Forbidden Palace Location

[Konquest02]

I'd like to have some advice on where to put my FP in my current game. This game is all random 6 civ on a standard map, but I found out I got to play on continents... I am playing on warlord. With the English, I (almost) wiped the Iroquois and took their capital on the turn before this minimap screen shot. I got no GL during this war (and none since the start of the game). My capital is in red and is half covered with tundra (which 2 of them have game).

My dilemma is the following: Should I build my FP on the west part or on the east part of my continent? Should I wait and build my FP on the other continent when I'll get there? I'm planning for either a cultural, diplomatic or spaceship win because I'm not that much of a warmonger.

I'll post my save game and a screenshot later tonight.

--Kon--

[Iskandar Reza]

Keep on rolling, take the entire continent, Eliminate the English and build your FP in former English territory.

[Konquest02]

If I do this, should I move my palace a bit upper in my actual territory (in order to get more cities close to my palace)?

--Kon--

[Theseus]

Kon, although you are a builder, who knows how this game will go?

I would build and FP ASAP in the center or slightly north of center of your founding continent's mass... trying to position both the FP and the Palace more optimally won;t gain that much more.

This is a really important point: Cities look to EITHER the FP or the Palace for corruption-minimization, not both. Thus, the recommended 'barbell' results in lost corruption/waste-fighting in the center.

Doing this will give you the option of moving the Palace to another continent, if need be, and thus maximal impact of both palaces.

[Serb]

I recomend to build FP in city which is the big red point on the map. You should start to build there something big f.e. palace or wounder before you will have 8 cities. When possible switch to FP. When you complete it it will greatly reduce corruption in your empire and it will be easier for you to expand north. When you will conquer north, more probably it will be when democracy will be known to you (which is reduce corruption too) you should remove your capital to city which is the big green point on the map. The best choice to do it is a hurry production function of one of your leaders. But anyway in modern times cities generate more production points then in ancient times and it is MUCH easier to build a palace in modern times, because its cost is always the same.

[The Pioneer]

Originally posted by Serb
But anyway in modern times cities generate more production points then in ancient times and it is MUCH easier to build a palace in modern times, because its cost is always the same.

Are you sure? I thought that the cost of the Palace increase with the number of cities that you control!?

As for FP placement I never wait, I build it early and then at later stages I build my Palace.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by The Pioneer
Are you sure? I thought that the cost of the Palace increase with the number of cities that you control!?

Yes, but the cost grows never beyond 1000 shields, that's the upper cap. As for the FP location: If you intend further expansion, Serbs suggestion is good. If not, I would think about an east-west location of the P/FP axis, given the shape of your present empire.

[Serb]

Sure he intends further expansion. Everyone should. This continet simly created for conquest, if he will do everything like I said he will have more or less good corruption rate in every city of this continent. Remaining continents could be easily erased when he will have enough nukes.

Diplomatic and spaceship victory is for suckers. Real men always win through rude force or through cultural domination (actually never won last one. No matter how I tried, I've build temples early, very early, much earlier then AI, but it doesn't help mach. It's too long to wait until cultural victory, conquest is much easier).

[Harovan]

Actually, cultural victories are among the cheapest and lamest. Build cities, and lots of them. Every 2nd tile, regardless of terrain. Set science to 0% and buy techs up to Education. Build (or rush) Temples, Libraries, Cathedrals and Universities everywhere and Marketplaces and Banks for more cash in the core cities. Wait. That's it.

[Serb]

Originally posted by The Pioneer


Are you sure? I thought that the cost of the Palace increase with the number of cities that you control!?

I don't have any patches and in my games it always cost the same. But I don't play Civ3 for several months (lost my interest when I won a dozen of games on diety level) and perhaps I forget something, but as I remember it always cost about 300 sheilds.

As for FP placement I never wait, I build it early and then at later stages I build my Palace.

I'm talking about the same. If you don't build it fast, you'll start to suck soon.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Actually, cultural victories are among the cheapest and lamest. Build cities, and lots of them. Every 2nd tile, regardless of terrain. Set science to 0% and buy techs up to Education. Build (or rush) Temples, Libraries, Cathedrals and Universities everywhere and Marketplaces and Banks for more cash in the core cities. Wait. That's it.

Every second tile, regardless of terrain? It's inefective. I always try to place my cities as much effective, as possible. To give each city as much tiles as possible.

And it's to boring to wait. I'll better go with my way. With highest among the other (to assimilate conquered cities) culture, but not nessesary for Cultural victory.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Serb
Every second tile, regardless of terrain? It's inefective.

Overall yes, but regarding culture it's very effective. You don't need the cities for building anything, you need them merely to hold and support cultural buildings. If you have 50 cities with an average of 20 culture points per turn, the victory should be yours in less than 100 turns (given, the AI doesn't do the same, which is highly unlikely).

Nice threadjack btw, so lets stop it.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Overall yes, but regarding culture it's very effective

Ralph, sure you right and I undestood clearly what are you trying to say, but this is not my style. I never played as you described, because I don't like such strategy. I like to crush enemy spearmens with my knights or enemy infantry with my modern tanks.

Nice threadjack btw,

Thank's

so lets stop it.

Ok.

P.S. It's always a pleasure to talk with you.
Odnako shutku pro moi chlen ya tebe kogda-nibud pripomnu. I mean, someday I'll pay you with the same token. eto bila shutka konechno.

[Arrian]

Konquest,

I think Serb's suggestions for FP and later Palace locations are pretty good. Perhaps I would choose the city directly NE of the one he chose for the FP (that one's a bit farther out, and will help new cities you build to the north), but otherwise I agree.

I would attempt to generate a Great Leader for the Palace move, however, because otherwise it will take forever. The immediate boost you will get from the FP (which should be built quickly since it's close to your capitol) will help in the short term. There have been whole threads devoted to leader generation... check 'em out.

One thing I think you really need to do is to settle the area that's open right now. The civs on the other continent will if you don't.

-Arrian

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Yes, but the cost (of a palace) grows never beyond 1000 shields, that's the upper cap.

In my current game, in a city with 31 shield per turn production, I'm told it will take 129 turns to complete a new palace. That's a cost of 4000 shields!

(huge map, v1.21)

[Marquis de Sodaq]

On topic, I agree with the suggestion that building the FP to the north is the way to go. Look at all that open land! Go settle it quickly, you can increase your production base by 50%!

[Serb]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

In my current game, in a city with 31 shield per turn production, I'm told it will take 129 turns to complete a new palace. That's a cost of 4000 shields!

(huge map, v1.21)

It changes a lot. Perhaps I should download the patch and play it again?
Btw, how do you play on huge maps? They are so HUGE In modern times it took so much time for single turn. I prefer standard maps, it took much lesser amount of time per turn and resources becomes more valuable, because on huge map you almost always could easily took any strategic resource, which needed. Without a shortcuts the game is less fun.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
In my current game, in a city with 31 shield per turn production, I'm told it will take 129 turns to complete a new palace. That's a cost of 4000 shields!

(huge map, v1.21)

Really? Well, may be the upper cap is map size depending. My latest experiences come from standard maps. Didn't play on huge maps since long.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by Serb
Btw, how do you play on huge maps? They are so HUGE In modern times it took so much time for single turn.

Well, for years I've had the habit of rarely playing civ games out thru the modern era. This latest game is only the second Civ3 game I've played past 1500ad... It does take a looong time for turns. I think I'm going to move to a smaller map after I play this one out.

[Konquest02]

Thanks all for your suggestions. I was thinking about the same but now, my thoughts were confirmed.

Originally posted by Arrian

One thing I think you really need to do is to settle the area that's open right now. The civs on the other continent will if you don't.

That is exactly what I am doing right now. Just after the war with the Iroquois, i switched my productions to settlers and was able to cranck 4 within 3 turns.

I just got knights so I am now preparing a force to attack England. I'll expand first, put a few defensive units in my newly founded cities and build an invasion force with my core cities. I'm pretty anxious to see the results!

--Kon--