Intersite Game - Turn Discussion Thread

[novice]

I don't think we should settle that city that soon. WPC is at war and is unlikely to expand into the jungle in the meantime. I'd much rather plant the CFC border city first, preferably 1S of the oasis as indicated by my "ideal" dotmap, but 1S of the corn would be adequate as well. We could also go for SW of the oasis and then 2S of the corn.

I agree that the red dot is unlikely to get poached. We should still settle it first, though, since it's the better spot.

[kjn]

WPC is very unlikely to expand soon, given the beating they just took. On the other hand, we've already had signals from CFC that they are interested in the corn-fish spot to our southeast, and they've shown that they are willing and able to plant new cities.

The red spot is more valuable long-term, but there is much less pressure from other teams to claim it.

So my priority would be:

1. Aggressive (claims stone) fish-corn spot
   
2. Red dot
   
3. Western (non-stone) fish-corn spot
   

[Sian]

i'd lean towards non-stone grabbing Fishcorn spot ... we allready have stone to our west just beyond the pond, and honestly IMO its not in our interest to piss off CFC more than needed ... let them get the stone, if we grab Corn and fish, its a drain on their economy unless they magic up something from the stones

[mostly_harmless]

Map time!


This is the sphere of influence and resulting "natural borders" based on known or assumed location of capitals.
WPC is a bit hampered in their access to our jungle due to the sea and a mountain.

I know that these "natural borders" are only indicative and become less meaningful as the game progresses. But remember the Templars and Imperio and how they insisted we divide up the land equally although Team RB was in a much better state by then already.

Some conclusions:
The barb city and any dots we have drawn in the jungle belt are within foreign spheres of influence.
The situation with CFC is actually the most relaxed, while we are already pushing up against the Germans.

What the situation is in the South, SW and West remains a mystery. I would put my money on having yet another of the weaker civs as a neighbour there, possibly the Spanish team.

mh

[novice]

What's your conclusion, m_h?

I agree we shouldn't piss off CFC. Maybe offer to settle nonaggressively at the oasis in exchange for us capturing the barb city?

[kjn]

CFC might not be aware of the barb city, and it's on the other side of the small sea anyway, ie similar to our stone city. I say we take it - we can inform them when we have a city-taking stack (ie 2 or 3 axes or WCs) just outside it, but otherwise we make it a fait accompli.

[mostly_harmless]

Before making plans I would like to see what the barb city looks like. Whether it will auto-raze and whether there is any sea food around.
But I am tending towards 1S of the oasis if the spot is still available and just raze the barb city.

mh

[spacetyrantxenu]

I agree we should investigate the terrain around the barb city before coming to a conclusion about keeping or razing. If it is in a good location, great, we just saved hammers on a settler and got a jump on the area. If it doesn't fit the dot map or misses key resources nearby, burn it down. Also, if CFC has a unit near the city where they could contest us taking it (assuming it is at least size 2) I'd say burn it down to deny them the opportunity, if we can.

Regarding that last point, I don't know if the game rules covered a situation where two civs (let's call them RB and CFC) both are in position to attack and capture a neutral (barb or other civ) city. Fastest click/lowest ping wins? I guess that assumes diplomacy fails or doesn't preclude a clickfest determining the outcome.

[NobleHelium]

Obvious solution is to declare war on CFC the previous turn to lock them out of the first half of the next turn.

[Gold Ergo Sum]

I don't think we should attempt to steal the stone. But capturing the barb city seems fine to me. It is much closer to our borders at the moment than it is to the CFC borders.