Quote:
quote:Originally posted by akots
I also noticed you are mining the game between Torino and Roma (not sure it is a good decision). I would have probably moved Torino 1 tile SW and irrigate the game. Also, if Ravenna will be moved 1 tile SW, it can share two cows with Genoa and/or Rome and by building Granary in one of those cities(apparently Genoa), it might be possible to greatly boost the growth. Bologna could have been moved 1 tile NW to get the fishes in radius and to free a place for a fishermen village on one of the costal hills. Also, I don't see the reason for stopping settler production but it might be you have a better perspective here. However, with clearing marshes and irrigating two game tiles there, a city somewhere in between Torino, Venezia and Ravenna will be a nice worker factory.
In general, strating location seems extremely nice with lots and lots of food and shields which basically substantially diminishes the advantage of argi trait of erikk.
|
Mining the Game was a 50-50 choice. It is not near water so I'd have to irrigate the BG near Roma first. Since that needs mining soon for the SoZ that was not realy an option. I am usually very much for irrigating them but considdering as well that Torino has some plains who will give 3 food with RR there is enough growth.
As for the Torino Location, I think very much it is best where it is now because of the wider spread of cities I want and need. Also, upon Library construction it will get two BG on a river within the city radius. To finalise decisionmaking for it's location I planned an overlap with city number 10 but the babs beat me to it.
This a rather large Standard map and DCP is not a good option, that is why I
only wanted 3 cities South(east) of Roma-Milano. For the Hills/Mountains/Fish/Wheat to be of optimal use in the Next age I need Bologna and Genoa to be powerhouses! Size 10+ with little corruption and high shields (20+).
I agree Akots that in general a "fishing village" Is ok to have. High commerce and little need for improvements (harbor/market/lib only since production is very low no need for rax/factories). However, on this map there will be plenty of room to settle (once wars start).
In general all your advise is very logical Akots
but one thing I do not agree on and that is Ravenna sharing the Cow. Ravenna as placed here will have access to two Game , a fish in a lake, 4 hills, 3-5 Coastal tiles and 3 grass. I see firstly no need to move it closer to the Genoa-Cow, as sharing that will never happen because Genoa needs it very much for itself. Second, sharing the Roma-cow is a little more realistic but not outweighing the beneficial advantage the Cow has for Roma. Not to mention Moving Ravenna SW will make the area more dense again.
I guess it all has a lot to do with the bigger picture, which I did not mention in this thread at all. This is a wide map as said so that is the most important factor in placing the cities. It is something one does not always "know" when starting but as soon as I found out here I'd get at least 10 cities (wide) or 14 (close-placement) I chose 10 cities in a wider patern. It also has to do with being Commercial. I love the trait and it shows real power with large cities. All cities founded can grow past size 12!
Last remark, I was indeed not unhappy when I saw the Food-plethora here. The agri-one-extra-food is hardly that important. Being first in pop shows just that.