February 6th, 2010, 20:24
Posts: 15
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2010
Speaking of Sullla, isn't it a bad idea to have cities one square away from coastal tiles?
February 7th, 2010, 02:45
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Welcome, binary!
Normally cities should be founded on the coast, yes. In this case the city only has one coast in the BFC IIRC, so it's practically an inland city. And it was placed the way it was to grab resources and river grasslands. Although placing it on the coast would certainly have been a valid option, and would have allowed Spullla to explore Centralia sooner. (Especially seeing how their fledgling harbour city on the inner coast got razed this turn).
I have to run.
February 7th, 2010, 02:50
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Am I the one way off base, are the CoW members deceiving themselves, or are they trying to deceive each other? They're talking about how they'll disconnect India's resources, research construction, and come out victorious.
The reality is that India's resources will at best be disconnected temporarily, the current invading forces will be wiped out, and India will have construction a lot sooner than Greece. At that point it won't even matter if the CoW disconnect India's resources, India has enough units to do mop-up after the catapults have done their part.
I have to run.
February 7th, 2010, 04:40
Posts: 1,716
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2009
Agreed. The impression I'm getting is that they consider the disconnecting of the resources and some pillaging to be a major victory. They lost a ton of units doing so though, and aside from India being able to reconnect them before long, Spulla's far from beaten at this point. Plus once they get out cats, I'm not even sure Whosit's Praets will be able to do much damage.
We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw
February 7th, 2010, 05:52
Posts: 968
Threads: 18
Joined: Apr 2004
One of the thing is that even with the horses they pillage very weak (or easily rebuild) tiles. What they need is to pillage the very mature cottage (town ?) around the capital, not the 3t ago cottage that have 0 value.
with some of them not even considering sending serious troops, the best they should hope for is Rome RAZING the city, no way anyone will hold it more than 10t once the preatorians are gone.
February 7th, 2010, 08:20
Posts: 4,138
Threads: 54
Joined: Dec 2009
You'd have thought that disconnecting resources and pillaging are pretty harmless with Spulla's fast workers! Now killing/stealing a few of them would have been a much more helpful blow to strike.
"You want to take my city of Troll%ng? Go ahead and try."
February 7th, 2010, 08:31
Posts: 4,443
Threads: 45
Joined: Nov 2009
They would just get stolen back.
Also, any guesses on when the separate peaces start coming up?
Also, LOL @ Dantski called out Sullla on attacking Nakor.
February 7th, 2010, 15:09
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Noone will sign peace in a long time. The first peace treaties will be Dantski or Jowy, as a result of losing multiple cities.
There are many decisions being discussed on the CoW side that I plain don't understand. Perhaps there are good reasons behind them, perhaps not...
For example, Jowy's "not sure" if it's "worth it" to go max science on construction... And Whosit seems unable to make a long term plan and stick to it. Prioritizing construction over currency is crazy on his part. And why build an incan outpost when he can build a precious metals city on Centralia which will also give offshore trade routes? His economy is hurting badly and he's planning expansion, two new wars, and more military buildup?
I have to run.
February 7th, 2010, 16:00
Posts: 23,489
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
And now to make everyone hate me and stamp out this argument asap..
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
February 7th, 2010, 16:30
Posts: 686
Threads: 8
Joined: Feb 2010
Jowy Wrote:What's the big problem with that? Just sounds like to me that you're being a bit gamey and trying to force Athlete out of this war to get yourself in a better position in the game. Personally I don't see a difference between Athlete playing his turn at the first or latter half as long as he moves his units involved in the war at the first one (like he said he would). We will have to extend the timer to 48 hours if you're really not down with that.
now i know im new here (very new at that) and i dont want to get anyones back up but the problem i have with this argument is that there is a tactical advantage to holding your turn till after the otherside has moved their units, you can whip an extra unit for example. So i dont see it as being gamey of Sulla/ Speaker to ask them what they have, but trying to ensure that the playing field is fair according to the rules set down before this war started.
p.s. i have not put this in the IT thread for fear it may influance any tactical play the had not though of if i am correct.
|
