1BC Civ Forums / Civilization IV Discussion / 1BC CivIV BTS Multi Team Battle / Town Square / Dgame Archive / Possible 2nd City Locations / Latest Posts

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

TORARADICAL — Wed, 23 May 2007 18:23:30 GMT

[quote][b]Leo (5/23/2007)[/b][hr]Note: NOT an active member...just a passing trader

I'd say north of the red X too. Since we can't abandon cities in IV and since it counts against you the number of cities you can have...it's back to the old Civ 2 SuperCities (tm). The borders expand faster that way too.

I'm betting resources show up in those deserts later...and you would get the harbor.

But I am just a voice from the peanut gallery[/quote]
:w00t:

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Leo — Wed, 23 May 2007 14:15:54 GMT

Note: NOT an active member...just a passing trader

I'd say north of the red X too. Since we can't abandon cities in IV and since it counts against you the number of cities you can have...it's back to the old Civ 2 SuperCities (tm). The borders expand faster that way too.

I'm betting resources show up in those deserts later...and you would get the harbor.

But I am just a voice from the peanut gallery

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

McNulty — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:23:22 GMT

I'd vote for the yellow X as it doesn't overlap. It doesn't matter that you won't get much from the desert tiles, as you would be two tiles down in any event.

It's logical.

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Comedy Dave — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:20:57 GMT

The Red X sounds good to me. Do we need to hold a proper Senate vote to approve this location?

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

psweetman1590 — Tue, 22 May 2007 18:13:44 GMT

I would also say the Red X is better. If there were a resource in the desert that would make the tile workable, I'd be leaning towards the yellow, but there isn't, and I'm not, so let's take the red one.

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

TORARADICAL — Mon, 21 May 2007 16:32:48 GMT

[quote][b]Locus Coeruleus (5/21/2007)[/b][hr][quote]as that would be in grid[/quote]

Still not a big fan of the city overlap, eh, Tora? :)[/quote]

Not even with the mod that extands city limits,lol

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

jerm — Mon, 21 May 2007 16:21:54 GMT

Between the two, I'd agree with the red X for all the reasons civfan gave. Any further north and we have too much desert IMO. But why not get the copper first now that we know it's there?

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Terminal_Civ-er — Mon, 21 May 2007 15:45:43 GMT

[b][red]X[/red][/b]

*whisper* If you build it ... they will come.

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Zigeuner — Mon, 21 May 2007 15:33:42 GMT

Red X. If you build on the hill, you cannot mine the hill... :)

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Locus Coeruleus — Mon, 21 May 2007 14:35:42 GMT

[quote]as that would be in grid[/quote]

Still not a big fan of the city overlap, eh, Tora? :)

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

TORARADICAL — Mon, 21 May 2007 13:58:21 GMT

We would suggest just to the North of the red x as that would be in grid, and grant a harbour access

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

Bolan Longpants — Mon, 21 May 2007 08:08:15 GMT

Since I am one of those 'left wing' peasants I would go for red.:D

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

CivFan — Sun, 20 May 2007 18:10:09 GMT

I would choose the red x over the yellow x. I know the red x overlaps 2 with the capital, but the yellow x has 4 unworkable tiles that the red x does not have (2 extra dessert, 2 extra mountains). And, although the forested grassland square to the right will probably never get worked if you choose the red x, the plains square to the left will never get worked if you choose the yellow x. Overall, I just think the red x will prove to be a more powerful city because it can work 4 extra tiles.

I haven't been following too much - have you figured out the fractal map's shape yet? You might want to consider pushing the red x up one and getting a coastal city. The only problem with that is it doesn't cover the rice, and I don't think that one food resource will be enough without fresh water nearby to irrigate farms. Though maybe they can hold until civil service, and you can bring some up from the capital.

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

ontrial — Sun, 20 May 2007 17:43:20 GMT

im all for the yellow yellow x giving us the extra forest to chop an a clear capital radius, the only real advantage i think we would miss early on is getting the cows in the initial radius of the city but we are using the worker for other things atm anyways,

another fast settler after this one can go the copper but i don't think that getting its is that much of a priority just yet

RE: Possible 2nd City Locations

tones — Sun, 20 May 2007 14:24:59 GMT

Peasants say: och forget this. Go fir southern site just north o' lake and close tae new copper. But only if we dinna need tae chop jungle tae giz it. Us peasants cannae dunlood save y'ken?

Possible 2nd City Locations

mongoose201 — Sun, 20 May 2007 13:54:51 GMT

These are the locations for which I'm considering asking the Senate for City Placement Approval. (That sentence didn't feel right)

I'm curious about the citizens thoughts on the locations.

Both have the advantage of both the Rice and Cattle in the city radius. I'm leaning toward the red X since it would mean fewer desert tiles in the radius.... The downside is that 2 tiles would overlap with the capital.

What say the people?