December 12th, 2011, 19:51
Posts: 7,766
Threads: 94
Joined: Oct 2009
novice Wrote:Thanks, Commodore.
Warrior NW, scout SW-SW, settler S-Settle, perhaps?
I'm in for Warrior NW. If that doesn't make us consider settling N I'd say settler S. Since it has sentry it might reveal something interesting, and I can't see the scout SWSW move making us decide to NOT go south. After that, scout probably goes SWSW but could investigate elsewhere if it seems prudent.
Settle and build worker.
December 12th, 2011, 21:45
Posts: 6,673
Threads: 131
Joined: Mar 2004
novice Wrote:By the way my brother had an excellent suggestion for a naming theme: RB Naming Themes.
If you make your capital "RB Naming Themes" that would be the most meta thing ever.
December 13th, 2011, 02:09
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
SevenSpirits Wrote:I think we need to at least consider Agri-AH-BW. One possibility there is grow to 5 after the initial worker, whip a worker as soon as BW is in and we've revolted, then complete a settler with the overflow. Settler on t22 and we're at size 3 and have built three warriors, and have cows, corn, and the plains hill all improved.
I tried this, and it does look appealing. We save a forest and get an extra improvement instead, and we're one size larger than with the early settler.
I guess it depends on what our early scouting reveals. If we find a good city site downriver with a grain food resource, maybe an early settler is good.
I have to run.
December 13th, 2011, 02:20
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
December 13th, 2011, 09:04
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
SevenSpirits Wrote:This is the strategy we are going to use:
Mackoti's on to us already!
Mackoti Wrote:1 attachment: rbpbemXXIX_BC-4000_to_Sultan_Novice_Seven.CivBeyondSwordSave
Have fun.
Also, the map maker is clearly trolling Seven (check out the game name).
I have to run.
December 13th, 2011, 09:06
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Since I'm incapable of completing a turn in one go, here's a partial turn 0 report:
I have to run.
December 13th, 2011, 09:21
Posts: 8,244
Threads: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
novice Wrote:I don't see us moving the settler east, away from rivers and wet corn.
I highly doubted that you would move the starting city away from the southern hill. The warrior to NE would have given more revealed tiles for planning the 2nd city.
December 13th, 2011, 15:57
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Rowain Wrote:I highly doubted that you would move the starting city away from the southern hill. The warrior to NE would have given more revealed tiles for planning the 2nd city.
Yeah, I wanted to see if there was food by the ivory though.
Anyway, turn 0 played, and we settled on the southern plains hill:
Score mouseover shows that there are 843 land tiles, 211 per player, 10 full BFCs.
Moreover, toroidal wrap is confirmed:
And the map is 40 tiles wide and 39(?) tiles tall. Fake edit: It's 38 tiles tall, the road segment through Seoul saves a turn on the southward trip.
Everybody settled on t0 and are making 5 food-hammers.
Wanted: Naming scheme(s).
I have to run.
December 13th, 2011, 16:38
Posts: 7,766
Threads: 94
Joined: Oct 2009
If you thought it was 39 and the road was actually saving a turn, that means it's 40 right? (And that would be eminently sensible.)
December 13th, 2011, 16:42
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
SevenSpirits Wrote:If you thought it was 39 and the road was actually saving a turn, that means it's 40 right? (And that would be eminently sensible.)
Indeed. 40x40 it is.
I have to run.
|