2)Do you like to be allied, just for cash/gift reasons?

3)My power is mighty but my reputation is despicable.Is having a bad reputation relevent other than you don't seem to get any money from the others

I'm talking about AI opponents only, and I'm playing on emperor level.
Cheers

------------------
Scouse Git[1]

2. I don't, generally, like to be allied to a near neighbour. I will be taking steps to pen them in and that can't be done if you are allied. But an alliance with a remote civ is good news for quite a few reasons. They tell you stuff which helps you to exchange tech effectively, they will usually exchange maps so your exploration is aided, they are a safe trading partner, you can manipulate your relationship with other civs to some extent through the ally and, yes, gifts are welcome.

I once managed to stay allied with virtually every other civ almost throughout an entire OCC game, which was great in that context. By the way, depleting the treasury before you ask for the gift seems to make them more ready to part with cash and to give more.

3. The consensus is that reputation is of very little importance but there are disenting voices. I'll leave them to speak on the disadvantages. No-one, I think, bothers to build the Eiffel Tower.

Now, as to the capital, it matters most early on. In gov.ts other than Democracy and Communism the further a city is away from the capital the greater the effect of corruption upon it. Corruption is cripling under despotism which is one of the reasons that achieving Monarchy is such a vital early goal (the restriction on squares which produce three or more shields/arrows/wheatsheaves is another). But it is still pretty bad under Monarchy and still a feature under Republic (the main forms of early government). So what you want is a capital which is near the geographical centre of your civ. Often enough that is what you have, roughly, because you expand in every direction. But it is not at all uncommon for geography to dictate that you expand in one direction only so that your capital finishes up right at the edge of your empire.

Then defence is another consideration. You can lose the odd border city and your civ will not have suffered a mortal blow (in my current game I arranged to lose a city to barbs). Losing your capital is very bad news at all times. Once the space race is at its height there is even a known tactic whereby you get your bird in the air then move the capital to a one citizen capital which can be destroyed but not captured. This avoids your spaceship ever having to come home because the capital falls. And in MP I believe moving capitals is a known ploy just to confuse opponents about where the capital is - so significant is the chance to have a crack at an opponents capital regarded.

More likely, though, you would move the palace to a central city which can be strongly defended.

But there is a problem to all this which limits the number of games in which a capital gets moved (in SP anyway). The capital itself has no corruption and you probably site it in a good spot. It is also your first city. So you probably build an early wonder or two there. If the wonders are or include Hanging Gardens or Collossus then you may not fancy moving the capital because this may introduce unwanted corruption into your most productive city. And those wonders are long lasting in themselves and also make it advantageous to add later wonders like Copes which are permanent.

All in all you need to bear in mind the possibility of moving capital but don't be surprised if you actually do it very rarely (and probably when things are going awry).

One noteworthy point, though, is that if, like me, you are willing to delay initial founding quite a while then it will often be one of the paybacks that you find a good non coastal site (less vulnerable) with room for the next five or six cities to be established in a ring, each about equidistant (and close) to the capital. This will help your early development quite significantly by delaying the time when corruption starts to hurt. Delay it enough in fact for the achievement of Monarchy to drop it back before it's become very significant and, if you go for early Republic, the same again when you move to that form of gov.t.

Leads me to another question though. How many moves are you willing to wait before you build your 1st city? I don't wait more than 1 or 2, but the central capital with surrounding cities is appealing.

quote: Originally posted by Dhalsim on 03-29-2001 02:44 PM Leads me to another question though. How many moves are you willing to wait before you build your 1st city? I don't wait more than 1 or 2, but the central capital with surrounding cities is appealing.

AAAAAaaaaghghgh! Please God no! not this again!

quote: Originally posted by reds4ever on 03-29-2001 07:17 PM i find the only problem with waiting lots of turns to find the 'perfect' spot is that as the turns go by the spot has to be more and more 'perfect' before you'll found the city as you want more and more return for the turns you've just spent. i just find a special or a river and go from there

Exactly; well put. My rule of thumb is that I found on the first good site I find, "good" being defined as reds4ever has, with two exceptions: I also consider a site on the water and no bad terrain to be "good"; and I don't consider fish or fruit, by themselves, to be specials worth founding on. In Deity, with two settlers, this generally means I can found pretty quickly; with only one settler, I try to found by 3500 BC at the latest.

Yes it can backfire, as when you find you are on a smallish island and there are no huts - but it doesn't take long to establish (or guess) that this is the case.

You often find neighbours very early and can take effective steps to cramp them or hit them with hut units, a legion or two or a chariot or two can be hot stuff early.

You can manage hut tipping (finding one early doesn't mean you have to tip it0. E.g, in deity, you can decide between getting two cities down or one. If you find two or three huts on wooded or non flat terrain get two cities down, then tip those huts. You've got good odds on a wandering tribe in which case you have your non settler back but still have the accelerated start two cities brings.

Last point. Rolling back the fog of war around your early cities is also good in itself.

As I've said before, if I look at the top five cities and see the A1 civs are all at size three when i am just setting out I am not downhearted.

Edit to add a downside. The game gives you a short barb (except from huts) free period at the very start. Delay founding and this is gone. I've sat through the bloody looong video twice in recent weeks as a result.

My ego can just about bear that, though. I sorta like the barbs, so going down to them doesn't sting. It's their red tunics and devil may care attitude I think.