Is there anything you can do to help get that 2nd settler at the beginning?

I was wondering. Is it completely random? Or does it have to do with your choice of map size or climate or difficulty of play?

I am always so surprised and happy when I get the 2nd settler. But does this somehow relate to how hard the enemies or game will be - so that Sid is having mercy on us?

Would it help get the second settler if I chose a civ or terrain or difficulty?

stwils

I think the Russians always seem more likely to get one. In fact, some FAQs on the net say that only the Russians get it but really all civs have a chance. There's nothing recorded about difficulty or climate, map size. Though they may be a factor it is safe to say it is random with the Russians having a bigger chance then anybody.

I usually play Russians because I thought they always got 2. In fact I thought it was based on which Civ you were. Some got some good techs to start with, others got 2 settlers. I disproved that yesterday when I started a new game and the Russians only got 1 settler.

I started a new game this morning as the Russians. And guess what? I got two settlers!

I wonder what other advantages playing as the Russians has.

stwils

I wrote a little program to give two settlers at the start of a game.

Click here to download EXTRASET.zip

1) Download the ZIP file.
2) Put the executable in the folder/directory that contains CIV DOS.
3) Run CIV and start a new game.
4) Save the game in save file 0 (zero) after the first move the year must be 3980BC
5) run EXTRASET

The output should look like the following if run from the Command Prompt

C:\mps\civ>extraset

Year > 3980 BCE
People > English
Leader > 61

C:\mps\civ>

7) run CIV you should have two settlers.


Note: The program does only minimal error checking. It only looks at the first save file CIVIL0.SVE . It checks that the year is 3980BC and that the first unit is a settler. It clones the settler.

Absolute legend. Dack, how did you learn how to do all this stuff? And how far can you meddle with the code?

I you want to cheat to get two settlers just start about 10 new games with whatever civ and you will surely get two settlers. If you get tech or 50 gold at the start it makes it less likely. The best start I ever had was as the Greeks - two settlers within a few squares of two huts that both turned into advanced tribes!!!

I think it has something to do with how good the computer thinks your starting location is. If you have little space to settle on, you get compensation by getting techs or even another settler. I guess the Russians always are placed last, so if you have many civs in your game, Russia can get two settlers because it has little room for expansion.

Just try putting three civs on a normal map and choose Russia; you will surely not get an extra settler or even extra techs since all three civs have plenty of room for expansion.

The same issue is present in Civ2 and there the general understanding is exactly what ozo said above. Extra techs and the second settler are compensation for what the computer thinks is relatively poor starting location.

In Civ2, the placement starts with Russians/Romans and thus you have a higher chance of getting the 2nd settler with Civs at the other end of the spectrum (Mongols/Indians).

I seem to get it most often with the Russians and Chinese, especially when I get dropped into an area with lots of forest and not much grassland. It could be a self-fulfilling prophecy, though. It seems to happen most with the Russians and Chinese, so naturally I play the Russians and Chinese most.

Dack said:

I wrote a little program to give two settlers at the start of a game.

Click here to download EXTRASET.zip

1) Download the ZIP file.
2) Put the executable in the folder/directory that contains CIV DOS.
3) Run CIV and start a new game.
4) Save the game in save file 0 (zero) after the first move the year must be 3980BC
5) run EXTRASET

The output should look like the following if run from the Command Prompt

C:\mps\civ>extraset

Year > 3980 BCE
People > English
Leader > 61

C:\mps\civ>

7) run CIV you should have two settlers.


Note: The program does only minimal error checking. It only looks at the first save file CIVIL0.SVE . It checks that the year is 3980BC and that the first unit is a settler. It clones the settler.

Click to expand...

Haha nice, I should try that

ozo said:

I think it has something to do with how good the computer thinks your starting location is. If you have little space to settle on, you get compensation by getting techs or even another settler. I guess the Russians always are placed last, so if you have many civs in your game, Russia can get two settlers because it has little room for expansion.

Click to expand...

There might be truth in this... My experience is that when you play Earth on Warlord with 4 civs, and you play with the Germans you almost always get the second settler. This could be because the Romans are spawning nearby.

(I always found Berlin in the first turn, then took Rome with my second settler and found Leipzig in 'France': three cities in ten turns)

Ali Ardavan said:

The same issue is present in Civ2 and there the general understanding is exactly what ozo said above. Extra techs and the second settler are compensation for what the computer thinks is relatively poor starting location.

In Civ2, the placement starts with Russians/Romans and thus you have a higher chance of getting the 2nd settler with Civs at the other end of the spectrum (Mongols/Indians).

Click to expand...

This is very true. Back in the day I was part of a group at Apolyton that did a ton of research on this type of thing. We did most of it on civ 2 but a lot translated back to civ 1 as well. The worse the game thinks your starting location is the more compensation you will receive in settler, techs, etc. The colors that are placed last have a better chance of being seen as having a bad start and thus will get more techs or an extra settler. Also, the techs you get are dependent upon the traits of the civ you select (for example, militaristic civs are more likely to get bronze working, civilized civs likely are more likely to get alphabet, etc).

I used to have a bunch of stats from doing a ton of game starts with different civs but don't know if I can find them anymore.

iguana1 said:

The colors that are placed last have a better chance of being seen as having a bad start and thus will get more techs or an extra settler. Also, the techs you get are dependent upon the traits of the civ you select (for example, militaristic civs are more likely to get bronze working, civilized civs likely are more likely to get alphabet, etc).

Click to expand...

What do you mean by the colors placed last?

Also what you are saying is that the traits of the civ you choose influences the techs you get at the beginning.

Please say more about these two thoughts.

stwils

stwils said:

What do you mean by the colors placed last?

Also what you are saying is that the traits of the civ you choose influences the techs you get at the beginning.

Please say more about these two thoughts.

stwils

Click to expand...

I do not recall the details of the full order that starting locations are chosen but I do know that the game places each country 1 at a time when the world is being built. In Civ 1, white is the last country to be placed. The game calculates how good a starting location you have based on things like number of neighbors, distance to neighbors, make up of the land near the starting location (forest, tundra, grasslands, etc) and such. The worse it thinks your starting location is, the more help it gives you at the start.

The game sees having a lot of neighbors as a bad thing (early attack, etc) and it evaluates the starting spot of each nation at the time it is placed. Therefore, the first country placed will never have neighbors and thus will only get bonus techs, settler, etc if it is starting in a "bad location" (few grasslands, etc). The later in the order of 7 that a nation is placed, the more likely it is to have several neighbors and the more likely it is to get bonuses.

As for the traits info, see the thread on "In Civ1 (windows & Dos) are there any differences in the civs' characteristics?" I will try to explain briefly here but there is more info in that thread as well.

Each civ has 3 traits that help it make decisions in the game:
1 - an agressive rating (friendly, normal, aggressive) - The more aggressive a civ is, the more likely they are to declare war, etc.
2 - A development rating (perfectionist, normal, expansionist) - Perfectionist nations are more into building a few large cities with lots of infrastructure, expansionist are more likely to have lots of small cities with fewer improvements.
3 - A militaristic rating (civilized, normal, militaristic) - Militaristic civs will build more units/larger armies. Civilized civs will concentrate more on libraries, etc.

So, based on what traits you have, you have a greater percentage of getting certain techs as gifts if the game assumes you have a bad starting position. Again, I don't have the stats in front of me or the tech chart but civilized civs are more likely to get things like alphabet or pottery while militaristic civs are more likely to get things like the wheel or bronze working, etc.

Learned something right there. I never thought about trait-specific starting techs. But it makes sense.. Thanks for the infomation This is the kinda stuff that needs to go on the wiki

I guess that iguana1 said almost everything that is to say about this topic.
I remember reading in the bible called "Rome Or 640k a Day" that the computer compensates poorer locations with technologies and sometimes an extra settler unit. So, every time I start with two settlers and/or lots of technologies I know that I'm in trouble because there will be neighbours very close.

I like to start with just one settler and no technologies, except for irrigation, mining and roads, of course.

Taken from "Sid Meier's Civilization, or Rome on 640K a Day" (a great book by Johnny L. Wilson and Alan Emrich), page 9:

«On some occasions you will be given one or more advances, like Pottery, The Wheel, or The Alphabet. You might even begin with two Settler units, instead of only one. When this happens, it is merely the computer handicapping every civilization based on its starting location. While Grassland would be a neutral starting square, a River starting square gives you a small advantage at the start. A Plains starting square would be disadvantageous. Table 2-2 lists the starting location handicaps, both good and bad.

Table 2-2. Starting Location Handicaps
GOOD=River;BAD=Grasslands or Plains
GOOD=Big continent; BAD=Small island
GOOD=No civilizations close; BAD=Other civilizations close»

Hope this will be useful to some of you.

Alright, I've always been wondering whether this is just a bug, or whether it was implemented on purpose. It's pretty handy, either way.

Also, are there any civilizations that cannot get two settlers at the start or civilizations that more frequently have this happen?

Moderator Action: Merged with existing thread for added clarity and information newer members may have missed on a similar topic.

EDIT: Thank you, Dack.

You can get a second settler with any civ if you are in a relatively weak position. It's quite an advantage in the early game, especially if you're into fast settlers, but it kind of loses it's impact later on... Which is a whole new conversation: do you found a second city right away with your extra settler, or do you use it only for improvements because it doesn't require support? I expect some hard-ass mathematics.