November 5th, 2012, 14:45
(This post was last modified: November 5th, 2012, 14:47 by NobleHelium.)
Posts: 13,214
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
Sure, it doesn't stop them. But keep in mind that they won't immediately know that we've settled the city in that location unless their quechua is still nearby. Most likely they will find out about the city when we get culture over the gems, and then they would still need to scramble to settle next to the gems and get culture going in their city. If we can get third ring before they can get second ring, we can likely hold the gems. How difficult will that be? I'm not sure.
Yes, if we settle next to the gems it will be a lot easier to hold the tile culturally. But it would be a much crappier city and also a lot more aggressive.
November 5th, 2012, 15:25
Posts: 2,996
Threads: 7
Joined: Apr 2012
And if we get any difficulties we have of course the option to use our free music artist 
November 5th, 2012, 15:50
Posts: 2,569
Threads: 53
Joined: Jan 2006
We should reveal more tiles around the gems, to see whether there is more food towards the Germans. If not and they settle next to the gems, their city will be pretty bad. Lots of overlap with their city in the north and all jungle.
mh
November 5th, 2012, 15:57
Posts: 13,214
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
I think we can move NE one more time (would mean the warrior would get back to HF on t69), then SE from that, allowing us to reveal a few more tiles while getting closer to HF.
November 5th, 2012, 16:02
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
(November 5th, 2012, 15:57)NobleHelium Wrote: I think we can move NE one more time (would mean the warrior would get back to HF on t69), then SE from that, allowing us to reveal a few more tiles while getting closer to HF.
The warrior should scout around the gems and then guard the gems settler that's whipped in AO on t68. We'll have to find another solution for HF.
I have to run.
November 5th, 2012, 16:22
Posts: 6,727
Threads: 59
Joined: Apr 2004
Um, shouldn't we still be looking for horses before we start settling up on other teams?
November 5th, 2012, 16:29
Posts: 2,868
Threads: 15
Joined: Sep 2010
(November 5th, 2012, 14:45)NobleHelium Wrote: Sure, it doesn't stop them. But keep in mind that they won't immediately know that we've settled the city in that location unless their quechua is still nearby. Most likely they will find out about the city when we get culture over the gems, and then they would still need to scramble to settle next to the gems and get culture going in their city. If we can get third ring before they can get second ring, we can likely hold the gems. How difficult will that be? I'm not sure.
Yes, if we settle next to the gems it will be a lot easier to hold the tile culturally. But it would be a much crappier city and also a lot more aggressive.
Well with a library and a monument it will take us 34 turns to get 3rd ring culture. They'll definitely get second ring before that- they're expansive inca and they already have a city nearby.
I agree that settling next to the gems would be a mistake, but I think we need to prepare for a serious Culture war there.
November 5th, 2012, 16:42
Posts: 1,285
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2009
Can we try to use diplo to "claim" the gems?
Kalin
November 5th, 2012, 16:47
Posts: 7,766
Threads: 94
Joined: Oct 2009
(November 5th, 2012, 16:42)kalin Wrote: Can we try to use diplo to "claim" the gems?
Kalin
Gems are claimable by a borderline first-ring city of ours. I think they are probably supposed to be "ours".
We should find out the location of the german capital, to see if it supports this argument.
November 5th, 2012, 17:14
Posts: 1,285
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2009
(November 5th, 2012, 16:47)SevenSpirits Wrote: Gems are claimable by a borderline first-ring city of ours. I think they are probably supposed to be "ours".
We should find out the location of the german capital, to see if it supports this argument.
Yes, that's what I meant. If we can move quickly, we could ask the German team to not make a city with the gems in the first ring.
Kalin
|
