I was dealt this possibly interesting start....

http://www.whiterose.org/danil/civ4/posts/waterlog.gif

Judge the prospect of moving the settler one tile north (allowing access to the ocean, for a lighthouse and 6 lake tiles @ 3/0/2 ).

Settlers have two movement points, so you don't have to move directly to the hut - you can instead step to the grasslands to get a look before you commit. That leaves open the option of settling on the first turn (if you go NE with the first step, you've still got 5 lake tiles with an ocean view), returning to the original location to settle at turn two, popping the hut and settling at turn two.

You'll have the extra information of seeing more tiles - so if you would move, and something visible would change your strategy, please describe it. You've also got a warrior move at your disposal.

Yes, the yellow is Hatty, but don't be constrained by that - please explore this using your own prefered leader, difficulty level, and victory type.

I'd go NE and unless everything I defogged was desert, park there. Starting in the blue circle is crazy, you get 7 lake squares but all stay at 2 food. 6 or 5 lake squares with 3 food each is way better (once you research sailing and build lighthouse, which would be my priority here pretty early.) Get the Colossus in the city, and all is well for a long time. I hate wasting even one turn before founding, so I would settle for 5 lakes instead of 6, and thus save myself a few trees for chopping.

EDIT Colossus in any of your cities is fine. But probably more likely in the capital.

I'd go NE and settle there on the first turn. You lose one lake tile, but trade a grassland for a future plains once you get Ironworking. Any way you do it, this is going to be a financial powerhouse some day.

Is that a plains/hill northeast of you? The gif isn't that great... If so, I'd probably have a run up it with the settler to see what's north. Assuming not desert/tundra/mountain, I'd probably take the hill for my start.

One advantage to this is that it works well for packing in the cities without overlap. The second city would probably be on the hill just north of the clams. Third city on the unknown tile two southwest of the settler.

Is that a plains/hill northeast of you? The gif isn't that great... If so, I'd probably have a run up it with the settler to see what's north. Assuming not desert/tundra/mountain, I'd probably take the hill for my start.


It is a plains/hill to the northeast, and a forrest/grassland/hill underneath the settler's initial position.

I think settling on the hut would make for a nice Great People farm, with 2 food resources and almost every other tile producing 3 food.

Settling in place I believe is less than ideal. You would want to have one or two hill tiles in your radius so that you can mine them to get some MUCH-needed hammers.

I'd go one tile NE and settle. That way you get 2 hills to mine, less plains in your radius, still have 5 lake tiles as well as the rice and banana, and access to ocean - all important things.

But settling in place might mean you have a good strategic resource pop in the radius.

I'd go one tile northeast. Compared to one tile north, you can settle the first turn, and won't lose the forest the hut is on. Definitly don't settle in place: moving gains you two hill tiles, ocean access, and the accompanying lighthouse.

Settling one up would let you move your boats onto BOTH lakes! :lol:

Then you could settle at the other end of those lakes next to the ocean and voila, easy access between north, south and west! Oooooooh.

Settling one up would let you move your boats onto BOTH lakes! :lol:

Then you could settle at the other end of those lakes next to the ocean and voila, easy access between north, south and west! Oooooooh.
Well, I don't see much benefit in having access to both lakes... one is enough if you want to create a shortcut through the continent. Of course, you may end up being near the tip of a peninsula anyway, in which case it wouldn't be that great to settle a city so close to your capital.

I would more warior one tile right (uups, east I mean), to see whats there in fog, before decision. anf then do NE and settle anyway..

Well, I don't see much benefit in having access to both lakes... one is enough if you want to create a shortcut through the continent. Of course, you may end up being near the tip of a peninsula anyway, in which case it wouldn't be that great to settle a city so close to your capital.

I wan't being very serious :p.

Oh. Well, it might be a good idea.... if somehow there you are on a really long continent East-West with another continent to the north and another to the south. But that would be a strange configuration indeed.