When to build first settler?

[Emac78]

At what point do you build your first settler? Is there a certain population point you wait for? Do you wait until you reach the happy cap?

I generally play vanilla MP and my usual starting production is something like this: warrior/scout/worker/archer/archer/settler

If I start off with a warrior I fortify it and will always research Hunting unless I'm Spiritual and start off with Mysticism in which case I go for Polytheism or Meditation. Once I get Hunting I build a scout as soon as it becomes available. If I start off with Hunting then I have a scout and will start off building a warrior to defend my city. In MP it is wise to protect your capital from crazy rushers. Sometimes I'll build another warrior just to protect my worker. After Hunting, I normally get my economic techs like Fishing, The Wheel, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, and Mining depending which is in my city's radius. Then I either go with Archery/or Bronze Working, Pottery/Writing, or Horseback Riding depending on who I am and what kind of strategy I'm thinking of pursuing.

By about the time my capital city reaches 3 or about to reach 3, I will usually have one or two warriors, an exploring scout, one worker, and maybe a couple of archers. One archer to defend the capital and one archer to escort/defend my next city. Sometimes I will get a barracks instead of the extra warrior. Usually by pop 3 or 4 though I start my first settler. Is it better to wait until the happy cap which is 6 on Noble?

I'd like to see what your stategies and opinions are and I'm sure it does depend on the situation.

 

[kazapp]

Pop 4 seems to be a common answer...

 

[OJimiJam]

Normally around pop 2 for me. Build normally goes worker > warrior (grow to pop 2) > Settler.

Obvious difference if i start coastal with seafood and fishing, then its a couple of workboats in the build as well meaning im normally pop 4.

 

[siggboy]

Opinions wildly differ on this subject.

I have no experience with multiplayer games at all, but in my single player games I usually grow the capital to at least size 4 before I start on my first settler. Normally I slow build that settler assisted by some chopping if I have enough forests (I prefer to save some forests for key wonders in any case).

It can be a winning strategy to build the first settler earlier, however. If you see a key resource for an early rush nearby, or gold to boost your research, for example. In that case starting on a settler ASAP will give you access to that resource a few turns earlier, which can be crucial.

I don't think any "middle-of-the-road" approach is very strong. Either get the settler out as early as possible (via chopping), or grow the capital to happy cap and then mainly slow build the settlers (or whip).

 

[vicawoo]

I thought in multiplayer you build a second warrior first.

 

[Stephanus]

Like you say in your post: it depends on the situation, and the difficulty you're playing at. The lower the difficulty, the less military units you'll need.

I generally go for warrior/worker/settler/warrior (or better depending on the techs I have at that moment), even in Marathon. The sooner I can have my second city up, the better. The tech path I prefer is always to have at least bronze working asap.

This way I can always build up my empire pretty quick, and this helps me in getting the advantage over the AI, whether in military power, whether in techs, but most often both. This is my playing style since the original Civilization, and it has always worked out fine up to now.

Hopefully this answer can help you already.

 

[troytheface]

i use a binary system because the computer is set up that way, which is to say, a preferred build is 2 cities, to 4 cities, to 6 cities. Any odd number of cities is to be avoided unless you get to seven and run out of space on standard map setting.
The end result of this i am not sure.

 

[r_rolo1]

i use a binary system because the computer is set up that way, which is to say, a preferred build is 2 cities, to 4 cities, to 6 cities. Any odd number of cities is to be avoided unless you get to seven and run out of space on standard map setting.
The end result of this i am not sure.

On topic:

I normally make the 2nd settler at pop 3.

 

[Yxklyx]

Lately I do Worker-Worker-Settler using chopping. I have my initial Scout fogbust the path first. Having a Warrior accompany a Settler means the Settler is slowed to 1 tile move per turn. I suppose you could build a Warrior first after the two Workers and have him move out ahead of the Settler.

 

[Ibian]

Some of the early wonders are really key to me. I would rather have 4 cities with the oracle and henge and maybe mids/GLH/colossus than 6 wonderless cities.

 

[SETX Aggie]

I think it depends a lot of the available improved tiles. Using the typical worker first strategy, and chopping a second worker as soon as feasible, I want to grow to the happiness cap only if there are enough improved tiles for my citizens to work. If my 4th, 5th, or 6th citizens, depending on the cap, areonly working an unimproved grassland tile, I'd rather get the settler earlier.

I guess all this is to say that I generally don't start building settlers until I have the maximum number of citizens working improved tiles as possible - which is generally but not always the happiness cap.

 

[Polobo]

i use a binary system because the computer is set up that way, which is to say, a preferred build is 2 cities, to 4 cities, to 6 cities. Any odd number of cities is to be avoided unless you get to seven and run out of space on standard map setting.
The end result of this i am not sure.

A binary system would be the description of an OCC. You start with ZERO cities and then you have ONE city. Either you stay with the ONE city or you go back to ZERO cities (and thus lose).

Now, if you want to represent a base-10 number (2, 4, 6, 7, etc...) using binary (base-2) any number can be represented, even "odd" numbers (a term generally used only when referring to base-10 numbers)

The other way to look at binary is to take expression 2^n for n = 0 .. infinity; in this case your sequence would be 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32,etc.... 6 is not a valid result (restricting n to an integer).

Now, I realize that you may not have advanced far enough in your study of math yet (this is generally taught before or during high-school in the states), so don't feel too bad if what I've said makes little sense to you.

 

[Ibian]

Dont encourage him

 

[DaveMcW]

Please stop quoting troytheface, it bypasses my ignore list.

 

[Abegweit]

Post deleted

 

[Abegweit]

Post deleted

 

[Daedal]

It depends...... if you're going to rush your neighbor or you need to block off a key bit of land then chop that settler out ASAP. If not, happy cap is a good time to build a second settler. Also on small maps and higher levels you may want to get that settler out sooner rather than later to compete for limited space against crazy fast REXing AIs.

 

[brianb1974]

You grow until you're working all your good tiles. There's no point putting time into growth so that you have access to a forest tile that nets you a single hammer. But if you can grow and work another resource, then you certainly want to do it.

 

[eewallace]

It depends on a huge number of factors. Usually I try to have my first settler finished about the time I get the latter of animal husbandry and bronze working. Then I know if there are horses or bronze nearby. It depends, too, on how fast I think I'm going to be able to grow. If I found a bunch of huts giving gold, or if I'm playing a financial leader with a nice river or coast, I'll probably build my first and second settlers sooner. Also, if I'm positioned so that I can cut off an opponent with my first 3 cities, I'll really rush to get those settlers out.

 

[schwartz]

Please stop quoting troytheface, it bypasses my ignore list.

This.