Advice on city placement, priorities and Do's and Don'ts...

[Glitches]

Every game that I play, the one decision that is always the hardest to make is where to place my 2nd and 3rd cities. I've read a decent amount of threads yet still have questions on what I consider to be one of the most important decisions of the game. Curious on:

1. What is the #1 priority for 2nd/3rd cities: Resources, location or terrain?

2. Distance from capital? I tend to try and keep the initial borders around 3 tiles from capital. Too close, too far or disregard for another reason?

3. Type of city? I tend to look for a production (military) city but I think I tend to force this one.

4. Do you ever wait and place your capital in a different location than the initial starting point?

Thanks in advance for any help on this. For what it's worth I tend to use Elizabeth.

 

[Giaur]

AD 1) What do you mean by saying: "terrain" and "location"?
Base of every placement are food resources: pigs, cows, sheep, corn, wheat, rice. Clam, Crab, Fish. Also banana, sugar and spices. Next to that is how many plains, flood plains and grasslands city would have. Next to that is production. How many hills city would have. Remember that pigs are not equal to not irigated rice. Also grassland hills are not equal to plain hills. All these things are to be considered.

AD 2) Do not be scared of maintanace. Sometimes placing second city far from the capital is profitable. I would be more concerned about troop movement. If second city is placed far from the capital prioritize the wheel and build roads as soon as possible. If barbs invade you, it would be much easier to manage your troops when countryside is connected.

AD 3) Your point of view is very similar to mine. I do not consider founding a city, if it had less than 10 hammers. Some people play without shields and toy with pop-rushing. But it's not a good habit. To pop-rush you must have set Slavery. And what if you needed Caste System or Emancipation?

AD 4) It's good to have 2 hammers produced by the center of the city. So sometimes it's good to move settler into plain hills. Personally I do that in almost every case. Good start is extremely important.

edit: Strategic resources are to be grabbed if your favourite way of winning is conquest. However if you are peaceful builder, startegic resources are important too. You could get 4 happiness resources in exchange for Iron ...

 

[JoeBlade]

1. What is the #1 priority for 2nd/3rd cities: Resources, location or terrain?

Strategic resources are the primary consideration if my capital doesn't have any.
Otherwise I'll mainly ensure a city can be turned into something useful (production, GP farm or commerce-based city) without jumping through hoops. Very low-food cities for 2nd or 3rds are a big no-no to me, as are cities with very few workable tiles. I may still settle such spots later but certainly not for my first few cities.
Unlike the AIs I don't bend myself backwards either to get as many resources as possible in my BFC. I prefer to split resources across 2 or 3 meaningful cities rather than have a single city with 5-6 resources but of no other use due to, say, lack of food.
Hills for extra defense, fresh water access and trees are only minor considerations to me. If I can reach those goals by moving 1 square and not lose anything important in the process I'll do so but that's about the extent of it. I don't like the blue circles in this respect either, they tend to prioritise fresh water access and hills defense far too much IMO.

2. Distance from capital? I tend to try and keep the initial borders around 3 tiles from capital. Too close, too far or disregard for another reason?

Depends a bit on map size this one but generally I'll settle at most 5 tiles from my border, unless there's a very good reason to do otherwise. Examples would be strategic resources again or sealing off a large section of land.

3. Type of city? I tend to look for a production (military) city but I think I tend to force this one.

I like to look for good production sites as well simply because even a single one of those can be a great boon (other cities can focus on buildings a bit more) and they are often hard to locate. The combination of sufficient hammers and enough food to work them is a rarity on some maps.
Overall, I want a purpose for my cities regardless and want to ensure I have either sufficient hammers for later-game production or lots of potential food surplus for whipping. This last point is something the city location algorithm is particularly bad at to my tastes.

4. Do you ever wait and place your capital in a different location than the initial starting point?

I'm not sure whether you mean moving the initial settler before founding your capital or relocating the palace elsewhere during a game.
I'll do the former on occasion simply because the city location algorithm has a few odd glitches.
Moving the palace is something I do fairly frequently. I find that the distance from capital can make a substantial difference during the course of a game, esp. on larger maps.

 

[Glitches]

AD 1) What do you mean by saying: "terrain" and "location"?

For terrain, I was referring to mostly to identifying the ideal location for a production (military) city. Basically, looking for the # of hammers, hills to build mines, and a river for watermill. Would you prioritize the ideal production terrain over: 1) a less attractive location but one that has better resources or 2) a better location (closer for reduced maintanance costs or one the secures land away from your neighbors)?

 

[KMadCandy]

i don't prioritize a military production city as my second city. but i'm very much not a "go to war early" type either. i do like to secure military resources with it, but if it can't make the actual troops i don't freak out. so it's more a military grab city than a military making city.

i do like early expansion toward my neighbor since i have a "this land is my land and that land is your land until i decide that you don't deserve it any more, and if you settle on my land then my decision comes a lot quicker" attitude. i often don't open borders until i've settled my juicy spots. frequently i haven't met them, or i've met them but don't really know where their cities are, when i'm placing my second city. so it's not a huge priority that early. if they're close tho, city #3 comes sooner than it might otherwise.

i sometimes move my initial settler a tile or two, but i don't really ever wait several turns to place the capital the way it sounds to me you're implying (maybe you're not). i have no qualms about regenerating the map if the starting location looks icky to me. i relocate my capital sometimes, for a more central location but usually because i like it cottaged and i started out coastal, no hammers left after my chopping frenzy and no rivers in my capital doesn't exactly thrill me.

again keep in mind, i don't usually go to war early. this whole idea of not having catapults boggles my mind! it works for some people, but i ain't good at it, i'm a wuss. so take everything i say with a big fat grain of salt.

 

[Glitches]

Thanks guys. Yes, I was referring to whether or not anyone ever waits past the very first turn to settle their first city. I never do (but sometimes wish I had) because it takes to long to scout even nearby territory for a better spot.

Curious on another city placement option early in the game: I tend to try and avoid settling cities on the coast (regardless of ocean resources) because I feel that I can secure more land by staying inland. Does anyone place a priority on coastal cities?

 

[nullspace]

1. If there are other civs very near, I want my early cities to get strategic resources or to block of their expansion. If my opponents are distant, I want locations that have good growth and commerce. A gold resource and a food resource is great, floodplains or sea resources are good.

2. I think the main difficulty with distant cities is defending them and connecting them to your capital. If you can solve those problems, then the higher maintenance is worth it.

3. Production or commerce depends on whether a rush would be beneficial or not. You'll eventually want at least one production city, but it might be low priority if you're isolated.

Curious on another city placement option early in the game: I tend to try and avoid settling cities on the coast (regardless of ocean resources) because I feel that I can secure more land by staying inland. Does anyone place a priority on coastal cities?

Coastal cities get more money from trade routes, and additional health from ports, but I generally only build them where there are food resources in the water. They do claim less land, but crabs plus gold or copper would be a good second city.

4. Moving your initial settler is a big risk. Some people have advocated moving away from the coast, since then your capital will block other civs from settling you coastal spot and you can get it later. I've never tried it.

 

[Meanness]

1 - Second city to grab copper or horses, assuming these are not in your first city's fat cross. Military resources at this stage of the game are crucial. I am not averse to settling right on top the said resource, so I can start cranking out units the second I link up my cities.

If I have bronze and/or horses in my first city, I go for sites with food resources that I can grow fast and whip units. Avoid jungle, ignore calendar resources. Let opponents develop these sites, then conquer them.

2 - As close as possible. I like to keep fat cross overlap to a minimum - not for practical purposes, but because I'm anal like that. Closer cities = easier defense = cheaper maintenance.

3 - See #1. Military and food resources are all that matter in the early game. You'll conquer the rest.

4 - I'll wait one turn at most, and only if the improvement in locations is obvious. Usually you're in a pretty good spot to start.

 

[Ecofarm]

1. Food resource -> Number of hills -> settle on hill/resource?

2. Move towards your nearest neighbor. They will be the only easy conquest of the game (due to short distance for troop movement).

3. Type of city = 1st capital (yes, I consider the capital to be neither SE nor CE - it operates under a Capital Economy and can serve almost any function), 2nd war resource, 3rd production or library city, others according to terrain (cottages with flat land, production with hills, specialists with 2 food resources).

4. Depends on game speed. At epic you can move 4 turns, At normal 2 turns. Sometimes this can result in surprising benefits: culture from creative leaders + founding religion putting cultural pressure even on enemy capitals, blocking off large areas of land for ''backfilling", securing a nice plains elephant + river city. Don't forget, however, that tiles in the fat cross of starting location will upgrade if they are naturally tundra (eg. fur/deer/silver can be on plains (and forest) - with a river this is a cheater tile).


Regarding coastal cities:

Coastal cities + fishing + financial trait + colosus = victory (CE without cottages). Do it with Ragnar, build Berserkers while researching Astronomy. Scout well with a couple of caravels. Chop/buy/whip galleons. Drop 2-4 cities on the turn you declare. Just get to galleons before target has/uses optics and take position for your stikes more the 2 tiles from cultural borders. Viking's +1 boat movement and circumnavigation (from early optics) means you can sweep in from outside vision and amphibious any coastal city. Bring a catapult (no time for engineering) for any city you must make landfall to hit, as the 1 turn of landing troops will give the defender a chance to move troops into the city and whip one. The idea is that city raider_2 strength 8s (maces will do but require you to make landfall before hitting) will kill longbows at 20-40% (if at 2:1 casualties). If the target only has 1-2 per city and no time to whip defenders/move horses, 1-2 galleons is sufficient per city. Burning/keeping 2-4 cities on the turn you declare is about the fastest way to win a war and you need coastal cities(lighthouse+financial+colosus) to do it efficiently. You can't get to astronomy that fast with cottages, and you can't burn 4 cities on the same turn you declare an overland war.

 

[KMadCandy]

i meant that i'm not a big fan of my capital being a coastal city (usually not enough production and cottage tiles for me). but if the map looks like there's a lot of useful coast and seafood tiles, so that i'll end up with a lot of fishing towns, then i'll settle a coastal city fairly early (not city #2 tho). if i'm financial it's pretty much guaranteed. colossus is really nice and very quick to build. at least it seems that way, since you have to have to a forge to build it, and the doubler is copper, far easier to get than marble or stone.