Cottages on grassland or floodplains....?.....or both?

[Znabel15]

I have recently been trying too specialize my cities, but the thing is that I cant\wont understand why people are putting cottages on floodplains in a commerce city. Example: If I have a commerce city with: 4 plains, 2 hills, 4 floodplains and 10 grassland. I my head it would be best to cottage everything exept the hills and 2 floodplains, wich I would mine and farm.
The reason I would like to farm floodplains instead of the grassland is that I would still have the +1 commerce from being adjacent to a river with the floodplains, but not on the grasslands. (Or am I completely wrong ?)

Perhaps a bad example but my point is that most people seem to cottage every floodplain tile?

 

[Oho]

Perhaps a bad example but my point is that most people seem to cottage every floodplain tile?

Well at least if you play financial, the cottage on flood plain immediately give you three golds and a a one food surplus for growth.

 

[Morred]

The thing in most peoples mind, would you rather +4 Food or +3 Food and a ton more Commerce and a hammer. Especially as a Financial Civ, with Printing Press, you can 7 Commerce on those Tiles with the loss of only 1 Food and the gain of a hammer (with certain civics). Most people would much prefer that over one extra food point. Same with Grassland to an extent.

 

[DaviddesJ]

The reason I would like to farm floodplains instead of the grassland is that I would still have the +1 commerce from being adjacent to a river with the floodplains, but not on the grasslands. (Or am I completely wrong ?)

It makes no difference. If you put a farm on one of the grasslands and a cottage on one of the floodplains, or if you put a farm on one of the floodplains and a cottage on one of the grasslands, the result from working those two tiles is exactly the same, either way.

If you're going to build some farms and some cottages, planning to work both, it's probably better to put the farms on the floodplains and the cottages on the grasslands, as this gives you more flexibility to emphasize food production, if you want. But it's basically the same either way.

 

[ZippyRiver]

I have been playing a financial civ, so any tile that gives 1 commerce gets a cottage (for a total of 3). I also make sure that I do not cut off my water supply so that I can farm those grassland tiles that don't have access. But if I can, I will route a farm string from outside the city radius and still cottage the rest of the river tiles.

 

[Wodan]

It depends on what you want first. You want your city to work the floodplains before the grasslands (because they're +1, plain and simple they're better tiles).

So, if you want the city to grow faster, then farm the floodplains.

Most people, by far, want the money first. So, cottage the floodplains. You'll get money instead of food. Plus, you'll get your cottages to Towns earlier in the game, so long haul it's better as well.

Wodan

 

[Mathemagician13]

The net food increase is a large reason of why people do it. Since it costs 2 food to feed the poor point of population working the flood plain (as it does every other tile), and a cottage on a floodplain generates 3 food, the cottage on a floodplain leaves a little left over to ultimately work a tile that can't support itself.
They're handy to use early on, because your city can grow and gain commerce effectively, but I recall that they might take longer to build on. So, for early "build farms and then demoloish to build cottages when you approach your ideal population" techniques, you may want to dodge those tiles since it will take extra time to rebuild.

 

[FratBoy]

Obviously if you are going for a commerce city (which you seem to be doing, since you have at least 1 cottage in the city) then you should do as follows:

10 grassland -> all cottage
4 floodplains -> all cottage
4 plains -> all cottage
2 hills -> all cottage (or windmill)

You don't mention if it's plains-hills or grassland-hills, which makes a difference. You can cottage grassland-hills, but not plains-hills. You also need 40 food total to work those 20 tiles, and if the 2 hills you mention are grassland-hills build cottages on them, if they are plains-hills go with windmill.

With the full line of tech and the right civics (and financial trait) this city will be 161 base commerce + 1 more for each tile next to a river, so most likely 170 or so base (provided both hills are grassland-hills). That is one of the best base commerce I've ever seen, my best are usually around 150 or so. If you build Oxford and an academy in the city we're talking about roughly 600 beakers, without any specialists. Not bad!

 

[Znabel15]

Thanks for the input everyone. It cleared up things a bit...

 

[FratBoy]

Btw in your example the only reason I can think of that you would build a farm in this city is that you either want specialists in the city, or you want it to grow to size 20 faster.

 

[sandman_civ]

My thoughts on this is that it depends on how fast you want your city to grow. If it's going to grow too fast and stagnate due to unhappiness then growth control can by all means be cottages, but if you have hereditary rule or lots of happiness resources, then farm all floodplains and farm/cottage grasslands and resort to cottages on plains. Another benefit of farming floodplains is that there's a lot more food for specialists to eat. So, "it depends".

 

[crazymarco]

When I am planning a tile should be in cottages or farm, I just follow the rule "2 Food in 1 tile". It is obviously a optimal choice for non-GP farm cities. Of coz, for a GP city, it is good to farm all tiles that produce tones of food to feed the specialist. But for other cities, plan before you work on is important. Especially with the tech of Civil Service and Biology that can make a great difference with you city planning.

 

[Artanis]

I have recently been trying too specialize my cities, but the thing is that I cant\wont understand why people are putting cottages on floodplains in a commerce city. Example: If I have a commerce city with: 4 plains, 2 hills, 4 floodplains and 10 grassland. I my head it would be best to cottage everything exept the hills and 2 floodplains, wich I would mine and farm.
The reason I would like to farm floodplains instead of the grassland is that I would still have the +1 commerce from being adjacent to a river with the floodplains, but not on the grasslands. (Or am I completely wrong ?)

Lessee...
10 Grasslands can feed themselves, and 4 Flood Plains can feed the 4 Plains regardless of improvements. So...what kind of Hills are those? If they're Grassland hills, then the city tile will feed them, and thus you'll be able to work every single tile in the city radius without a single Farm. However, if they're any other sort of Hills, your city tile will only feed one, and you'll need 2 Farms to feed the other. Also, what tiles are next to the river? Flood Plains obviously are, but are there any Plains or Grasslands on the river?

I would put Mines on the Hills no matter what happens. If the Hills are Grass AND have no hammer bonuses in them, I'd put up to 2 Watermills, preferably on Plains, or on Grassland if no Plains are next to the river, with Flood Plains as a last resort. If the Hills are non-Grass, I'd put Farms instead of Watermills, with the same criteria for selecting which tiles to put them on. If the Hills are Grass AND have a hammer bonus in at least one of them (like Iron or something), I'd just throw Cottages on all the flat land.

The big thing with the layout I just stated isn't that it's Cottages on Flood Plains, it's Cottages on everything, since such terrain is so easy to feed.

 

[Oggums]

Irrigate the flood plains and put workshops everywhere else, then build lots of tanks and kill people.

 

[DaveMcW]

Irrigate the flood plains and put workshops everywhere else, then build lots of tanks and kill people.

Don't you mean "build lots of swordmen"? It's hard to reach tanks with no cottages!

 

[Oggums]

err build 100 warriors and rule the world

 

[SlipperyJim]

Don't you mean "build lots of swordmen"? It's hard to reach tanks with no cottages!

Get all of your required techs, then plow over the cottages to build farms and workshops?

(j/k)

 

[shadow2k]

It really depends on what the city needs.

In my commerce cities, I like to have enough food to grow quickly. So if I have to farm a FP or two, I do it. I can always go back and cottage them later, when growth isn't needed, for whatever reason. I'd rather farm the FP's than the grassland though, it gives you more versatility (one four-food tile instead of two 3-food tiles).

As for the hills, I mine them to start. I also put workshops around, so that I can build infra for the city at certain points, whatever it may be. If I can use slavery if there's a lot of food around, or UniSuff later on, then I will. But those aren't always the best options, or even available.

Remember, you can always go back and change tiles around to suit your current needs. It's the best way to improve your game actually, because you pay more attention to each city, and optimize each one constantly. But it's very painful to have to tear down a developed town, so think about what you'll need later on before you start tossing them down on every tile.

 

[SomethingWitty]

I always farm the floodplains.

I work under the idea that it's better to specialize the terrain than to have a mixed bag.

Arguments against?

 

[Yzen Danek]

I always farm the floodplains.

I work under the idea that it's better to specialize the terrain than to have a mixed bag.

Arguments against?

Specializing the terrain is only particularly useful if you're intending to omit some of the squares some of the time.

As someone else pointed out above, if you have 3 tiles you're going to be working as a farm and two cottages, every combination of a farm and two cottages will produce identical results, with the small exception of in the case of a finacial Civ, where a river tile will produce additional 1 commerce for 10 turns or so (once the cottages reach hamlet, it's all the same again).