[SPOILERS] Smackdown Game Thread

[Ichabod]

I doubt it was intended, to be honest, just how it shook out from the implementation. Anyway it applies to all builds that treat food as hammers.

I seem to remember that I read in an interview somewhere that it was intended. But, well, that's irrelevant for the present case. If angry citizens don't eat food while building a worker, I'm out of ideas.

[SevenSpirits]

Yeah, I changed builds to all kinds of things, including settlers, but always the angry citizen was a hungry citizen.

[NobleHelium]

I think it will fix itself when your next turn starts. Some game state cleanup is done at start of turn.

[Ichabod]

I know it's a longshot and likely to be stupid, but couldn't it have anything to do with the city being starving? Maybe if you have a surplus food, it'll not be detracted from the settler/worker build, but it will if you are starving on the city.

[SevenSpirits]

I know it's a longshot and likely to be stupid, but couldn't it have anything to do with the city being starving? Maybe if you have a surplus food, it'll not be detracted from the settler/worker build, but it will if you are starving on the city.

Yeah, I looked into it and this is what it is. If we were producing 3f more, then we would not only not starve for 3f but also produce +2 foodhammers. Unfortunately we've lost the food this time, but in the future I'll be able to plan it out correctly.

(I think even if I'd realized it before ending turn we'd still do this, because the only way for us to not be starving would be to use the rice, which we really need OJ to use. But if I could rewind TWO turns it could be avoided by growing the cities in the other order.)

[Ichabod]

I'm not used to being right.

[Ichabod]

Just posting the screenshot to show everyone that we almost have a lock on Judaism. RMoG already played and didn't get it. 3H recently has a civ revolt to slavery. I don't think they'd do it if Org Rel was near, they'd probably wait for a double revolt. So, it's all up to LAM, which it's also not likely, as Seven pointed out through C&D.

The other reason to post this screenshot is asking the team about a possible city in the red circle. It seems to me that all the good possible city sites that we have near us are expanding away from our adversaries, not near them. That isn't very nice, since we want our fair share (a bigger fair share ) of the contested lands.

This one city that I present is a possible way to settle towards RMoG. I think the city would be pretty good. It has good tiles on the horse and irrigated rice. It's on a hill, so naturally defensible. It also can't be reached through the north sea, which RMoG will probably have easier access to, and only one tile open to the South sea. Besides, if we keep our second ring border, they can't reach our city with slow movers directly through defensible terrain. They'd have to stand one turn into a flat tile (unless if they move they stack through boats), where we could have the initiative. That's the main advantage compared to a 1W settle, which is closer to us, so more defensible early, but less defensible later, in my opinion.

I think that, since we are aiming at a powerful economy early, we could use it to fund some cities far from our core, backfilling later. We probably want to get to currency first, though.

[Ichabod]

No judaism founded yet, after 3H turn. They founded two cities at the same turn for Native America, it seems.

[Ichabod]

Religion?

[SevenSpirits]

Not just religion, but also an immediate spread to the capital!

(Btw, there was no real danger of another team being able to get it, since we were first to Masonry 2t ago.)