Still settle on luxes?

the_jeff

the_jeff

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
52
Location
Saint Paul, MN
In the new environment, since you can't trade them for lump sum cash right away and there's a lot less gold on the map, do you all still settle directly on a lux with your 2nd-3rd or 4th cities, or do you recommend settling nearby to get the benefit from the tile improvement?
 
You'll still need them later on to trade for other luxury resources. Plains/forests/jungles are bound to be there and are much better to settle on.
 
When u settle city usually u want it to be 3+ citizens, so usually u put citizens on tiles with 2+ food. Thats why u can not put them on gold, silver etc. So I think cities on 'mining' luxes on hills (1 shield) are perfect.
 
It all depends. If you are strapped for happiness, settle on the lux, but if you are strapped for cash, settle next to it and improve it.

I would say if you have the time and happiness, don't settle on it. That's a last resort for a rush settling strategy in my book. But that's just me :goodjob:
 
I sell them for cash all the time. If you don't go bat guano all over trying to top every AI in claimed land space, often they're very eager to make friends.
 
I'd rather get the tile improvement. More gold that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KayAU
Which are your favourite civs (in Vox Populi or vanilla)?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Darth Tribble
Darth Tribble
M
Settling 2nd/3rd City; how to prioritize monopoly v grabbing best spots that other Civs will also aim for, on tradition opening.
Replies
4
Views
807
Stalker0
S
almughavar
Settling directly on a resource or a tile with base good yield vs working that tile itself
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tobizi
T
pineappledan
  • Locked
(7-09a) Shoshone and Huns Change
2
Replies
28
Views
700
azum4roll
A
Rekk
  • Poll
[Vote] (7-78) Standardize City Tile Yields
Replies
8
Views
307
Recursive
Recursive
Top Bottom