Resettlement (Level 2 Order tenet)

[Draskar]

Resettlement: New Cities start with an extra 1 Population.

Isn't really useless? I'm missing something?

 

[kaspergm]

It seems to come perhaps a tiny bit too late in game? But haven't tried game yet, so I can't say for sure. I guess the name seems to imply that you would use this to resettle lands that you have claimed from others (after burning their cities ) so I guess if you go militaristic Order, it might help ... a tiny bit?

 

[Miravlix]

Combined with food trade routes, you can build up viable cities much later than was possible in G&K.

 

[Hyperion529]

doesnt look very appealing to me either, but maybe its useful in later era starts.

 

[Draskar]

Combined with food trade routes, you can build up viable cities much later than was possible in G&K.

It's quite true, but i think other tenets are better than this.
The first pop growth comes very early, it's like settling a city 6 turn early...powerfull in the beginning, but not so good in late game...or not?

P.S. as Italian, I can't try the game until 12/7

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

Sounds like it would be a great policy (maybe even OP) if it were part of the Liberty tree, for example, but as a 2nd tier tenet...well, let's just say it wouldn't be great for the smaller maps I play where the cities are all built quite early in the game.

 

[Kennan]

You get 3 extra population, they changed it. Have not tried it but it might be powerful for late expansion.

 

[Inhalaattori]

People really should understand that lots of stuff from the early builds have changed. Online Civilopedia for example is a good source of information. It still has some error, but usually it provides right information.

With this policy your cities start with 4 population, which is pretty strong IMO. Its wort taking even if you establish just 2-3 new cities.

 

[kaspergm]

Oh ok, then it definitely sounds much more useful!

 

[Mesix]

You can't build (or rush buy) Settlers in cities with 1 population. If you establish a foothold on a new continent, you would normally have to wait for the city to grow before you can expand further with more settlers. With Resettlement, you can plop down the city and rush buy a settler immediately.

 

[oddtail]

You can't build (or rush buy) Settlers in cities with 1 population. If you establish a foothold on a new continent, you would normally have to wait for the city to grow before you can expand further with more settlers. With Resettlement, you can plop down the city and rush buy a settler immediately.

Seems that way. In about the time you could get two cities without Resettlement, with a total of 3-5 population, with Resettlement (and enough money) you could be looking at three cities, with a total of 12-13 population. That's nothing to sneeze at.

EDIT: also, you can go for production hexes (like Hills) without the initial setup period, where you focus on getting your population up. This means, in addition to not having to wait for the city itself to grow, less time that any Workers you might be using spend on building Farms, and more time to build Mines.

 

[Draskar]

"I'm missing something?" yes

 

[pilot00]

Seems good to me. You might need a new city with capabilities at strategic point at any given time. To me it allows you to do just that.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Seems good to me. You might need a new city with capabilities at strategic point at any given time. To me it allows you to do just that.

And how many will you need ?
It's rare that I even found one city during the industrial era, it's very rare that I found two, and I can't remember the last time I founded three or more.

 

[pilot00]

And how many will you need ?
It's rare that I even found one city during the industrial era, it's very rare that I found two, and I can't remember the last time I founded three or more.

I cant give hard numbers but I had settled six on one game in the modern era. One to use as an invasion beachhead, two to control some natural wonders, One as a naval base for repairs and the other one I think as a choke point between a small sea corridor in order to block it.
The last one near a mountain because none had a mountain to build the mountain wonders.

Clearly not a top argument but a situational one.

 

[AlazkanAssassin]

And how many will you need ?
It's rare that I even found one city during the industrial era, it's very rare that I found two, and I can't remember the last time I founded three or more.

When I hit the industrial era, there are usually a number of unsettled islands and ice-bound regions that have the potential to contain needed resources.
If I find myself lacking in coal, oil and aluminum, founding cities on those islands are a great way to permanently aquire the resources.

 

[Mesix]

I think the mechanic is much more useful on island or small continent maps than it would be on Pangaea style maps where you can quickly build or rush settlers from original cities when needed.

 

[pilot00]

When I hit the industrial era, there are usually a number of unsettled islands and ice-bound regions that have the potential to contain needed resources.
If I find myself lacking in coal, oil and aluminum, founding cities on those islands are a great way to permanently aquire the resources.

I think the mechanic is much more useful on island or small continent maps than it would be on Pangaea style maps where you can quickly build or rush settlers from original cities when needed.

Both of this reasons are plausible for me.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Sounds useful for India, I'd wager.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Both of this reasons are plausible for me.

Theres one flaw (at least I think it is a flaw, mabe others have a different play style): When I found a city late in the game because I want the resources and the terrain isn't that good otherwise I dont want the city grow quickly. It increases unhappiness and doesn't add much of value.