The follow-up to my "are we sure" question is, if we're not sure we're going to want or be able to attack m_h in 40 turns or whatever, why engender the risks of a hostile border now, when there's no pressing reason to do so? There are other good city sites in the jungle, and we don't need the resources that city *has a chance* to secure. I value a secure border over a shot at a redundant resource and increased risks of conflict. If it's based on the merits of the city-site itself, what does that city lose by having to run ten thousand specialists during Caste System and build culture buildings all its life? That's a big opportunity cost. I'm almost inclined to say settle the spot 3S of Cannae (or even let m_h settle 2 or 3S of there), and the clear grassland tile 4S of Dunkirk, and have just about the widest border imaginable. Crush suttree without worrying about m_h, or, if we decide we really want that land he's claimed, take it from him after he's developed it for us in 40 turns (eg. from the city-site 3S of Cannae, pre-Engineering knights can hit Nibru from an invisible staging-tile in one turn, and get close to his next-northernmost city in a second stack from the same tile as well). Anyway, just two more gpt from me.
|
[Spoilers] Fintourist and Old Harry have nothing to see here
|
|
|