slow growth while in size 4.

3) with both the irrigation and a harbor, the city can grow to size 6 an have faster growth us to size 5 and have regular growth through to size 6. While in the smaller sizes, it could have it normal (for now) growth and have a higher production and trade output (working the silks more).

But as we also need more cities, I believe that it should build the settler first, but I will take a look at it in the spreadsheet.

FYI, it will be 10 turns (from the next turn) until the first irrigation can effect the cities growth rate (4 more turns after that for the 2nd irrigation).

In all fairness, I will look at all the senerios in the spreadsheet for Bcn.

E_T

	10-03-2003 19:54									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

My calculations are done without any irrigation improvement.

I agree that we need settlers, but we also need temples to capitalize our trait and fight back ND. At the present moment our cities are still not in danger of being fliped, but once they build a temple in these border cities we would be in danger because they have higher culture than us.

Anyway, we can have both things (temple plus settler plus border expansion) in 16 turns, while with the other options we have to wait a lot more (except with the option D maybe).

	10-03-2003 21:04									#5
	Tired of ads?

I mostly agree with E_T : we need a settler soon, but after that completion and with the help of the irrigated tiles, I would Barcelona to grow without interruption in order to become a good factory city.

The Barcelona potential, with all the hills around is to become a high productive city. We must let Barcelona grow, if not it's a waste of a city !!

I await the E_T calculations to give my final decision

Don Pedro de la Alcantarilla

	10-03-2003 22:41									#6
	Increase Your PM Length

Please continue this discussion as we still have time to change our mind.

We appear to have a new window of opportunity as we are now equal in military strength to ND, we have secured our border cities, and our enemies are in the midst of their own REX. I want Spain to keep up the pace with our neighbors so long as it is reasonable to do so.

Barcelona's settler may be settling a coastal site to the right of the river in Spice Valley. The settlement would give us spices, but growth would be very limited without irrigation, and forest cutting may also be required. Thus, multiple workers will be needed. Furthermore, this site may also be plagued by Barbarians and may need an additional unit (preferably a horseman) to protect it.

Bottom line: We're investing in another city that won't pay off for some time ... not unlike Barcelona.

Also note: Once Iron is linked up and our upgrade project is complete, we will unshackle Madrid to allow it to grow again and create a mix of settlers, horsemen, and spears.

--Togas

	11-03-2003 01:29									#7
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

My personal opinion about that: Once again we are facing a different situation. From being the most extended civ (not counting Lego which we don't know) we have become the second civ. ND has more score than us, but only for a few points.

I think we must react, but without leting fear take control of our decissions. We've decided a few turns ago that we are going back to more expansion and less military building, so we are on the right way. I like the idea that Great Despot Togas expressed at the Cow Valley plan's thread of Madrid building a settler once iron is connected. This settler could go to cow valley and become that flood plains city we are talking about.

But Barcelona, with all this slow growth doesn't seem the most indicated city to pop settlers. Maybe it can pop a settler or a worker after finishing the temple if we really feel like expansion is so important, but by building a settler first we are sacrifying too much production capability, and right now Barcelona is the only city able to do that.

Just my thoughts about the matter.

	11-03-2003 03:09									#8
	Increase the size of your Attachments

At first I wanted a settler first. Now I am leaning toward a temple first. I agree we will need workers and defense to make the city secure and productive, neither of which we have available at the moment for use.

	11-03-2003 03:14									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I want the settler first. As irrigation comes to Barcelona, the city will rebound quicker, and she is not in threat from a neighbor civ to the point that border expansion is that necessary at the moment.

More cities = more everything

On a side note, I think we should also start considering a limited backfill policy to lay claim to anything in our south that would tempt another civ to settle there. Mapmaking is here. Let's not pretend that our southern paradise is invulnerable just because we have the continent cut in two.

	11-03-2003 04:15									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Now that ND is quickly building cities, we have to quickly build cities of our own.

	11-03-2003 04:41									#11
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by ruby_maser On a side note, I think we should also start considering a limited backfill policy to lay claim to anything in our south that would tempt another civ to settle there. Mapmaking is here. Let's not pretend that our southern paradise is invulnerable just because we have the continent cut in two.

I have been seriously considering planting a city at the Ivory paradise ... the only ivory located on our continent to my knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if GoW or ND decided to drop a ship with a settler and a few spears in our southern flank just to tempt fate.

Mostly because GF has commented to me on two occasions that he's "Very curious" about where all of the luxuries are located.

--Togas

	11-03-2003 20:20									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I have done several senerios, with different combinations of Temple, Settler and Harbor with maxed Production and Growth. I have done this from 1300BC to 110BC (55 turns). All of these assume that the Arnelos worker will Irrigate Bcn #9 and #1 and then (possibly) road #6 (other forrest).

STH (Settler, Temple, Harbor)
Max Growth - Settler in 1075BC, Temple in 610BC, Harbor in 110BC. Trade by 110BC - 244.
Max Production - Settler in 1075BC, Temple in 610BC, Harbor in 110BC. Trade by 110BC - 254.

TSH
Mixed Growth - Temple in 1075BC, Settler in 825BC, Harbor in 150BC. Trade by 110BC - 259.
Max Growth - Temple in 1075BC, Settler in 775BC(will need Govenor set for emphasize production), Harbor in 170BC. Trade by 110BC - 266.
Max Production - Temple in 1075BC, Settler in 775BC(will need Govenor set for emphasize production), Harbor in 170BC. Trade by 110BC - 276.

HST
Max Production - Harbor in 670BC, Settler in 510BC, Temple in 250BC and a 30 point build (settler, galley) by 110BC . Trade by 110BC - 313.
Max Growth - Harbor in 670BC, Settler in 510BC, Temple in 270BC and a 30 point build (settler, galley) by 120BC . Trade by 110BC - 313.

HTS
Max Growth - Harbor in 670BC, Temple in 510BC, Settler in 410BC, then a Galley by 210BC and either having a 20 point build by 110BC or 22 sheilds towards something else (Lighthouse??). Trade by 110BC - 321.

That's all I have for now, I'll e-mail the sheets to Astrologix later today.

E_T

	11-03-2003 22:49									#13
	Remove this text

Fascinating!

So by your calculations I assume that you would choose the Harbour Temple Settler option?

	11-03-2003 23:48									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by E_T Trade by 110BC - 254. Trade by 110BC - 259. Trade by 110BC - 266. Trade by 110BC - 276. Trade by 110BC - 313. Trade by 110BC - 313. Trade by 110BC - 321.

Please, indulge me. What do the numbers after the date signify?

	12-03-2003 01:09									#15
	Increase the size of your Attachments

That would be the gold reserves we have after that time with no rushes, presumably.

	12-03-2003 01:59									#16
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Then I am going to presume it doesn't take into account the money we would make by having another city built sooner rather than later...

...or does it...

	12-03-2003 02:28									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

E_T, could you please explain your numbers? We seem to be having a hard time understanding them

	12-03-2003 05:06									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Those trade numbers represent the accumulated trade (after corruption) from the city from 1300BC to 110BC. This is NOT taking into account 2 things, the likely hood of changing to Monarchy before 110BC AND the addition of cities that are closer to Madrid than Barcelona currently is (and theirby increasing the overall corruption for the city).

[EDIT] that is RAW Trade, before being split into research, gold and Luxuries from various slider positions.

E_T

	12-03-2003 05:12									#19
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by ruby_maser Then I am going to presume it doesn't take into account the money we would make by having another city built sooner rather than later...

That is correct. I would have to figure out the corruption for that other city and the trade from it, based on when it's founded, how soon it's connected, how fast it's population increases, etc. Those are variables that are too much to try to figure out at this time.

All of those figures deal with Barcelona only.

E_T

	12-03-2003 05:36									#20
	Got spare money?

Building a settler wipes out your production, period, and the lesser production in these examples is due to building a settler. However, you get back production in the nation as a whole once the new city is created.

We can't just sit back and wait for all of our cities to be large enough to effortlessly birth settlers, nor should we put an undue burden on our weaker cities. There must be a balance struck.

I am intregued by the effects of a Habor in Barcelona, and I think that this improvement would greatly strengthen Barcelona's growth. I ask that Astrologix review these plans and give his opinion.

I am most in favor of SHT or HST, but I may be convinced of HTS if there is a great deal of public outcry for it.

--Togas

	12-03-2003 06:13									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I am beggining to prefer to do HST. I don't want to build the settler quite yet there for defense reasons (from barbs). Then comes the matter of temple or Harbor. Total culture doesnt have any effect on individual borders between cities of two civs. Only the border cities in question do. If your concerned about culture flips, I have rarely heard of culture flips in MP. I have had MP games where I had a large culture lead on another civ and a lot of cultural pressure on an enemy city, with no flip. Not to mention the fact that ND overall seems to be more interested in brute force in general as opposed to building culture. Since we dont need the temple for happiness or to expand the borders for food purposes, lets go with the harbor first.

	12-03-2003 06:16									#22
	Support Apolyton

I just e-mailed the spreadsheets to Astrologix. Does anyone else what a copy, too?

E_T

	12-03-2003 06:22									#23
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by oliverfa Fascinating! So by your calculations I assume that you would choose the Harbour Temple Settler option?

Actually, I would also like to get more cities built as soon as possible. But we also want the cities that we have to be as productive as possible, especially if we need to change our production goals in case of an emergency. If the city is too production poor to be able to do that, then it's not able to contribute to the whole if it is needed to do that.

E_T

	12-03-2003 16:25									#24
	Suffering from ads?

I don't really believe that Barcelona is the right city for building a settler. After all we have Madrid stalled in population production. Once thw iron is connected and the warriors upgraded I would be in favour of Madrid building a settler. But remember Barcelona has too much things to do. It is our only coastal city at the moment, the only place where we can build galeys, harbour, the lighthouse... A temple would also help (in this thread http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...?threadid=39825 Dan Magaha from Firaxis says that civ culture points are important in culture-fliping calculations)

With all that many things to be built there that no other city can at the moment, why a settler?

I agree to build settlers, but am reluctant to build them here.

	12-03-2003 20:34									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by oliverfa With all that many things to be built there that no other city can at the moment, why a settler?

You give me a convincing reason why "all those many things" should come first, and I'll concede. I gotta say I don't think its gonna happen though.

Also, I don't think Madrid should be substituted for Barcelona. I think Madrid should build one as well.

	14-03-2003 03:58									#26
	Tired of ads?

In my opinion these two things are more important: Temple for start acumulating culture and galley to start exploring. However, I don't want to make a big issue of all that. My personal opinion is that we should not build a settler with BCN right now and that it is an error. Not a big error, but an error. But I'm very aware of the power structure and won't challenge the team if the settler is finally done. Just accept it and try to be more convincent next time.

	14-03-2003 22:18									#27
	Inflate your Upload Space

E_T, I've been carefully reading your spreadsheet and I thank you very much for this great job.

I assume that our country needs more settlers ASAP, but on the other hand we should consider the global amount of settlers built and the global wealth produced in a given time.

If we see what Barcelona is able to build in the next 46 turns from now (until 150 BC), I find that with the STH or SHT options, only a settler can be produced by this city.

If the HST option (Max Growth) is applied, Barcelona can complete 2 settlers in that interval and the global amount of whealth will be high.

The first settler would be completed in 27 turns from now (510 BC) and the second in 46 turns (150 BC), and the city size would keep 3 pop after that last completion.

Barcelona shouldn't be consider as a settler factory, this role is naturally given to Pamplona.

I've calculated that Pamplona could build a 2nd settler in 9 turns from now and keep a high growth capacity after that. In that case, a new coastal city could be founded in 18 turns from now, near the spices river.

9 turns after that, with the HST above option, Barcelona will complete his first settler and 19 turns later his second settler.

IMO, it would be an excellent timing to build 3 new settlers in the next 46 turns.

If we continue to build a settler in Barcelona (STH and SHT options), the next spices city will be build in only 12 turns from now (only 6 turns before the "Pamplona option"), but the Barcelona potential will be wasted.

So, my decision is clear : HST max growth option for Barcelona.

Thus, I assume that ruby_maser would allow Pamplona to build a settler next the current one and that our Great Despot Togas will bless my decision

	15-03-2003 05:02									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'm glad the Barcelona governor took care of my suggestions about delaying the settler production a bit.

With that harbour we will be able to commerce with GoW if they build a HARBOUR at one of their coastal cities and maybe some other civ (it depends if commerce routes have to pass through ocean tiles or not) and build veteran galleys, which would be useful to watch the western coast.

Edited: changed Temple by harbour

Last edited by OliverFA on 15-03-2003 at 20:54

	15-03-2003 05:12									#29
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by astrologix Thus, I assume that ruby_maser would allow Pamplona to build a settler next the current one and that our Great Despot Togas will bless my decision

Nope. Sorry. I've decided to pre-build the Hoover Dam instead. I figure the added benefit of such an improvement later on far outweighs the cost to us now.

	15-03-2003 18:21									#30
	Tired of ads?

A harbour is good for Barcelona because of already mentioned reasons, but it won't help on the poor production. Something has to be done with that, and as for using workers we must underprioritize Barcelona until further.
We need develop production bases now.

How we can make Barcelona a serious production base is a more important issue to discuss. It will take some time to reach that goal because of the site Barcelona is built on. (for settler production as well)