[SPOILERS] Roland and Suboptimal Team Up

[suboptimal]

Turn 12

Moved the warriors. The unfiltered view:




The land SW of the wheat is coastal, W of the wheat is not. The view with the Appeal-o-meter on:




Faith galore but not much in the way of to be found. In the south I’m going to go around the mountain rather than over the river as I’ll defog more faster. In the north I’m crossing the river to the east.

[roland of gilead]

TURN 13

Slinger get's hit for 53 which is slightly higher than it could be I think but expected. I retreat towards capital have a seizure as I wrongly think the spear can lock it in with zone of control. Recovering from that as we speak.



in the south we have as much desert as was expected and nowhere near as much as wanted. Petra for 2 tiles? really good ones in fairness. Certainly only china could justify it. In better newws if i settle off the coast I believe a 3rd costal city can be squeezed in later in game.

move Petra city one east frees up the peninsula city SW right? Lot's of good districts down here especially with Machu Pichu.

[roland of gilead]

settler finishes in 6 turns.

Need to sort out a plan to get us religion around turn 30-32. Need to decide where my holy site is going and buy a tile probably. Need to build a builder next in cap then holy site and probably buy a builder at second city.

[suboptimal]

The peninsula in your SW is blocked by the city location on the Amur River to the SE. However, I agree with moving the city 1E. I'd actually say that Petra is a low priority here because there isn't much benefit from it. Pyramids and Jebel Barkal have higher payoffs than Petra in this location and should get built first.

Settler is going to the stone, right?

[roland of gilead]

Yes settler to the stone.

I agree on the petra it does really help with the copper and diamonds though. Nearer the time I can do a cost analysis.

The peninsula city isn't much of a loss I suppose.

[roland of gilead]

pretty sure the peninsula is valid btw. It's a awful City though

[suboptimal]

In counting tiles, you're right - you'd have one tile to settle on for a city. However, except as a space filler I don't know that it'd be worth it - the land down there is not that good and other than a resource grab would be very slow to develop.

[roland of gilead]

yeah agreed.

perhaps a civ 4 style fishing village to produce boats

[suboptimal]

A city down there would be stuck at 2 population until it either completed a Harbor + lighthouse or farmed the wheat (at which point it'd get stuck at 3 pop).

Yield management on this map is going to be a greater-than-usual key to succeeding here. Part of that is going to be avoiding city locations Just based on available yields my settler will be heading to the northern coast and settling between the stone and tea, working the diamonds first. Beyond that I need to do some pondering.

One thing I'm considering is the possibility that the map has been set up to provide limited "good" city sites at the start and then have the players make a risk/reward decision - settle sub-par locations nearby (same land mass) to get cities up quickly OR wait, explore, and find "good" locations nearby but that require Shipbuilding to access. A evidence I'll cite the fact that right now each of us has only one area outside our immediate start position that has 2 tiles unless there's a resource present.

PBEM 18 goes on hiatus tonight - dunno if Ichabod will be playing the turn tonight or not. That'll give me plenty of time over the next couple of turns here to work up some dotmaps and yield calculations for my section of the map and to work out an intermediate-term (30-40 turn) plan.

[roland of gilead]

Sounds good and I agree there are almost certainly good islands out there.

The one we can see in my SW suggests as much.

TBs also seems to have removed almost any early randomness. No volcanoes no few flood plains.