February 11th, 2010, 23:31
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
I'd like to start using binary science the moment AH comes in. Definitely well-worthwhile for pre-capital Library, of course, as well as the usual round-off bugs.
February 11th, 2010, 23:46
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 47
Joined: Mar 2007
What does AH have to do with binary science? I would think the founding of city #2 is the point where we need to start using binary science.
Maybe these will both be on the same turn, so it makes no difference.
February 11th, 2010, 23:48
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
The problem was to avoid losing a turn on AH. AH is scheduled to come in at the end of T39, and it needs to or else we're wasting worker turns.
February 11th, 2010, 23:50
Posts: 4,443
Threads: 45
Joined: Nov 2009
Another thing with the delayed city 2 is a slightly faster sheeps with a potential of working sheeps + 2 GHM + rice.
February 11th, 2010, 23:53
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
No, it doesn't affect when the sheep comes online at all, or when we could grow to size 4. Basically, this plan is moving the build that used to be T39 and T40, and putting them at T33 and T34, and moving everything that used to be from T33-T38 back 2t. We'll still need 4t after the settler completes T45 (3t of max-food, 1t with sheep or 2xGHM) to reach size 4.
February 12th, 2010, 00:01
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 47
Joined: Mar 2007
OK, I agree with all of that. But I still don't see where binary science comes in. With the warriors being built earlier, the second city should not be founded until T40. So we should be running 100% science until then, which should finish AH on schedule at T39.
Or am I missing something?
February 12th, 2010, 00:02
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
Right. I had been worried about that problem with the old set-up, this one gets around it.
February 12th, 2010, 00:19
Posts: 5,607
Threads: 47
Joined: Mar 2007
Ah, another benefit of building the warriors earlier!
I still hate the delay in founding city #2 (we really need a name), but this is helpful and makes me feel slightly better about the change in plans.
February 12th, 2010, 01:03
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
Names. Hm. I was fine with keeping it as York, but then again we can do better than that.
We've used fictional or legendary people (Wolf the Quarrelsome, may he rest in peace, surely existed) for our units to date. So we could go with that for our cities.
Suggestions for rules:
1) Must have a connection to the British Isles.
2) Can we try to avoid the easily over-done LOTR and Harry Potter?
Shakespeare should be fine, though. At least in moderation. So, say, Elsinore (Hamlet), is an option. Or Camelot. There's got to be plenty of others.
Our Empire also needs a name. The Anglo-Chasm Kingdom? The New Britannia?
Other ideas?
February 12th, 2010, 12:29
Posts: 5,631
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
T30:
I forgot to name Happy. He's on the forest, ready to chop. Doc has begun his chopping. Gulliver moved SE. Options:
SE onto the hill. This keeps us exploring the edge of our territory. There likely won't be any forests to move to next turn, but hill visibility will minimize the risk of 1t on flatland.
Demos:
Nothing interesting. 2 teams (Mehmed and Napoleon) discovered Mining. That's it. Demogs attached.
Oh, and re: Names: Elizabeth of France is the Anglo-French Empire, so our title probably shouldn't include Anglo-X in it. Even though we are the true England.
|