Farming resource nodes outside BFC

[jmrathbun]

The attached screen shot shows a source of gems just outside my capitol's Big Fat Cross. The tool tip shows I can get 1 hammer and 5 gold by building a mine and one happy face from adding a road. I'm unclear as to whether being outside the BFC negates these benefits.

 

[coanda]

Being outside the BFC means no citizen can work it. So while the tile will be worth 1 more hammer and 5 more commerce, you can't actually get the hammer and commerce without settling another city.

The happiness you'll get as soon as you connect it by road to your cities.

 

[OneLeggedRhino]

The happiness is from having the resource. If the tile is in your culture, has a mine and a road, you'll get that resource. Note that you only get 1 happiness from gold no matter how many golds you have, so the only purpose to getting a second is to trade it with the AIs. (Which is worthwhile, but not as good as getting your first).

The hammers and commerce are from working the tile. You only get that if the tile is in the BFC of one of your cities, and only if that city actually works the tile.

 

[Um the Muse]

Welcome to Civilization IV!

I would suggest you read this guide on terrain and what you can do with it.

 

[jmrathbun]

Thanks! There's a small problem in the URL, however. Correct is http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/completeguide1.php

 

[The Oz-Man]

I'd build another city with those gems in the BFC so that it can work them, though (double-click a city's name to see what it's working). Riverside gems like that can help you generate research and gold very easily. Can you build a city in such a way that the gems and a food source will be in the BFC?

 

[Kid R]

BTW gems are one of the absolute best tiles. If you can see some before you settle at the start it's usually a good idea to move the settler to get them in the BFC so long as you don't lose all your food in the process.

 

[Um the Muse]

I disagree with Kid R, actually. Early gems are really nice, no question about it. However, unless you're trying to do something tricky (very fast Horse Archers or shooting the moon with the Oracle) I would rather have the gems a little later.

Food, like your corn next to a river, is much more important for your first tile, and production/ food is best for the next four tiles (cow on the plains and the two hills are excellent). As an aside, since you "only" have four nice tiles of that sort, you should probably not let your city grow past size four. Build workers and settlers non-stop a this point.

The reason is that settlers and workers are expensive but pay off way better than anything you can else you can build at the beginning of the game. Getting your cities to grow quickly is also very nice.

 

[Kid R]

^ @Um

I think a good commerce tile is really, really strong at the start. It gives you so much flexibility in the first 50 turns with your tech path. There are lots of critical either/or tech decisions in that period and it takes the pressure off some of them.

• Don't get horse/copper? No problem you can afford to try for copper/horse too!
• Fail to get either in time for barbs - detour to archery required? No problem.
• Pigs food but didn't start with hunting or agriculture? No problem.
• Got camp resources but can't decide if a bigger happy cap is worth the time spent researching hunting? Go on, treat yourself!
• Can't decide between masonry/sailing etc. or writing. No problem - get both.
• Trying for the oracle and want to get a good free tech? No problem you *will* be able to get the prereqs in time.
• etc.

Gems is the best of the high-commerce tiles at the start because unlike the others it doesn't stunt growth. You can afford to work it virtually straight away when it matters for all those super-early tactical tech decisions, rather than wait till happy cap and then put a citizen on it.

 

[strijder20]

Don't confuse him with moving at the start.
Moving at the start is not something recommendable until you have some experience with the game

 

[Celebithil]

It should also be mentioned that if you don't intend to work a resource it's often better to build a fort on top of it instead of the resourcespecific improvement. A fort also gives the resource, but has added benefits (an extra well-defensible tile, which can act as a canal and airport.) Also if the resource is oil, you can built a fort before you get combustion (though the oil is only connected upon researching combustion.)

 

[jmrathbun]

Now THAT's interesting, C!

 

[coanda]

Don't build a fort unless a fort there is especially useful. It takes more worker-turns.

 

[Mylene]

I disagree with Kid R, actually. Early gems are really nice, no question about it. However, unless you're trying to do something tricky (very fast Horse Archers or shooting the moon with the Oracle) I would rather have the gems a little later.

Food, like your corn next to a river, is much more important for your first tile, and production/ food is best for the next four tiles (cow on the plains and the two hills are excellent). As an aside, since you "only" have four nice tiles of that sort, you should probably not let your city grow past size four. Build workers and settlers non-stop a this point.

The reason is that settlers and workers are expensive but pay off way better than anything you can else you can build at the beginning of the game. Getting your cities to grow quickly is also very nice.

Sorry but this post has a lot of questionable advice.
If you don't move for a riverside gems while not losing your important food, you won't be able to take on bigger challenges ~~

Gems beat a regular mine by so much early, it isn't even close.
They allow you to get techs for early buildings/wonders quicker, fast expanding and only settlers/workers non-stop leads to stagnation in gameplay experience.

I cannot agree with teaching new players only the basics first, you also should give them a hint on what will be needed to improve so they understand the big picture.
Land = power is one of the worst statements in civ4. Gameplan = power.

 

[Um the Muse]

Hmm. I don't know if I'm just plain wrong, or if you're misinterpreting me. KidR said that you should do it as long as you don't lose all of your food. I'm saying that there's more to it than that. Giving up other special resources like cows for it when you can grab it with your second city on a low difficulty seems foolhardy to me.

It's not like you'll never own the gems; it's great for your second city to work. It's just that using it in your first city takes more advanced techniques.

It's especially good advice for someone who's never played before, who needs to learn that the number one improvement should almost always be food.

Or am I wrong?

 

[TheWilltoAct]

Don't build a fort unless a fort there is especially useful. It takes more worker-turns.

Or why build a fort when you could settle a city near the resource?

 

[MarigoldRan]

Sorry but this post has a lot of questionable advice.
If you don't move for a riverside gems while not losing your important food, you won't be able to take on bigger challenges ~~

Gems beat a regular mine by so much early, it isn't even close.
They allow you to get techs for early buildings/wonders quicker, fast expanding and only settlers/workers non-stop leads to stagnation in gameplay experience.

I cannot agree with teaching new players only the basics first, you also should give them a hint on what will be needed to improve so they understand the big picture.
Land = power is one of the worst statements in civ4. Gameplan = power.

Ok. Fair enough. Let's re-phrase it: one of the more effective ways of playing the game is to play towards the goal of getting more land.

Expand if you have the room and enough money. Kill the AI and take theirs when you run out.

History is kind to war-mongers.

 

[Old Hippy]

looking at your cities , it appears that altough you have it in your culture your city plot markers don't cover it 1( south of shown city)and 2(south west of shown city) i don't know if they are built yet but a gem like that should be covered by your 2nd or 3rd city's BFC. it would have been seen at first city POP, giving plenty of time to plan a coverage

and you have 2 gold on that flood plains tile ... together they would be worth getting for a 2nd city... unless you have realy good stuff out of view of course

 

[Kid R]

Hmm. I don't know if I'm just plain wrong, or if you're misinterpreting me. KidR said that you should do it as long as you don't lose all of your food. I'm saying that there's more to it than that. Giving up other special resources like cows for it when you can grab it with your second city on a low difficulty seems foolhardy to me.

It's not like you'll never own the gems; it's great for your second city to work. It's just that using it in your first city takes more advanced techniques.

It's especially good advice for someone who's never played before, who needs to learn that the number one improvement should almost always be food.

Or am I wrong?

No I think you're right that there's more to it -claiming gems would be a poor move if you lost all your hills. But I challenge you to swap one capital BFC hill for a flat gems in worldbuilder sometime, play both and then claim the hill made for a stronger start

Edit - where's my santa smiley - - that's better!

 

[Um the Muse]

Glad we can agree. It's kind of a moot point in this particular map; I see only one tile that covers both the corn and gems without settling on the cows and it still keeps that grassland hill.

In fact, JMRathbun, you might consider starting over and seeing how much the early gems can help.