This makes me sad

Venice, I am so, so, sorry.

http://i.imgur.com/4Jc8kMX.jpg

I've had that happen before to an AI Venice before.

and for those who don't want to bother opening another tab:

At least they can trade with you..

I hate those bodies of water that are stuck in the middle of the continent. Sometimes I settle thinking it's a great coast location. Then suddenly, I see it's a circle and have to reload an earlier save or restart.

I am halfway through a game as Spain on a stupid Pangaea with me spawning exactly like that, but with only one CS to trade with. Still managing but definitely hurt my game

No visible fish or coast luxuries, don't think he'll be much of a problem that game.

Also a perfect example where a canal would be a nice tile improvement for them to have access to trading with Ramesses with ships.

I've had several games that started this way playing as Venice and other civs. It sucks.

I don't get it. What am I not seeing?

Had a situation like that as the Dutch. AND I was neighbors with Denmark. Just my luck.

Davor said:

I don't get it. What am I not seeing?

Click to expand...

This is a continents game. If venice spawned their capital one hex to the right, they would have the whole wide ocean to trade with. Now they can only trade with people through that lake through Venice. With the Venice UA, that placement will undoubtedly hurt them quite a bit throughout the game.

I met an AI England that had London on northern ocean, with about five ocean tiles locked in by ice. Full of ship of the line going nowhere.

On another map I found England again, this time with one single solitary desert tile. So she had built petra.

I've been seeing those landlocked seas quite a lot in my games also (Continents Plus maps).

The starting location can affect the outcome of the entire game. I have restarted many games because the starting location was unfavorable. If you wait too many turns before building your capitol city, you can fall behind early, and have a harder time catching up with the AI.

redwings1340 said:

This is a continents game. If venice spawned their capital one hex to the right, they would have the whole wide ocean to trade with. Now they can only trade with people through that lake through Venice. With the Venice UA, that placement will undoubtedly hurt them quite a bit throughout the game.

Click to expand...

Why not just build another city so he can start trading? There is room enough for another city to be built.

Davor said:

Why not just build another city so he can start trading? There is room enough for another city to be built.

Click to expand...

It's Venice, they can't build settlers

Venice cannot build settlers. The only way to acquire new cities is to buy city-states with a Merchant of Venice or conquering existing cities. They cannot found a new city.

quantum42 said:

The starting location can affect the outcome of the entire game. I have restarted many games because the starting location was unfavorable. If you wait too many turns before building your capitol city, you can fall behind early, and have a harder time catching up with the AI.

Click to expand...

One of the early Civilopedias stated up front, choosing the location of your starting city probably is the most important decision you'll make in the game. In regard to BNW I saw another argument (a complaint) that the game had become overly dependent on starting location. I find most of my starting locations are unfavorable so it's clear from the opening I'm going to be running like mad to catch the AI. (I have gotten bored with the endless repetition of endless deserts, jungles and tundra that reveal themselves to be practically hopeless within a dozen moves). I thought I had found a good map at last, lots of potential for movement, plenty of resources, and a river mouth where I could later build the Brandenburg gate for a strong naval force. The river proved to be on one of those nearly worthless inland seas. When I do come to a river mouth that would be ideal for a port city, there's a CS already there.

On a rainy Sunday, yesterday, I tried to get a favorable start for Persia - would get frustrated, bored, give up, come back later and try again. I suspect all this may be a part of the overall "slow start" strategy introduced into BNW that I think has harmed the game. It is my fervent hope the fall patch will fix this or I expect, I will be drifting away to await Civ 6.

I commented in a post the other day that I was at turn 907 and my income was stuck in the "teens." Some commented that with my small army I must be "doing something wrong." I even adapted some of their advice, micromanaging with particular care to gp income - only to find myself at turn 1,000 with two trade routes, a market in every city, a trading post on any hex not on a river and having no "bonus" resource, an income of +2, with four knights, three swordsmen, and composite bows garrisoned in each of four cities. These smaller armies when applied to other civs also lead to battles that are more like slicing through cheese, in terms of the "intensity of competition."

Second cities equally have become a drag. Previously, I liked to use my second city as my arsenal, where I would try to build Alhambra for the rough terrain bonus. Not so in BNW. A couple of days ago, limited to building my empire on desert and a combination of jungle and forest, as I selected Alhambra, I noted that it was going to require 108 turns, although my second city had been built on the best of only four mediocre locations available for satellite cities. By the time, I had built Alhambra and an armory, (huge map, marathon length) two hours had passed.

Despite this even in G&K when I checked the diplomatic screen, I'd regularly find one or two other civs way ahead of me on points. In BNW, other civs fall quickly behind, and soon enough are too far behind even to "eat my dust.

I thought those insane rushes by Oda, Bismark and Attila, at the beginnings of Civ 5 and G&K were a bit excessive but I miss the fact that they have completely gone in BNW. And yes, I have been double DoW early in BNW.

I have always played huge map and marathon so, it's obvious that I enjoy the more immersive long game. But instead of being immersive BNW feels dragged out. I have stated in previous posts that I find the elongated tech tree, that does not match the historical time line another unnecessary impediment to flow that exacerbates the sense of, "nothing happening, nothing happening, nothing happening."

I see there are some who have invested what could be called real scholarship into the game, and surely I can learn from them and I come here to do so. Though I play incessantly, I play casually, since my every day work demands intensive research. While I applaud all the advancements of BNW as real breakthroughs for the franchise, this gives rise to an oxymoron: despite the breakthroughs, I find BNW the least addictive in the series and more often than not, when I do stop playing it's because of the sheer boredom of waiting and waiting for the next significant advance.

I've started looking for the Civ alternative to keep me occupied while I await, in hope, the fall patch for BNW.

Funababbitt - your income sounds weird. Where are your expenses going? Care to break it down for us? If you have so many markets and trading posts you should be raking it in, not making +2 income.

As for unfavorable start - yeah, my game as Spain I think is coming to an end. I'm not losing, but I don't really see myself winning either. Landlocked in the middle of the continent is no fun.

Xiao Xiong said:

I met an AI England that had London on northern ocean, with about five ocean tiles locked in by ice. Full of ship of the line going nowhere.

On another map I found England again, this time with one single solitary desert tile. So she had built petra.

Click to expand...

Yeah that's the worst. Being beaten to petra by a couple of turns, and when you go find who built it, you see an AI city with 2 desert tiles, at best.

dashwinner said:

Yeah that's the worst. Being beaten to petra by a couple of turns, and when you go find who built it, you see an AI city with 2 desert tiles, at best.

Click to expand...

Actually a good strategy for the AI, 1. It gives a useful desert tile, even if it is only one, and 2. It prevents another civ with lots of desert tiles from taking in the benefits.