[pb74 spoilers] Miguelito and Ginger bring about the end of the world

[Miguelito]

Fingers crossed that MS understands the value of signalling good neighbourhood. Also that warrior is of course preparing a plant, so hopefully he wants to use it to cover the settler. Hm, should I avoid a double move here? Probably.

metal planted, a turn before us (along with Gav, DZ, and Dreylin). At least that allowed to settler scry, his city is 2N1W of the wheat (see previous post, where I now fied the secondscreenshot), so it appears that he'll want to claim horse together with gems? And that there's even more food around there...?

[Miguelito]

Here you have MS lucking out and settling copper without having researched BW (also evidenced by the power graph):


also a serious forward plant, 5 tiles from his capital (we went just 3)

Here are various approaches for us to make him our mortal enemy:


yellow was my originally favoured variant before we found the clam. I still don't care very much for clam, but of course orphaning food should not be done lightly. The second yellow dot is in fact closer to our cap than his, 6 tiles vs 7 , but of course we'd be grabbing more than half of the land between us, especially if we do some culture bomb there. I like that it invalidates the spot by the marble, but if we could have a hill plant 1 south I'd much prefer that. With the hill layout as it is, I still want to have it, although it does feel like a bad idea.
Red would be conventional. It gets a border hill plant that is not as easily bypassed. I don't like that it doesn't get the wheat though, although we could plant a wheat/sheep city...
Purple might not be as silly as it appears on first sight. Being on the bay it is not quite as vulnerable to naval attacks. The copper on the city tile gives 2h, although the mine will outperform this rather quickly. And it grabs all three food ressources. The dot to claim gold could be the yellow one or something further south.
All three of this settle the city at maximum distance from MS's Creative second city, that's good.



I had not shown our second city yet, here it is. moving to pasture the horse now, then maybe I'll use just one worker for the ivory while the next one may road toward city 3 already. The capital will finish the granary a bit later than indicated here because it will work the cottage after this turn, but no loss in terms of food. Around t48 we should have two granaries, our next settler, one WC finished and the next well under way.

[Ginger*]

Does anyone know how to run Civ4 on mac OS Ventura? Steam won't let me download it bc its 32 bit

I like the yellow dot on the hill west of the mountains, its a good goal, but I think we need to plant red dot for the clam and then plant our wheat city directly north of the wheat. It sucks to lose the forest but i think that we have three principles
A) dont orphan clam
B) settle either wheat or cow first ring, too slow to second ring both food sources.
C) claim the river cow and at least two flood plains

The reason I'd like red dot and second ring the coastal cow is theres no point settling within 3 tiles of MS's cre borders, we both get full expansion this way and more breathing room.

My big question is how do we prioritize that split versus any ambitions we have vis a vis metal/stonehenge

Speicifically whether we settle on the grass hill for the sheep and open up the possibility of a gem grab or if we just settle plains hill for the sheep and accept a wider berth from korea

Edit: just noticed, with spices, silk and marble, MS is heavily incentivized to go calendar pronto

[Miguelito]

ugh


This may force a premature war chariot whip. Nobody likes to whip chariots
For now we're keeping the turn split and hope he doesn't do anything stupid. Debated warpeacing, but that might actually entice him?

[Miguelito]

...


also seeing strange whips from other people on PBspy. Why is everybody so ill tempered in this game?

[Miguelito]

mechanics question:
I am afraid of him moving to the horse pasture. Gigner says we can still whip a WC as long as it isn't pillaged, I would guess the strategic is cut if he's occupying the tile. Who is right?

[RefSteel]

Ginger is correct: Enemy units standing on a tile prevent that tile from being worked but do not actually disconnect the resource as long as the tile improvement and road connection (or river connection - or coast connection if the tile improvement is a fort, or...) to the relevant city remain intact.

[Miguelito]

thanks Ref!

he did not go towards the horse, but still made me whip a WC




question now is, don't I really have to declare and kill his units for it to have been worthwhile? I.e., do I have enough restraint not to?

[Mjmd]

I didn't notice last turn; is that axe injured? Is what why you were confident to not whip last turn?

[Miguelito]

yes he killed a bear but did not get a promotion. It was still risky, the axe would get like 30% on offense. Actually I had agreed with Ginger to whip last turn but then failed to log in again