Official Poll: Should we follow the "Genghis Plan" for French Territory?

[Jonny]

As our war on France continues, a question arises:

Should we leave the French cities that we conquer where they are, or disband some and move them to better spots?

GenghisFarb proposed a plan for disbanding the French cities and building 4 cities of our own on their land. (The picture of that plan is at the end of this post.) 1a and 1b are alternate sites for the same city.

The question of this poll: Should we follow this plan or not?

Here's how it works: The number of people who voted for either of the 2 yes options will be compared to those who voted for the no option. If the yes options are higher, then we'll follow the plan.

This poll lasts 3 days.

[Jonny]

Possible Implementation of the Genghis Plan

Here It Is will build a settler next turn. This settler will be headed to one of the City 1 sites (whichever one is selected). We will disband Bescanon (once we capture it) and build the new city. We will probably try to build its culture fairly quickly to prevent the Greeks from moving into former French territory.

The 2nd settler will probably go to the tile south of Amiens. This settler may possibly come from Amiens itself. Amiens will be disbanded and the new city will be built.

Cities 3 and 2 will have to wait a while before being built.

Remember, this plan is only a tentative plan. This plan for implementation of the Genghis Plan is not set in stone.

[Jonny]

One more thing: I'd like to request that the next turnchat is not before Monday at 1800 GMT, so that I have time to get the results of this poll and place my orders.

[MrWhereItsAt]

For me I guess it depends on how much has been built in those cities already. It is a constant nuisance having to rushbuild to get cities up to scratch, so I'd much rather just keep what we get and a few meagre improvements than have to tolerate lots of lytons going into building them again as well as what isn't in the French cities now.

[roadcage]

Site 1B is clearly superior to 1A. Either would be a real shield powerhouse, but 1A would be short of food to reach it'strue potential. 1B will have enough grassland (after clearing jungle) to max out all those hills. And note that either already has iron, so the extra jungle tiles for 1B increases the chances of coal and an Iron Works small wonder. Remember folks, that DOUBLES shields at that city. Do I expect an Iron Works? No, but I have a dream! What is surprizing is that since 1B is so superior, Ghengis gave us an option.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by roadcage
Site 1B is clearly superior to 1A. Either would be a real shield powerhouse, but 1A would be short of food to reach it'strue potential. 1B will have enough grassland (after clearing jungle) to max out all those hills. And note that either already has iron, so the extra jungle tiles for 1B increases the chances of coal and an Iron Works small wonder. Remember folks, that DOUBLES shields at that city. Do I expect an Iron Works? No, but I have a dream! What is surprizing is that since 1B is so superior, Ghengis gave us an option.

I do prefer 1b for exactly the reasons you stated, but all suggestions before mine were even farther over than 1a and I wanted to let the people decide what they preferred.

[Arnelos]

IF the war continues, I support GhengisFarb's plan for re-situating the French cities - following the plan variant for cite 1b.

That should not necessarily be read as support for the war continuing, however, merely support for following this plan IF the war DOES continue.

[E_T]

Originally posted by Jonny
Possible Implementation of the Genghis Plan

Here It Is will build a settler next turn. This settler will be headed to one of the City 1 sites (whichever one is selected). We will disband Bescanon (once we capture it) and build the new city. We will probably try to build its culture fairly quickly to prevent the Greeks from moving into former French territory.

What about Lyons? Does it stay or get disbanded?

The 2nd settler will probably go to the tile south of Amiens. This settler may possibly come from Amiens itself. Amiens will be disbanded and the new city will be built.

No problem, I have a Settler to be set up in my orders already.

Cities 3 and 2 will have to wait a while before being built.

Remember, this plan is only a tentative plan. This plan for implementation of the Genghis Plan is not set in stone.

So, your looking at moving ALL 4 of the French lowland cities, in time? Have you concidered that there might be some other options that might have been presented, due to the fact that we have recently changed the scope of the war (due to general public sentamint) to a full conquest of France. Yes, I had one, and it involves combining Besancon & Lyons and placing it just north of the current Lyons. Moving Tours NE by one (or 2) and the same move for Amiens (SE by one). That would be 4 out of 6 to move and make 3 new cities from 4 (and spend less money to move).

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
For me I guess it depends on how much has been built in those cities already. It is a constant nuisance having to rushbuild to get cities up to scratch, so I'd much rather just keep what we get and a few meagre improvements than have to tolerate lots of lytons going into building them again as well as what isn't in the French cities now.

Avagnon will mostlikely have an Auqaduct and maybe a Marketplace (because of it's size). I agree, we've had a heated discussion about what we should move the science slider to and the cost to rushbuild some items. Because of the waste that most of these cities will have (See the CONJECTURE - End of War, around 860AD Statistics for Corruption & Waste Report). At 95% waste, your Rushcost is ONLY reduced by 4 LPT. THey will require fairly large large rush costs (Settler one turn rush built cost is equal 116L). Then we'll need temples in all six, espesially the ones on the borders (same one turn cost as Settler, 116L). Going by my plan, we would only have to pay for 3 Settlers: Tours, Besancon & Lyons. Ameims could be built by itself in 5 turns. And also have to pay for 5 temples (New Tours, Granobe, Avagnon, Dijon & Combined Lyons/Besancon) A total of 928L for 9 one turn rush cost.

The Settler form HII will be ready on turn one and will still have to move to what ever location before he's used (at least 2 turns). The Ameins Settler will be ready (normally) in 5 turns. Lyons is currently size 3 and is working on an Worker, then a Settler (to disband. Besancon will also be size 3 and will do the worker/settler thing and could provide a slight territory/culture block vs. greece while we're setting up. Dijon will start on a Temple first thing. The last three won't be ours for a few more turns, but by the end of the next turnchant.

Jonny, I'm not sure, but I think that you have to request the funds to rush settlers from the MoE.

E_T

[Aggie]

For all concerned I intend to take Besancon this turn(since we are going on the elite knight can hunt for victims elsewhere). And am considering taking the last southern city. Just wanted to mention that for city building plans.
Aggie

[Shiber]

What about Knossos? We are going to take it eventually. Wouldn't site 1b cause Knossos to overlap significantly?
If we're planning on Abandoning Knossos that's fine with me, but if we plan on keeping Knossos after we might prefer to go for 1a after all.

[joncnunn]

1B appears a no-brainer to me.

We have so many cities now, that consoldation of other cities we take is important.

(Especally if we expand in other directions as well.)

[joncnunn]

Except that Knossos once fliped to us, could chain flip Corinth.

Originally posted by Shiber
What about Knossos? We are going to take it eventually. Wouldn't site 1b cause Knossos to overlap significantly?

[=OttomusCeasar=]

Originally posted by Shiber
What about Knossos? We are going to take it eventually. Wouldn't site 1b cause Knossos to overlap significantly?
If we're planning on Abandoning Knossos that's fine with me, but if we plan on keeping Knossos after we might prefer to go for 1a after all.

1b overlaps ONE tile with Knossos. That's "significantly"?

Versus the complete waste of 3 grassland tiles with 1a.

1b, all the way.

[Shiber]

Nevermind that, I'm blind.
1b it is then.

[joncnunn]

Looks like it would be a good idea to have the pictures include the grid lines.

Not only did I slightly misjudge the numer of tiles from Knossos to 1B, but I also misjudged the number of tiles between Knossos and Corinth.

Knossos probably won't flip to us given how close it is to Athens. If it does it's location is fine.

[realpolitic]

No, unless we destroy all of France. Avigdon is in a good spot for trade, and a city at 1b is out of reach of the gold. If French cities are to corrupt, we can build workers, we're not far from Steam Power. Let's milk them. In those cities that have reasonable waste, we can build courthouses in anticipation of Democracy.

[E_T]

I've come up with three possible plans, that I'll show in three posts. All three are the same, except for the placement of New Tours. All three combine Lyons & Besancon into one city that covers both the Iron & Saltpeter. In the maps, the Iron is under our Forces just outside of Besancon.

Here is the first map. This shows moving Tours NE by 1:



It took me a while to figure out the layers thing in Corel Draw, but I did it.

E_T

[E_T]

This shows New Tours at NE1 and E1 from the current position

Here's the map:


In this one, if we really wanted to, we could move Grenobie up the coast a bit. If that is done, there would only be one overlap with New Tours, right where old Tours currently is.

E_T

[E_T]

THis moves New Tours NE by two:



In this one, Grenobie can also be moved, but there would be 2 tiles overlapping.

E_T

[Shiber]

You've addressed some important issues in your plan... but still, it leaves a lot of mountains and hills and a gold tile out of our city radiis.

[zeit]

-We should move those cities to best use the terrain, but how we should do that, that's what i ask?

Disbanding a size 4 cities means having tens of thousands of french citizens as refugess, this is not the way of the new Republican Apolytonia!

I support using the cities as Worker Factories, then disband them- the workers will be used to developed their own land, and justice will be done. We hold no grudge against the French people- only against the ill-stricken leadrship of Joan the heathen.

I'm aware this might be more expensive than just disbanding- but let us not forget that it is people (virtual ones- but so are the lytons) we have on stake here.

[Shiber]

Actually, converting the populace into workers before disbanding them is exactly the thing to do. They'll turn into French workers which are somewhat slower than Apolytonian workers but they don't cost upkeep.

[E_T]

Originally posted by Shiber
You've addressed some important issues in your plan... but still, it leaves a lot of mountains and hills and a gold tile out of our city radiis.

Sometimes, you just can't have it all. At least not on a tight budget and within a timely manner.

E_T