08-08-2003 04:26									#1
	turn 23 2900bc Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Played the turn and snet it.

In terms of interesting stuff absolutely nothing happened

	11-08-2003 11:48									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

we still can't post screen shots can we. Just wondering what's been happening.

	12-08-2003 23:56									#3
	Increase the size of your Attachments

We need better turn reports. Like saying which way the units were moved so that someone else can duplicate the move and post a screenshot

Speaking of screenshots and the above issue, here is what our situation looked like at the START of 2900 B.C.:



* Note: This image will not remain posted here indefinately. It will be pulled down when a new one is posted each turn (or whenever I can get to it) in each turnthread.

	14-08-2003 17:45									#4
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Wohoo, a screenie.

First question: why is the worker doing anything on that hill at the moment? It can't possibly be better than a mined plains tile, which would take half the time to develop. Or am I missing something.

Second question: The tile 2 of the city (or due south if you prefer) is partly hidden by the city name. I'd guess it was plains if not for the green broder on the river which suggests flood plains. Which is it?

Thirdly: I think we need more workers. A settler now would be good, but I think we need another worker quickly. Our city can only be a good settler pump running size 4 and 5 mostly, and at an absolute minimum we need two workers developing tiles quickly to get the pump running, if that is what we want to do. BTW have we been encouraging growth while producing jags? Currently we have the option of producing 2 extra food and 4 shields or 3 extra food and 3 shields (move from plains or hills to un-irrigated flood plains). One turn of the former and two of the latter produces a jag warrior as quickly as we can do it, and shaves a turn or two off the time to growth.

Settler pump possiblity: We need two irrigated flood plains (IFP), the mined wheat (MW), one mined plains (MP - or could be a mined hill) and two irrigated plains (IP). Starting with an empty food box and empty construction project at size 4, we work IFP IFP MW MP, for +3 food and 5 shields, 7 turns to grow. 35 shields total. Then we hit size 5, and work IFP IFP MW IP IP for +4 food and 5 shields, growing in 5 turns. That's another 25 shields, giving us 70 per cycle. That's a settler every 12 turns, plus a barracks and 2 jags first time around, and 4 jags each time after that. With a granary, we can get that down to 7 turn settlers, with a bit of wastage and no jags, or 8 turns with a jag between every settler. Given that we have another ready made settler or worker pump with the second set of flood plains on the norhern river, we probably can live with a slightly slower output of settlers from here.

Another question: How many turns 'till the worker finishes whatever it is doing on the hill?

Next question: what difficulty level is this (as in, how many naturally content citizens do we get?)

	14-08-2003 18:22									#5
	Get a bigger avatar today!

It regent.

I will not comment the rest of the post as my head is a bit slow at the monent owing to a cold (bit ironic to get a cold the hottest summer for a decade)

	14-08-2003 18:42									#6
	Remove this text

I'm a dozy bugger - we can do a 10 turn settler pump (without granary) at size 3 and 4, producing nothing but settlers, and 11 turn with alternating jags. IFP IFP MW at size 3, and add in an IP for 10 turn settlers at size 4. Changing the IP to MP for three turns at size 4 slows growth by one turn to give enough extra shields for a jag between settlers.

	14-08-2003 22:40									#7
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by vulture First question: why is the worker doing anything on that hill at the moment? It can't possibly be better than a mined plains tile, which would take half the time to develop. Or am I missing something.

Doh sorry about that, it's mining rather daft of me to not realize a plains mined would give the save .

We'll have to look at the stlr pump issue closely, I don't have enough time right now but from the screen shot 1 south of the wheat on grassland tile may be a good site, with irrigated FP and wheat we could have growth every 4 turns w/o granary although sheilds would likely cause a problem.

	15-08-2003 20:38									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

A granary would be an extravagance in this case, I think. We have easier access to food than shields, to the tune of being able to grow 2 sizes whilst producing just enough shields for a settler. A granary only really works when you can produce significantly more shields than needed. A settler pump in the size 4 and 5 range would benefit from a granary, since it can produce more than 70 shields during 2 expansion times, while the size 3-4 pump doesn't since it has its shields and food nicely balanced - all we'd end up with is a city that grew unnecessarily while producing a settler - which isn't worth the 60 shield investment in a granary IMHO.

The larger pump with granary is faster (7 or 8 turns, as compared with 10 or 11), giving 3 settlers compared with 2 from the slow pump in the same time span, but we would be giving up quite a lot in lead in time - time to build the granary mainly (10-12 turns I think), so we start off 1 settler behind. After 30 turns the granary pump has caught up, but its first city is 8 turns behind the non-granary's first city, and second city is 4 turns behind. So after 30 turns, the granary pump is equal in settlers, but 12 turns of jag production (presumably) behind. By 40 turns, the granary comes out ahead. This is rather a simplistic analysis though.

	16-08-2003 00:17									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by vulture A granary would be an extravagance in this case, I think. We have easier access to food than shields, to the tune of being able to grow 2 sizes whilst producing just enough shields for a settler. A granary only really works when you can produce significantly more shields than needed. A settler pump in the size 4 and 5 range would benefit from a granary, since it can produce more than 70 shields during 2 expansion times, while the size 3-4 pump doesn't since it has its shields and food nicely balanced - all we'd end up with is a city that grew unnecessarily while producing a settler - which isn't worth the 60 shield investment in a granary IMHO. The larger pump with granary is faster (7 or 8 turns, as compared with 10 or 11), giving 3 settlers compared with 2 from the slow pump in the same time span, but we would be giving up quite a lot in lead in time - time to build the granary mainly (10-12 turns I think), so we start off 1 settler behind. After 30 turns the granary pump has caught up, but its first city is 8 turns behind the non-granary's first city, and second city is 4 turns behind. So after 30 turns, the granary pump is equal in settlers, but 12 turns of jag production (presumably) behind. By 40 turns, the granary comes out ahead. This is rather a simplistic analysis though.

I remember running those numbers when I was arguing for building a Granary for the Roleplay Team in the PTWDG. In this case, I think building a granary or not is a toss-up.

If we build a Granary, it's because we want to build a sizable city core before our initial attack, an attack made primarily with archers, horsemen, and swordsmen.

If we do not build a Granary, it's because we want to get about 4 cities arrayed around our capital as quickly as possible, building barracks, and pump out Jaguar Warriors for an early rush strategy.

The first will leave us in a relatively good position after the war in terms of empire size, but our enemy (whomever that is) is also likely to have a city core by then as well and thus be a harder target.

The second will leave us smaller and perhaps more vulnerable after the war unless we use our Golden Age to REX once activated by hopefully bowling over an unprepared opponent.

So I'm torn between these options. My personal playstyle is a bit more conservative than we're going for in this game, I like REXing rather than eary rushes That said, we're playing the Aztecs, and if any civ is going to do an extremely early rush, it's them.