Always Worker First?

[riapopia]

So, I've been playing Warlords for a while and can now regularily win on Monarch (though I get smoked on Emperor). My question is simple - do you all build Worker first or second at the latest? I usually do for all the good reasons that we all probably accept.

I ask because I recently had a situation where I went Work Boat, Work Boat, Settler - I had 2 seafood resources and a primo city site that I was in danger of losing.

Is that reasonable or is it always a bad idea to wait on a worker? Certainly I was working unimproved tiles for a while and had ne benefit of chop acceleration. Retrospectively I felt like I ended up behind compared to where I would have been with even a single worker helping out. But that feeling is pretty fuzzy so I thought I'd see if anyone had any harder opinions.

Thx,

 

[Zanttu]

I don't ALWAYS build worker first - if I have seafood available or the worker would have nothing to do (i.e. all tiles around you are forest and you don't start with mining), workboat/warrior may be the first build. But workboat-workboat-SETTLER is something I would NEVER do. You should build a worker before your first settler, because most of the time you will get the settler faster if you improve the tiles or chop some forests. And on monarch I don't believe you would lose a good city spot near you to AI even if you complete the settler few turns later. And I suppose the good spot was near you, because otherwise sending a settler without escort is a big gamble.

 

[MrCynical]

Even on a double seafood start, I'd go workboat-workboat-worker-settler, since by the the time I've built both workboats and the worker I've surely got bronze working, and can chop some forest to get the settler out almost as fast as if I'd built it straight away.

 

[Gooblah]

I think your build path is justfied; Settlers use food and hammers when being built, like Workers. If you work the two seafood tiles, the Settler will be out faster.

Personally, I do Warrior/Workboat, then Worker. It gives the city time to grow, allowing it to pump out the Worker faster and expand culturally. I usually follow up with Warrior, Settler, Barracks, assorted units

 

[Belisar]

Even seafood doesn't mean workboat first automatically.
It depends on possible initial hammer/food combinations, the availability of food ressources inland and starting techs.

 

[Morgrad]

Nothing is "always" in this game. 95% of the time I go worker first, but if the situation merits it, I'll certainly build something else.

I don't think I've yet to build a settler before my first worker, but probably only because the situation hasn't arrived yet.

 

[duende29]

If there's seafood and I start with fishing, I'd usually go Work Boat first, since it lets the capital grow. If there's another seafood available, then another Boat, however, if there's a good land tile I have the tech for, for example a Cow tile (3f 3h/4f 2h), I'd go worker immediately after the boat gets done, since that's a heck or a tile worth more than clam or fish. For example, here:

Spoiler :

Crazy coincidence.

 

[Benford's Law]

I know I'll have a minority opinion here...but...once in a while, building a warrior (or scout with Hunting) first can be the right play....

I've had a couple of non-coastal starts with no worker techs available for my civ to use right away.

I would be in a densely forested area with a river as Mansa Musa, but all I knew was the wheel and mining. I couldn't chop the trees to do mining because I didn't know bronze working. The wheel didn't have much use because all the river was forested, too, and pottery for any cottaging was a long ways off! The only good options for research was bronze working (takes a while) or fishing (for a nearby high-commerce lake square, work boats were not an issue...since it was a landlocked, non-coastal start).

It was one of those rare situations that called for a warrior first! The only question was whether to work a certain tile for more city growth or another one to crank out the warrior faster for more early exploration.

That is an interesting question, too....concerning higher levels of difficulty (Monarch+)....I often wonder if it's actually worthwhile to send out a warrior or scout (especially scout) first to explore a lot and gamble on goody huts. With the AI sending out multiple units right away, it would seem like a worthwhile risk to take....making one quick, cheap unit using your highest hammer tile right away before starting your worker.

I wish there was an "opportunity cost analysis" for building a quick, cheap unit for exploration first vs. worker first. It would be a highly situational thing depending on factors like:

a) Do you have a high-hammer tile in your BFC for cranking out a quick unit?
b) Are your first feasible worker techs going to take a while longer than it would for you to create a worker to use it?
c) Even if it not and you can work some tiles right away, how much growth and city development would you lose by making a cheap unit first for exploration/ hut popping? Will it have been worth it if your second unit increases the chances of popping a lot of gold or a tech, instead?

On epic and marathon speed, it would seem slightly more biased towards building a warrior/scout first sometimes compared to a standard game, too....

~Benford's Law

 

[duende29]

Benford: In your case I think I'd still get a Worker first because your worker won't be wasted: he still can build roads. However, if you don't start with The Wheel and there's no way the worker would be timed right, yes, I'd start a Warrior first and do some scouting around my capital instead, letting my capital grow to a bigger size. In higher difficulties you need to worry less about the huts and more about the terrain surrounding you. Getting those Warriors killed by bears/archers and losing those hammers while they could be escorting your Settlers for a chance of popping a hut far from your capital? I usually choose saving my Warrios. Scouts? Well, they're expendable after a while so I do send them to see if I find something, like borders and stuff.

 

[Zanttu]

Benford: In your case I think I'd still get a Worker first because your worker won't be wasted: he still can build roads.

I think you get better results by building a warrior and letting your city grow than building a worker first just to build roads.

 

[Benford's Law]

duende29,
I agree that it's always a highly situational decision on what to make first. And......(putting aside seafood work boat starts) I'll usually go for the worker, definitely....but I do think it becomes more weighted towards warrior/scout in certain situations. Especially scout if you have hunting! You still have a 10% chance of popping a tech even at Emperor level, I think. And the possible gold will help early on with maintenance when your second city come online.
I know it's a situational call....but I would be *somewhat more likely* to make an exploratory unit first, myself. My odds would still be heavily in favor of making a worker first....but I would take a careful look at my situation, too.

~Benford's Law

 

[volfan37132]

As other posters have said. I do like to go work boat first if available.
Also, if a three food and one coin tile is available. I like to go warrior
first and complete the warrior the same turn the city grows to size 3.
Then build a worker. As a side note I research religion in the meantime
to get an early religion and go for worker techs next. I am a monarch
player and just recently got my first emperor win.

 

[Black Mech]

Same here. Any time I build worker first is if I have farming and/mining as my first techs and a gold hill and/or a weat, rice reasource in my bfc. If not, then I build workboats(if on coast) or warriors first till i get the needed techs to work my land.

 

[popejubal]

I always build a worker first... unless I have a reason not to.

If I don't start with any decent worker techs and I'm not going to research one soon for some reason, then any worker I build would just sit idle until I researched something for him to do.

All of the Agressive civs start with Hunting and a Scout instead of a Warrior, so if I'm on a map with lots of land nearby and I start with Hunting, I'll often build a second scout first to find strategic resources and my first victim. I would probably do this even if I had goodie huts turned off as an option because meeting the neighbors and finding out who has horses/copper/iron is so very important.

Even if I don't start with hunting, I'll usually send my warrior off to explore. If I build a second warrior, then I don't have to worry about him returning quickly (or at all if he meets a bear). Sometimes it might be worthwhile to leave the city defenseless while I build a worker first and then a warrior, but it's hard to go wrong with warrior, then worker. You might not be quite as efficient, but that isn't as critical in the lower levels and it's a good deal safer.

I might even start a Settler first if I have no-barbarians set or if I have an absolutely stellar second city location very close by. I haven't done this in about forever, but it's still something that I will consider before deciding not to.

If I'm on an Archepelago map, then it's hard to go wrong with Work Boat first, worker second and warrior third. The work boat gives the city time to grow and then the worker can get a faster start. Work boat, then worker often doesn't take too much more time than Worker by itself if you have the right resources and you tech to Bronze Working in time to whip one or both.

Finally, I have even started with Stonehenge on a very rare occasion. I started with Mysticism and Mining and settled right on the stone, so I figured I might as well get it started and put my 2 hammers per turn into Stonehenge + Flood Plains while I waited for Masonry to finish researching. This was a tiny duel map and my opponent didn't start with Mysticism, so I had the time to research Masonry and then my religions. That was a very odd game, but I had lots of fun toying with my opponnent and the very early Stonehenge worked out well for me.

Edit:
That said, my most common start is either warrior/worker, worker/warrior or similar with scout replacing the warrior or added into the mix somehow.

 

[riapopia]

Sounds like there is some disagreement on the details though most of you would build a worker very early for a typical start.

My start didn't feel typical as I had 2 seafood resources to work and no land resources I could improve (some Calender resources eventually would be there). So in this situation a worker would be able to build roads (doesn't seem terribly useful short-term), build mines (helpful but I didn't have mining), or be a risky "scout" to explore with.

Given my best 2 tiles were the seafood tiles, I thought workboat, workboat was the smart play as my city would have a LOT of excess food to covert into hammers via whipping. Plus I get the commerce benefit.

It's a tough call I think. Obviously the workboat is consumed where a worker is not upon improvement. But the fact that the city grows while building a boat somewhat mitigates this. Ultimately it was about not having something valuable for my worker to do...

 

[Il Corvo Bianco]

Ok, I feel like I found my major mistake.
I usually go with a warrior, then barracks (whiletime the capital should have grown to 3-4, and archery should have been discovered), last an archer if I've already discovered archery; if not, worker.
Why this? Because I got stomped too times by barbarians or stray enemy warriors, since CIV1.

 

[6K Man]

Ok, I feel like I found my major mistake.
I usually go with a warrior, then barracks (whiletime the capital should have grown to 3-4, and archery should have been discovered), last an archer if I've already discovered archery; if not, worker.
Why this? Because I got stomped too times by barbarians or stray enemy warriors, since CIV1.

What level/settings are you playing? Non-animal barbarians usually take a while to show up. Certainly enough time to build a worker and hopefully chop - for settlers, units, or if nothing else, to give the barbarians fewer forests to hide in.



To the original question - I don't like building a worker first because it bothers me that my city isn't growing. Consequently my ideal start includes seafood, and a civ that starts with Fishing for a workboat-first start. Usually that start will lead to a city that will be size 2 when I start the worker, and will finish that worker fast with +4 food from the nets. Otherwise I may build a Warrior or Scout first, then a Worker.

 

[reknaw]

If my capital's BFC doesn't have many forest tiles, I tend to build warriors until pop 3, so I can whip twice when building my first two workers, otherwise I build worker, chopped worker, chopped settler. I generally like to get my second city up and running as fast as possible.

 

[PotatoOverdose]

Unless I'm playing Inca (in which case I go quecha, quecha, quecha,... well you know where this is going) I go worker, worker, settler.

 

[JBossch]

Like most posters I go worker first in the vast majority of circumstances. Seafood start with fishing is a definite exception. I tend not to go for early religions either, so my worker build tends to work best with my playing style.
As for original post (is it reasonable to build workboat-->workboat-->settler?) I would say no on monarch with normal amount of AI's. I tend to add AI's to a pangea map sometimes and for a while I got real extreme adding two AI's to a small pangea on emperor. There was one time on those settings when I went settler first because of a highly threatened/amazing city spot and only beat the AI settler by one turn.