16-07-2003 07:39									#61
	Get a bigger avatar today!

We really don't want cities on flats. We probably have enough time to take Barcelona and get a Settler or two out of it. Depends on how RP is doing in the W compared to against us.

New Madrid we should probably raze, as it gives us a shot at getting to (and razing) Toledo fast if we have a city at NM 7, and is a much better location IMO anyways.

If we land a couple Settlers on NM 33 (with our Knights and at least a couple Pikes), we could build a city there, and then build a city at NM 7 the next turn. If we were to put a Settler on the NM 6 in the intial landing (with the main stack), then we could build the NM 7 city the same turn we take NM. What we should do depends on what our investigation of the city turns up.

	16-07-2003 08:41									#62
	Tired of ads?

While I like the configuration, I don't like the placement.

Why wouldn't we try to grab a limited, defensible territory with two luxuries? When I look at the map, I see three cities, at Spice7, Silk99, and Silk877. Lookouts TBD.

	16-07-2003 09:01									#63
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

That would put 2 of our 3 cities on flats though.

The Spices in general would be hard to claim initially and probably impossible to keep (assuming a ND/GoW alliance against us). We can keep the RP Spice city if we capture it, but I think it's a waste of resources to try and hold it (or any other non-hill city) against 3 move Knight UUs.

If it comes down to us vs. ND and GoW, we'll need every advantage we can get, meaning every city needs to be built on a hill. The two NM cities will give us cities on hills that can also get the size 7 bonus rather quickly... and if we hold onto them until Muskets, I can't see us losing them at all.

If we go for the 500AD NAP with ND... think they would break it? GoW alone wouldnt' be able to really do much against us, and are signed on long enough to let us get set.

	16-07-2003 09:07									#64
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Aeson, I just re-checked... all three sites I suggested are hills.

	16-07-2003 09:25									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I think you switch Spices and Silks then.

Looks better that way, but we have no rivers (good for funneling attacks), and little to no growth potential. Also our continental reinforcements would take 2 turns longer to be landed on average (galley round trip to pick up then drop off).

	16-07-2003 10:21									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

We can grab the spice city and hold it with 1 pike. We can stand to lose it, but during peace that is one less lux we need to buy/import.

	16-07-2003 12:32									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Togas takes it astoundingly easy. No room for my sig, sigh .

	16-07-2003 12:51									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

To be honest, I will believe it all when I see results on the map.

	16-07-2003 13:39									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

grrr...
I really can't stand RP. In BF's chat with NYE, he said that he'd rather ask us for help than ask "those isolationists" (referring to Lego). Bleah, I'm so sick of hearing this word, but mostly of hearing RP use this word against everyone. It especially annoys me knowing that Lego is not quite as isolationists as RP would like to portray them (see their interference with the Voxodus).
I might have gotten mad at BF during the chat if I were there. NYE, I admire your ability to control yourself in such situations.

	16-07-2003 18:28									#70
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Aeson's suggested layout is similar to mine (2 of the cities are right where I'd put them, and I'd considered a city on the coastal hill too). I'm not so sure about the western city. I think I'd rather have a city on the "central forces location."

-Arrian