Warlord to Regent (BC strategy)

Hello,

I am moving up from Warlord to Regent level and I have the feeling that after a number of cities I lose control. I am not sure what to build and what not, and after reading this forum I'm even more unsure about my tactics.
I think my main problems are planning the placement of my cities, chosing what to build while the town is too small to produce settlers and workers and I am not sure if I should build temples when I'm playing as the Persians.
After reading the forum I started a game as the Persians. In the Tech tree I researched up to Republic.
In 1790 BC I still don't have Republic, my treasury contains 23 gold, I have 4 cities (5 thx to a Settler joining my culture from a goody hut)and one settler moving to the next city spot, 3 workers, several warriors, 2 spearman. The reason I am building a temple in Brussopolis is that I want my cultural border to expand to the river (and connect to the city to be built over there).
What does a civ expert think about my city placement and my tactics in general? Advice is welcome!

Anyway, I can't play that game any further because I just installed the 1.22f Patch. But I want to learn from the mistakes that experts can point out in my strategy.

Cities are a little too spread, and not enough workers from what i see.

In the BC area you build settlers, workers, and offensive units.
A few city's should get granaries up and a few city's should get barracks. And one city could try for a wonder in regent, but make it a usefull wonder. Specialise citys for ither expansion or units.

Build warriors during the early part and later on, horseman. Swordsman if you plan to do some early war vs spearman, archers if you don't have access to horses or iron. Spearman, only a few, if you have a special purpose for them.

In your example:
#Eeklopolis, with its beautifull cow, should have build a granary and pump settlers non stop.

#If Calespolis had been build one tile closer to Foundland, then Foundland would have been able to use the wheet without a culture expansion.
Foundland should also be a settler pump.

#in fact, it would be better if you build all your cities with only 3 or 2 tiles inbetween. They can't grow past size 12 untill you have hospitals, and by that time, the game is almost over. So for the first half of the game, 8 of every 20 tiles will not be worked by citizens. So build your city's closer. This way, you also don't need culture to cover all your land.

#Amsterpolis is a great unit pump, it should first build barracks then pump offensive units non stop.

#A vet spear is doing nothing in your capitol, that sits safely in the middle of 6 other city's, but weak reg warriors are defending border city's from the hostile lands that lay beond????! At leats make the spear usefull in barbarian infested lands.
The only reason to have units in your capitol, unless it sits at the border, is for Mil Police contentness. And you should not need that becouse you can use the lux slider on the F1 screen to make people happy.
Also, becouse you build workers and settlers, they should not grow to much, so they will have only a few unhappy people anyway.
A temple for happyness is only needed at a much later stage, when you have big city's, and then only if you are unlucky in finding lux resources.

#The Oracle is great for if you are planning a 20k culture city, but if that is your plan, then its should have been your capitol or 2th city. In your situation the pyramids would be a better choice. Or are you using The Oracle as prebuild? Or is it a failed attempt at pyramids? (it still is a waste of a potential settler pump though, should have selected an other city for wonders)

#And you have been building spears, you could have also build 2 times the amound in warriors, or more workers. If unit support is a problem and you want less but more powerfull units, then build archers instead of spears.

Attack hostile units on your own turn, do not wait untill they atack you on their turn. For this, units with powerfull offensive value are better, becouse a spearman only has 1 offence, so it is more likely to lose when attacking a barbarian unit than an archer. And a warrior will do just as well but is cheaper to build.

The spearman is nice if you have a single city somewhere that is under a massive attack from barbarian, or a hostile civ. For example: a city at the edge of a massive jungle, that will not be settled untill much later, so that barbarians are free to roam and attack the city frequently.

The town in the jungle is one off of the river, so now you will have to build an aqua there to get to city size.

Agree with everything writen. These points are the most important:

-MANY more workers (with 9 cities, you should have at least 12 or so, i personally like 15)
-NO spearmen at all.
-No early wonders.
-No temples (as said, place your cities to close the gaps)
-Tighter city spacing

Republic 1790BC is not your goal. Completing the Republic slingshot around 1500BC is very good. Around 1000BC is not to win the GOTM's, but it is acceptable when trying to beat this level.

You should also have some more towns. Besides workers, also build more settlers. 12 towns at 1000BC is pretty easy to get if you don't have some extremely poor starting position or agressive close neighbours. Early game is all about food, food and more food. Focus on workers and settlers. Granaries are a good tool to enhance your food efficiency. Build them in food rich cities.
Espescially very early, while you have say, less than 6 cities, food, settlers and workers are the ONLY thing that count. Do not think about building spearman during that period. Only build warriors if you do not have the population to produce a settler or worker. If you ever have the choise between having production overflow on a settler and losing shields because the settlers is ready one or 2 turns before you have the needed population, take that loss rather than delaying the settler by 1 or 2 turns by building a warrior first.
A city one turn earlier is (much) more important than a regular warrior* !

*Exception is if you have more barbs than your current warriors can handle, causing that you cannot safely move settlers to their location.

early, I tend to not build temples, but try and fill in culture with a tighter build. I will build a temple if I absolutely need to to get a resource, but usually it's cheaper to just use a colony.


Settle next to a river if at all possible - almost always, you are better off moving the city 1 tile further to get it next to the river, because that's 80 shields for an aqueduct you don't need to spend...

Also, not every town needs to build settlers/workers. Particularly if there are a lot of trees/hills nearby, and no food bonuses, a town can make a good military base - in that case, build a barracks there early.

Thx for the advice everybody
Could I have placed the Jungle town on the Spices? Or would that have erased the Luxury? (and would it have been a better placement?)
I was trying to prebuild the Great Library (and only realised after some turns the city should have been producing settlers instead).
If you produce settlers in the inner cities, do you try to keep their movement to a new site limited? And how many turns do you let them walk on average?
The spearman were built because in the real early stages I tought there were rather a lot of Barbarians surrounding me, and I thought I already had enough exploring warriors and not enough population to build workers/settlers.
I think I'm still a bit conservative on the city defense side (I tend to get the impression that empty cities are easy lunch for barbarians/enemies).

AutomatedTeller said:

Also, not every town needs to build settlers/workers

Click to expand...

Don't know who told you that, but that's wrong. In the very beginning, you really should but nothing but settlers and workers. Start military when your space starts to run out. And then, preferably build millitary in at least half your cities. Early on, do not think about using forests or hills except the last turn of growth when you have food overflow. Don't build cities on sites where they cannot maintain 2 food production per citizen until all other spots in the neighbourhood ran out (meaning it is now no longer that early anyway).

In early game, you must think of only food. Your goal is to build many citizens for later in the game to produce gold and shields. Every citizen costs you 20 food. You need as much of it as possible. You see your first city producing 2fpt, that is not a lot. As soon as you build a second city, you go to at least 4 fpt and thus you grow twice as fast. TWICE AS FAST, that is why it is so insanely important to build that second city ASAP. Maybe you now found a city spot that can bring a city to 5fpt, build it ASAP, it will double your growth rate once again to a total of 11 fpt. Building a granary will effectively double the food production of a city, build a granary in that 5fpt city and your empire goes to 16fpt effectively. That is how you should think in early game, only increase your total fpt and always do whatever inceases your fpt most efficiently. (when choosing between granaries and settlers or city spots)
Never use a tile producing less than 2 food, never use a specialists, Maximise your FPT. Your fpt grows exponentially, and your population is an integration of that. Delay in this fpt growth is very, very costly.

Griffintje said:

Could I have placed the Jungle town on the Spices? Or would that have erased the Luxury? (and would it have been a better placement?)

Click to expand...

Building on bonusses does not erase the bonus. It even provides the advantage of imeadiately connecting them. The disadvantage is that you do not get the full bonus benefits. (gold, shield or food, whatever the bonus provides) In low corrupt cities i try never to build on top of a bonus. That includes bonus shield grasslands. In very remote cities that are completely corrupt, only food bonusses must be spared. Remote cities i will often place on top of the luxuries.

Griffintje said:

I was trying to prebuild the Great Library (and only realised after some turns the city should have been producing settlers instead).
If you produce settlers in the inner cities, do you try to keep their movement to a new site limited? And how many turns do you let them walk on average?

Click to expand...

I never have a maximum on their movement. In late game, when i am building ICS cities, they sometimes have to cross whole continents. In this part of the game where you are now, i first make a planning on what spots i want to make cities and then decide what settlers go where so that i don't send a settler build in the south to settle north and vice versa.
In order to reduce the settlers walking time, try to build roads towards the settling spot before the settler is ready. This is a very important time winner. Time is everything. Try hard to get those cities a few turns faster whenever possible.

Griffintje said:

The spearman were built because in the real early stages I tought there were rather a lot of Barbarians surrounding me, and I thought I already had enough exploring warriors and not enough population to build workers/settlers.
I think I'm still a bit conservative on the city defense side (I tend to get the impression that empty cities are easy lunch for barbarians/enemies).

Click to expand...

Barbarians don't do an incredible lot of damage to your cities. They are painfull when they take a settler or worker, but when they attack cities, most of the time they just take some gold. Only with bad luck, they destroy your build or 1 population point.
Barbarians do not appear within the line of sight from a warrior. You don't need many warriors, if you have a first few warriors, place them on hills and mountains surrounding your empire to prevent barbarians from appearing all together. When there are barbarians, attack and kill them with your warriors so that you can move your settlers to their spots. If there are no warriors to attack them, make sure they cant take your settlers or workers and let them attack one of your cities. Newly settled cities are actually prefered because those don't have a build or population to lose. If a new city gets attacked in the first turns after settling, that is a good way to lose barbarians.


AI enemies are normally not dangerous early on. On normal agression standards, they will not attack you before space is running out if you don't provoke them. They will however make some demands for gold or technology. Just pay them what they want. By the time space for settling is running out, you need to be prepared, this is when they can start to get agressive. Being prepared does not mean having spearmen everywhere, it means either having build a dozen of veteran warriors and upgrading them to swordsmen or having build 10 horses or so. Those are numbers i feel comfortable with on Deity, should certainly be comfortable on low levels. In practice, this is often around 1000BC (turn80) and i start preparing my military by starting my first barrack around 25 turns before that.

I started a new game as the Persians on Regent, I tried to keep in mind all the advice I've read. I am on a continent shared with Incas, Mayas and Aztecs. Around 500 BC the Inca's declared war on me because I refused to give them some technology. Also, I had no culture whatsoever and I noticed in the diplomatics screen that everybody was disdainful of my culture. The Inca's had in no time an aliance with the other two against me. (Has it something to do with me being Republic?) Anyway my army build up forced them to back off and I extorted the most out of them at the peace table. Their attitude towards me remains furious (the Incas) and cautious (the others). At this time I am building in almost all my cities a library (since Literature was discovered) to give me a culture boost. Would that be helpfull?
It is around 110 BC now. Same question as before: how about my city placement, and is it right to build Spearman at this time, or is it just stopping my expansion which is necessary before the others take all the land?

Your city placement is still too wide. Build them closer to eachother.
Can't tell if you have grown properly because it is almost AD already (a time where you could have conquered and filled with cities half your continent) Judging their size, it seems like you expended properly before 1000BC, but slacked down after that. Don't stop expanding after you have some terrain. If there is more land to take, keep expanding, if there is land to conquer, conquer it and expend into the conquered lands. Your continuous goal in civ is to make your empire larger, until it is 67% of the map* (for domination victory, for filling with scientists if you want a science victory or for filling with culture if you want 100K victory) Just make sure to build your settlers mostly from corrupt cities instead of your strongest cities. The cost of losing 2 population in a corrupt city is far lower than losing 2 population in a strong core city.

Use your rivers as well as you can. Try to build as many cities on rivers as possible. This includes building cities like this (the line is the river):
CxxxC
xxCxx

Make up for the extreme tight placement by having somewhat larger distances between these cities and your other cities (CxxxC like you now do a lot)

You need not to worry about culture. Culture is not the reason they hate you. Build libraries if you need the research, don't build them for culture. Be carefull not to overestimate their research value, a nice army is often much more valuable.

Except for some very specific situations, do not build a single defensive unit in your games. Only fast moving attackers. You want the flexibility provided by those.

Stay away from those wonders, also later in the game. Conquer them rather than build them yourself.

You still have 1/3 the workers you need. For a start, you could make it a habbit of making a worker your very first build in every city you found beyond the second.

*Although, on these low difficulties, it can be faster to just focus 100% on military and simply trample over your opponents for even a BC victory if you are good, but you are not that good yet.

I'm getting over the "feeling cramped" emotion and I started a game with the Americans (had some problems when I tried to use the Persians World Seed, Game kept on crashing whenever I built the first city (instead of popping up the city window), so I started in a different world too. I'm planning another city above the Wheat north of Buffalo, one next to that along the coast and one on the forests and fish next to Seattle. I am already four turns further in the game (don't mind the Temple building, I actually changed that to a Worker). I am researching the Republic now and after that I want to go for Literature but I am in doubt because it would be nice to be able to build Sails to conquer the other half of my continent faster. I can see some nice Settler factory spots there.

The great wall? all those shields could be many offensive units... but I also see 2 or 3 settlers worth of pop there. At least try a usefull wonder, *cugh* pyramids *cugh*

Even if you don't like to war, the least you could do is expand untill there is no more free land. Your first library/marketplace/acuaduc/ or any other building other than a granary or barracks should be started AFTER all free land is claimed by someone.

And I disagree a little bit with Wacken. The focus should be growth yes, but that does not mean neglegting mil. units. At least you can often make warriors in 5 turns and a worker in the other 5 turns while the city grows in 10 turns.
And you will eventually end up with cities near forrest that can't grow fast without some serious terrain improvements, that are not worth doing untill after the free expansion face. These should be set to early mil production.

But yes, if all other things are equal, settle the green grass first.

PS:Still building spears? Most will do nothing but sit in town and costing gold per turn. An archer will scare the AI into not attacking you 2 times as much as a spearman. so they do more than spearman even if they sit in town and not attack, meaning you need less of them to keep the peace.

I don't like to build settlers and workers in ALL cities. At first I would usually build settlers and workers in several core towns that are most suitable for this and let others grow while building barracks and units and sometimes libraries. And later switch to building settlers in corrupt or semi-corrupt cities. This way i'll have less cities, but i would be able to attack earlier. But it depends on the settings of course.

Obormot said:

I don't like to build settlers and workers in ALL cities. At first I would usually build settlers and workers in several core towns that are most suitable for this and let others grow while building barracks and units and sometimes libraries. And later switch to building settlers in corrupt or semi-corrupt cities. This way i'll have less cities, but i would be able to attack earlier. But it depends on the settings of course.

Click to expand...

And what good will this do? (the bold text) If the city produces enough base gold to make the library worth the investment, then it must be a pretty big city, meaning lots of unhappyness. And it also means it is suiteble for settler production.

The early mil city's should be the ones near your core that can't grow past size 3 or 2. And such small city's don't have enough base gold to make the lib worth it.

Yes, you make warriors in those first 50 turns. Indeed 5 turns for a warrior and 5 for a worker as said. But those are the warriors you have to build because you won't have the food to start with a worker anyway.
Those warriors that you HAVE TO build are all that you need really.

And yes, i also start with barracks before i have all cities i want, but if there is no AI in my way, it won't be before turn 50.

Either this means i have a settler factory that builds most of my settlers and i just build 1 - 2 extra settlers in the first towns i make, followed by workers in every town and then barracks in those first towns and more workers in the border towns. It gets to turn 50 then before i'm building those barracks.

Without settler factory, i simply build settlers wherever possible and around turn 50-60 would be a normal time to reserve the first cities for barracks.

Doing so any earlier while it is not needed just hurts your growth rate too much. I know how i learned to do it this way. When i started playing civ, i didn't feel safe without an army, I dreamed about pretty pyramids and I figured I should get libraries fast. That was all wrong, but i remember how you feel
I'm sorry obormot, i know you're a decent player and poster, but really, i feel 100% sure about what i say about early growth. Anything one sais about the importance of early growth in civ3 can only be an understatement. And early libraries is an awefull choise.

Your new city placement looks better, although i would have certainly placed 3 cities on that river at your capital.

You still need more workers, but you're getting in the right direction. It's just that i see Atlanta without improved tiles.
I also don't know what you are doing wrong exactly on growth, but it can be quite a bit better. you have 21 citizens now at 1000BC, no problems with Jungles and even a food bonus. I Think around 1000BC it is normal to have citizen counts around 30 in a starting area like this. (around 50 for the optimal situation of an agricultural civ with food bonus at capital).
I now count 7 workers, and they are almost enough to keep all your used tiles worked. Note, if you manage to improve your growth rate, you will have more citizens and need still more workers. If you had those 30 citizens, you would need 12 or so workers. And yes, that is possible.

Now about technollogy:
There are some technologies the AI very much likes to research, these are the following:
-Map Making
-Feudalism
-Invention
-Gunpowder
-Nationalism
-Replacable parts
-Flight
Map making is about 4 or 5 times as likely to be researched as the other techs after writing, Feudalism is an ever stronger favorite, 6-7 times as favorite as the other 2 MA starting techs. Invention and Gunpowder are strong enough favorites to be sure that at least some of the AI will research them imeadiately, so you never have to research these yourself. The last 3 are a virtually sure choise for the AI.

Those they do NOT like:
-Literature
-Currency
Literature is really low priority for them, Certainly at higher difficulties. On Sid, it is not strange to have all 7 AI's enter Industrial age while still not having Literature. This is the best research if you want a monopoly on one. Philosophy isn't high priority either, so your chances for a free tech there are also pretty decent.
Currency is not a huge underdog in the AI's choises, but i simply mention it because it is usually the best choise of research in AA and is significantly less chosen by the AI than construction.

So i would suggest to research Literature and trade for Map Making. Map Making is a more expensive tech and you can't trade them 1 on 1, but if you wait until they spread it amongst eachother while you are still the only one with Literature, they will give it for Lit.

Now a few small notes:
-Why not place SF one tile South-East? It is still on river and coast, it takes more water there, and you will still have acces to all the same land tiles you have now.(Don't look at how many land tiles are in the cities own radius, if that is 6 or more, it is ok. Rather look at your empire wide tiles available. You can shift tiles between cities anyway)
-Same for NY, 1 SW.
-Chicago is building a granary, but it has barely any food. A granary is not a solution for a food poor city. It sucks at that. Instead, build granaries in your rich cities.
-You seem to be building granaries everywhere now. I am usually much more selective about those. Build them in cities with food bonus or cities that have a huge production and simply make many more shields than 30 in the time needed to grow 2 citizens. This usually makes me build 3 granaries during my expansion phase. This is the easiest way to translate the "whatever makes most FPT" principle into simple actions: Build granaries in cities with food bonus and build granaries in cities with production that significantly exceeds their growth rate (if just 10 shields too much, you could build a warrior between settlers)
For more granaries, i prefer to conquer the pyramids if they are on my continent, else i build them usually after my warmachine is running or not at all (if i plan to win early).
In my games, i would now usually be building barracks in all my cities, (while having 2 or 3 completed earlier, those, as i said i start building around turn 50-60) However, in my games, i have neighbours to fight


I see no AI's in your games or they are very remote. First of all, that strenghens my statements about growth early on. If noone bothers you, more reason to keep building those settlers. Normally i can't state turn numbers for when to start building millitaire so easilly because one might be faced with an agressive neighbour very closeby, but your games all have plenty of space, therefore, i now do state those numbers. If you run into a game with a closeby AI, you might need to start your first barracks earlier than turn 50-60. It will take a little practice to estimate how late you can build them without getting yourself in danger, but you should realise that your goal is to start them as late as possible and keep growing as long as possible without endangering yourself too much.
I guess you make games with fewer than the default number of AI's. While this gives you plenty of space, it also provides a kind of vacuum in your games, wich is right now. You have plenty of space to continue growing, but your cities will all be corrupt so it will have to become ICS area. You could now be ready to go for war, but there is noone in the neighbourhood to fight with. It is nicer if your opponents are just 2 steps away and have roads trough their empire that you can use.

I am currently playing a PBEM game where i have the save files of every single turn from the early game. Those could be good an example for you. About city placement, about what to build in those cities, and when you have to start building military against deity closeby neighbours. (Meaning it will be less urgent in your games). While in a PBEM game there are of course other influences (a human opponent) that are missing in the single player games, this particular game started out very similar to single player games because of the large distance between us and the presence of 6 unusualy strong Deity AI's.
If you send me an email or PM with your email adress, i will put them in a zip file and send them to you. I only ask you not to say 1 word about the actual game in the forums because it is a game still in progress and my opponent reads these boards You can email or PM specific questions instead.

And lastly, i see you added a picture of your demographics. I figure i'll give you the link to an explanation about them. So you know what they actually mean.
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/demographics.php
Family size is the one you should be #1 on

Griffintje said:

I'm getting over the "feeling cramped" emotion and I started a game with the Americans (had some problems when I tried to use the Persians World Seed, Game kept on crashing whenever I built the first city (instead of popping up the city window), so I started in a different world too. I'm planning another city above the Wheat north of Buffalo, one next to that along the coast and one on the forests and fish next to Seattle. I am already four turns further in the game (don't mind the Temple building, I actually changed that to a Worker). I am researching the Republic now and after that I want to go for Literature but I am in doubt because it would be nice to be able to build Sails to conquer the other half of my continent faster. I can see some nice Settler factory spots there.

Click to expand...

Not every city should get a granary, build 5 or so and only around your capitol. A granary will cut the cost of growth in half, but if they have only 1 surplus food anyway, then they won't be able to make settlers, and workers will come in only 10 turns anyway, not worth the shields or GPT, better build units here, or build unit unit worker unit unit worker...

Avoid building one tile away from the sea, it would have been justifyed, in this case, to move your first settler one tile so that it will be on the coast.

The only "settler factory" I can see on your map is washington, the other ones would be too corrupt, and would come too late. Washington should be building settlers, not workers.

Also, I'd advice you first learn how to play on standard size maps with all 8 civs present.

WackenOpenAir said:

...

Your new city placement looks better, although i would have certainly placed 3 cities on that river at your capital.

Click to expand...

It really looked cramped And it took me a while to see how close that placement really is, but I got the idea now (working on it in the north of the map).

You still need more workers, but you're getting in the right direction. It's just that i see Atlanta without improved tiles.

Click to expand...

Atlanta finished the Granary and built a Worker around 800 BC, I have around 8 - 9 Workers (10 at 730 BC), around Atlanta I first only had forests so I didn't start any improvements there.

Now a few small notes:
-Why not place SF one tile South-East? It is still on river and coast, it takes more water there, and you will still have acces to all the same land tiles you have now.(Don't look at how many land tiles are in the cities own radius, if that is 6 or more, it is ok. Rather look at your empire wide tiles available. You can shift tiles between cities anyway)

Click to expand...

Maybe hard to see, but SF is on a river (starts near Seattle an runs to the sea just below SF) (or is that tile not considered to be bordering the river?).

-Same for NY, 1 SW.
-Chicago is building a granary, but it has barely any food. A granary is not a solution for a food poor city. It sucks at that. Instead, build granaries in your rich cities.

Click to expand...

Meaning Chicago should build... Workers? Military? (It's a bit poor on all resources...)

-You seem to be building granaries everywhere now. I am usually much more selective about those. Build them in cities with food bonus or cities that have a huge production and simply make many more shields than 30 in the time needed to grow 2 citizens. This usually makes me build 3 granaries during my expansion phase. This is the easiest way to translate the "whatever makes most FPT" principle into simple actions: Build granaries in cities with food bonus and build granaries in cities with production that significantly exceeds their growth rate (if just 10 shields too much, you could build a warrior between settlers)
For more granaries, i prefer to conquer the pyramids if they are on my continent, else i build them usually after my warmachine is running or not at all (if i plan to win early).
In my games, i would now usually be building barracks in all my cities, (while having 2 or 3 completed earlier, those, as i said i start building around turn 50-60) However, in my games, i have neighbours to fight

Click to expand...

I like the "Huge" world settings (hence the cramped feeling ).

Finally, i see no AI's in your games or they are very remote. First of all, that strenghens my statements about growth early on. If noone bothers you, more reason to keep building those settlers. Normally i can't state turn numbers for when to start building millitaire so easilly because one might be faced with an agressive neighbour very closeby, but your games all have plenty of space, therefore, i now do state those numbers. If you run into a game with a closeby AI, you might need to start your first barracks earlier than turn 50-60. It will take a little practice to estimate how late you can build them without getting yourself in danger, but you should realise that your goal is to start them as late as possible and keep growing as long as possible without endangering yourself too much.
I guess you make games with fewer than the default number of AI's. While this gives you plenty of space, it also provides a kind of vacuum in your games, wich is right now. You have plenty of space to continue growing, but your cities will all be corrupt so it will have to become ICS area. You could now be ready to go for war, but there is noone in the neighbourhood to fight with. It is nicer if your opponents are just 2 steps away and have roads trough their empire that you can use.

Click to expand...

I chose a Huge map with 7 opponents, to be able to expand decently The Aztecs are north of me, I have met them and traded for Iron Working and The Wheel (from them) against Philosophy and Code of Laws. So now I found some horses in my neighbourhood. And Iron on the opposite shore of the inner sea. Is the standard setting all the opponents on for a Huge map?

Standard setting on huge map ?
dunno, not many people play huge maps because they are a bore to finish
Most players play standard sized maps with 7 opponents. The good thing is that you then normally have just enough space to expand up to the point where you are now, and then you can seemlesly convert to conquering the rest. I know you probably still fear the AI, but you dont need to

Forests are reason for extra worker force actually. Cut those forests and be sure to use their 10 shields wisely. Never put a laborer on a forest as it produces only 1 food. And when you cut them, you may just find a BonusGrassland underneath it.

In your situation i would not have build a city on that Ice at all. It hurts the corruption in your other cities and doesn't do much good. I'd only build there if AI's are surrounding you and you really don't want them to get in between your cities.

MAS said:

...

Avoid building one tile away from the sea, it would have been justifyed, in this case, to move your first settler one tile so that it will be on the coast.

Click to expand...

so I realized after building the capital, but before I could not make out the coast clearly (yes, I went to fast ).

The only "settler factory" I can see on your map is washington, the other ones would be too corrupt, and would come too late. Washington should be building settlers, not workers.

Also, I'd advice you first learn how to play on standard size maps with all 8 civs present.

Click to expand...

WackenOpenAir said:

Standard setting on huge map ?
dunno, not many people play huge maps because they are a bore to finish

Click to expand...

I get the point My World settings have always been Huge up to now, and I admit that in the end I get pretty bored and confused and usually abandon the game.

Btw, note that I have included the save games for those who have too much time or like to point out their arguments

Oh yeah, i eddited my long post you replied to a bit longer while you were making a reply, so read the rest as well