Improving your Opening Play Sequences

[cracker]

MSGT John Drew,

Make sure you don't misread the page on settlers performing worker tasks because a town located on a hill cannot pass irrigation from one side of the town to the next.

You get the instant road and railroad but no canals over the mountains. So this may not be an instant fix to your irrigation problems in the lost valley.

 

[Zingo]

cracker, you missed Persia as industrious civ in your forest-article. I know, it's not a big deal but I wanted you to know.

 

[cracker]

Thanks Zingo,

I'll double check the locations where that topic comes up and fix those references. That sometimes occurs in conversion of the files because I edit out some of the extraneous html tags that get included with place names. This speeds up the downloads but can lead to occasional braincramps on my part.

 

[Serg]

Originally posted by Cartouche Bee

Because I use horsemen alot I know this to be untrue.

0 - r - r R r -

The river uses a whole movement point before engineering. So regardless of the point where you cross the river you can move three roads squares and 1 river sqaure.

The moving across the river depend on terrain type placed on the other bank of the river. Crossing river movement penalty is equally that terrain's movement penalty. If you move across the river from any terrain type tile to the hill or mountain (both tiles have the road) you stop on that tile. Anyway it is your first move or 6-th move of horsemen (has 2 movement point). Hence it is rationally to end unit moving by crossing the river but not to begin.
All above statements are true before discovering the Engineering.

 

[cavemanf16]

I would like to take time to say that your articles on the 'early game' tactics has really opened my mind on how I should start off my Civ3 games. Up until now, I was only successful about 30% of the time at Regent level using my development strategies. I have started putting into practice some of your strategies and it has improved my game. Yes, the Babylonians nuked Moscow twice on me , but at least now I'm in a commanding lead of over 700 points, and on track to complete my spaceship first out of me (the Russians), France, and Babylon. I used to play with automated settlers because I enjoyed focusing on the military aspect of Civ3 the most. No longer! Long live human intelligence in the use of Workers!!

 

[Pi Seti]

I have a quick question. When in the Iroquois Grassland example you decided to irigate the cow square northeast of Salamanca, why didn't you build a mine instead? I had thought that the extra food from irrigation would be wasted under despotism.

 

[cracker]

Pi Seti,

I think the article covers this question fairly well by detailed examples and tables on page two of the article.

You have misinterpretted the rule on how despotism impacts things. It is not that irrigation is wasted. The rule is that any square that produces more than two of anything will get a one unit penalty.

So if irrigation rasies the square to get 2 food normally --- you get 2 food
if irrigation raises the square to get 3 food normally --- you get 2 food
if irrigation raises the square to get 4 food normally --- you get 3 food, etc.

The penalty applies to gold and shields as well.

Squares with cows and wheat will generall already have enough food production that the despot penalty has already been extracted leaving you in a position to be above the line where the despot penalty will prevent you from seeing the irrigation benefit.

 

[SonOfShaka]

cracker ,
just another newbie wanting to thank you for your opening play summary . Very informative . I consider myself fortunate to have found it so early in my "career" .
Will start a new game soon to practice what you preach ...

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

Yo cracker - how about some comments on initial diplomatic relations. I've been playing GOTM 13, but I've been playing catchup on techs. I've been reluctatant to give up my world map for fear of being attacked. Am I wromg?

 

[Firebird]

Thats a very good article Cracker. Nice work :b:

 

[JMK]

Cracker.
Thank you for your great work, it opens my eyes on how to play CIV3. Now a party will last for ever, it's going to take time before I move a unit. THANK YOU.

 

[JonathanValjean]

Cracker,

You amaze me with the analytical power that you have. Thanks so much for such an excellent tutorial! It must have taken you many hours to complete such an extensive undertaking. By the way, congratulations on your most recent GOTM victory. That just gives me even more confidence in all of the things I've learned from your tutorial. Keep up the good work! Thanks a lot!
One more thing, I was blown away by the SOTD of yours in which you had covered the entire screen with Modern Armor/Mech. Infantry! Do you have 24 hour days like the rest of us? Where do you come up with all that time? Take care.

 

[Ribannah]

Cracker,

Do you ever consider producing a second Worker before anything else (or after a Warrior)? This reduces the waste from working unimproved terrain, and often you can quickly regain the lost time.

 

[cracker]

Ribannah,

I have tested the early 2nd worker thought process and generally don't think it works well.

It delays the first settler by sucking up 20 food units when you usually do not have lots of these.

In most positions, you can gain an extra shield of power easier than you can gain an extra growth point of food because shields are cummulative while each extra citizen eats 2 food and only gains any excess above this. Grassland and Plains are topped out without the presence of bonus resources.

The other factor is the free unit support value of 4 units under despotism. For standard civs: 1 worker (given at start) + 1 warrior + 1 worker + 1 settler = 4. For expansionist civs, 1 worker (given at start) + 1 scout (given at start) + 1 scout + 1 worker + 1 settler = 5 and this drives you over the free support level.

Most of the scenarios I tested ended up behind because my early units ended up over the 4 free units per town limit.

Getting the first city to raise your unit support level above the 4 minimum is critical. and then you can debate more workers vs more settlers vs more other stuff.

I did not test every possible combination but I found no examples where warrior+worker or scout+worker seemed to be a stronger process. (this does not mean that the excpetion does not exist.)

 

[Bamspeedy]

It doesn't make any sense to me either because you are delaying getting that second city built by so long. The only time I build a second worker before or around 3000 b.c. is in my second city if that second city was a settler from a hut. Whether or not this is the best, I'm not sure, but it makes sense to me since the second city has virtually no improved tiles.

 

[Ribannah]

But the second worker improves the terrain, which allows you to

(a) build faster
(b) grow faster
(c) move faster
(d) research / gain income faster
(e) explore faster
(f) connect resources faster

from in the worst case 3500 BC onward compared to - this is essential - your usual progress from 4000 BC onward. So you should be able to reduce that lag of max 10 turns (often less) rather quickly, while still having that extra worker, too. The support cost is irrelevant as you will have roaded more squares, or, what I often do, use the 40 turn rule to get your first or second tech (Mysticism).

I think the key factor would be whether there are any rivals nearby that can claim land where you would have placed your second or third city. After that, I expect you to have caught up compared to the development path without the extra Worker.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Ribannah, unless your fortunate enough to have built on a site where the city grows quicker than the first worker can make meaningful improvements, your better off getting a second city going. You need more workers when your cities are working undeveloped land. Even just following that lead you will connect cities and resources as quick as you expand. My solution is too brief for cracker's thread but he knows I consider actual situations and don't play off a predetermined rule set.

 

[cracker]

I would just add that improvements around the first city are usually not the problem. SO if you delay getting the 2nd city so you can get another worker around the first city, you are usually solving a problem that does not exist.

The population in the first city will usually oscillate in the 1 to 5 population range for the first 40 to 80 turns anyway. On a site with at least 3 grassland without a food bonus the growth rate pretty much stays at a constant 1 pop point per 10 turns and if you build a warrior(or scout) then a settler you will be assured of holding to a population that stays at 3 or fewer tiles being worked out through about turn 32. Stanadard workers will move-road-mine at the rate of one tile per ten turns. So just the fact that you put out the settler will put the first town in equilibrium or fully improved status even without the extra worker.

In general, a second worker will not speed growth by adding more improvements. The first worker can irrigate and road quicker that the typical growth curve. Mines slow down the worker success rate buy are important. You also have to look at integer combinations of excess food production and this begins to dominate things in floodplain and lots of wheat/cow conditions.

The real key is cranking out subsequent workers for subsequent cities but that is not the best use of the capital city in most cases.

 

[Ribannah]

You are still ignoring the advantages. With an extra Worker, your squares are already improved when you work them AND you have roads ready to your next city sites.

I just replayed Moscow on the Hill, where I start 8 turns behind for completing my additional Worker in 3550 BC. I built a Warrior in 3200 BC (instead of 3450 BC), and without rushing I got a Spearman in 2900 BC and Settler #1 in 2590 BC to found St. Petersburg (hill at the ocean, connected to Moscow and the Ivory) in 2510 BC (only two turns behind) with Worker #2 ready to improve the second FL Wheat square and protected by my Spearman from the barb Warrior that is approaching.
A second Spearman was completed in 2390 BC.
In 2150 BC, I discovered Iron Working (after Ceremonial Burial and Mysticism which I traded for Warrior Code, Masonry, Alphabet, The Wheel and money). We are now #1 in science thanks to not rushing anything.
Still without rushing, I built Settler #2 in 2150 BC to found Kiev (hill NW) in 2070 BC (two turns behind) with Worker #1 ready to start improving the terrain.
In 2030 BC I can have a rushed Settler #3 and start the war machine, with Horseback Riding around the corner. Moscow would be size 2; St. Petersburg has completed another Worker and is growing fast with 2 Workers improving the terrain.
This is now 2 turns ahead of your opening play, I have twice the terrain improvements with all cities connected, a science lead and
the extra Worker. Money was never a problem.

 

[Ribannah]

In the Germany example, I got my first Settler in 2750 BC (turn 25) after Spearman, Worker, Spearman. Settler #2 followed another Spearman in 2270 BC (turn 37) and Settler #3 followed a Warrior in 1830 BC (turn 48).
By then we had the Ivory connected and irrigated (near Leipzig), the wheat irrigated, two forests cleared and all the surrounding territory explored.