Breaking Bad Habits

[Chris Stalis]

Greetings all. I'm a Civ4 newb looking to update from Civ2, and failing rather hopelessly. Obviously, my ingrained, Emperor level play style just isn't working. And really, it's not the diplomacy that I don't feel I understand, nor is it the tech tree that's my greatest foible thus far (though I will need to improve my habits in both). Presently, it is understanding this new breed of city placement, and shaking this ever present feeling that either the cities I've settled or the cities I take via war/culture flip are "poorly placed" for lack of a better term. Here's what I'm talking about.

1) In Civ2, the resource seeder allowed for a grand maximum of 4 unique resources to be located in the city cross. In Civ4, by contrast, I seem to be able to have up to 1/2 of the city cross populated with special resources (elephants, gold, aluminum, etc). Back in Civ2, I obviously optimized for those 4 resource fields simply because of the vastly more powerful resource bonus they provide. But in Civ4... can a city be powerful and useful in any given stage of the game without these resource bumps? What is the minimum number of resource boosts I should settle with to keep things optimized? Does the river count in my estimations due to the late game bonus of the levee?

2) Also new to me is all these dead zones of resource usage. Deserts, Mountains, Glaciers and Ice all essentially equate to a lower supported population level. How fearful should I be of settling near these? Is, for instance, 3 of these 'dead zones' in the cross too many in the early game? What about about 6? 10? I'm also looking at this so that resources uncovered by techs later then iron working will be "pleasent surprises" and should not be planned for nor relied upon to make the city better.

3) Finally, there's the matter of a good city growth rate. In Civ2, my style of play dictated a need for 10 cities planted by 1 AD. Now, obviously, that's absurd in Civ4 as maintenance costs would be through the roof and the standard map size would mean you probably controlled most of a continent. But then, what would you think of as an 'average' growth rate? What goal should I set to try and achieve, say 3 cities? Or if that's too subjective, how hard should I push to get a 2nd city settled?

For standardizing it a little, assume I am playing Tokugawa on Noble, standard size and speeded continents map. Tokugawa because neither he nor Japan have special abilities tilted towards the opening game, and Noble because I don't like to learn with handicaps. They too easily become crutches for me.

Thanks to any who reply.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

At a bare minimum, you need to prioritize food resources - I'll tend not to settle early cities without at least one. Two is better but you can't always get 2. There are exceptions such as claiming resources and whatnot but I'll not overwhelm you just yet.

You should avoid settling cities with lots of plains/desert/etc but if you can settle a city that otherwise would have less food or miss an important resource like iron/copper then having a couple won't kill you - it won't matter for most of the game to have 3 desert tiles for example - that only hurts you once your city is more than size 16.

More important is the concept of specialization - I suggest you read the strategy article on that in the article subforum - as knowledge of it will help you with city placement also.

 

[CCRunner]

You should try to have as many cities as you can support by 1 AD as well as all other times. Usually around six.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

3) Finally, there's the matter of a good city growth rate. In Civ2, my style of play dictated a need for 10 cities planted by 1 AD. Now, obviously, that's absurd in Civ4 as maintenance costs would be through the roof and the standard map size would mean you probably controlled most of a continent. But then, what would you think of as an 'average' growth rate? What goal should I set to try and achieve, say 3 cities? Or if that's too subjective, how hard should I push to get a 2nd city settled?

You want your second city settled as soon as you can after your capital grows to size 4/5 - chopping forests at that point to get it quickly. First priority is to work the highly productive bonus tiles around your city. Then get out more workers and settlers as fast as you can.

I will usually settle city three straight after city two. The more cities you have the more production you will have. One city can only build one thing at a time and limits you a lot. The only time I will delay the third city is if I am in a wonder race and I will only be in a wonder race if I am sure I will still be able to claim land - either because I am isolated or because the AI is a long way away.

From then on settle cities as fast as your economy can stand it. With wonders like the Great Lighthouse to back my economy I've gotten to as many as 13 cities by 1AD. Typical number is probably around 7.

You can have as many cities as you like - but they must be good cities. Expanding too rapidly and having four size one cities and no workers to improve their tiles will kill your economy because the size one cities are a net drain. So you need to stagger your settlements and make sure that you have enough workers to get your new cities productive quickly.

With organized leaders you can push your expansion faster. With financial even more so.

 

[Lord Chambers]

Dont' worry about the long term productivity of a city. Just like in Civ2, 50% of the game you'll be working less than 10 tiles. Therefor having deserts and tundra in your city's radius is no worry.

What needs to be in the city's radius is food. Food can be converted into shields at absurd levels early in the game, and once you have the happiness and health resources to grow large cities it will facilitate growth. Food.

Some resources require Calendar or Monarchy to improve. You can saftely ignore these resources during the early land-grab. On noble there isn't a huge land grab so this piece of advice might make you flouder, but once you move up to Emperor you'll be happy you let other enemies settle them for you. Because you'll be taking their cities with units you built from food and mines.

 

[Bleys]

The proven method to beat this kind of game used to be very simple: 1 city with 10-pop works 11 tiles (10 citizens + 1 city tile), but 10 cities of 1-pop works 20 tiles (10 citizens + 10 city tiles).

Take that theory and toss it RIGHT OUT the window, heh.

You need to adjust to less cities, and get them growing bigger. This means food is the MOST IMPORTANT factor (as has been said, but is worth repeating). Get as many resource tiles in your city BFCs as you can, but make sure you have the food. There is such a thing as too much food, as well. If you have 4 food resources, you can split that into 2 cities if there are other strong tiles in those areas.

Now, by "strong tiles" I mean more than just having a resource. Any riverside tile is "strong". I would rather have a city with 2 food, and no other resource tiles, but 16 riverside grassland tiles, than a city with no food and lots of resources. Rivers are the powerhouses of this game, so look for city placements that work every single tile touching every single river you see. Sure, in the early game, they dont look like much, those puny cottages, those crummy watermills, etc, but trust me, they will be incredible later on. Good city placements involve more than an ability to grab resources, it involves "Vision". You have to be able to see that city in the future, with Towns instead of cottages or jungle, with Watermills instead of riverside forested plains. With workshops instead of lame plains that touch nothing.

Since you will be forced to run with less cities for a long time, you need to place them carefully, no more "this looks good" like we used to do in Civ II or SMAC, heh. I know the feeling, I had dozens of "this looks good" cities in those games. Now you need strong spots. You cannot settle ALL the spots right away either, so its a good idea to found cities that cut-off chunks of land that you can settle later. Once you reach certain milestones in the game that support your economy, you can go ahead and fill-in those spots you saved. Currency (+1 trade routes per city, ability to build Markets), Code of Laws (can build Courthouses), etc are good milestones to grab a couple more cities.

Also, remember, for a large part of the game, (and one of the most important parts) you will only be able to work about half of the tiles in a given city, so if you have 10 strong tiles, a few mediocre ones, and a few unworkable tiles (desert, peaks, ice) you can go quite far with that city before you run out of productive tiles to work, and if the city has solid food sources, excess citizens can be put to work as Specialists instead of working a tile.

So food is king. Other resources are Queen (certain ones, like Gold and Gems, are also close to king, heh), and Rivers are Royal Family. Dont be afraid to raze a worthless Barb or AI city, and move your own settler into the area later to settle a "better" tile, heck, dont be afraid to raze a city if you cant afford to keep it, and re-settle it when you can in the exact same spot if you wish, when you can afford it. There are a lot of strong game walkthroughs, strategy articles and guides, etc, that will help you out with things like this. Sisuitil has a very powerful guide, and he plays RPC games where he describes his moves with great detail. There are also quite a few Series type games where a number of people play from the same exact start, and report back on their choices and progress. Stuff like that can teach you a LOT about this game, seeing what others did, where they put cities, where they didnt, and how it worked out for them. Reading through some of those threads (Nobles Club, Lonely Hearts, etc) can really help you out. You dont have to play the old ones all the way, download a game, build a bunch of cities, then go back and see where others built theirs, and compare.

Good luck, and welcome to the addiction!

 

[silverbullet]

One more things I had to get rid of civ2 habbits: overlap is good.
For most of the game your cities will not be very big due to health/happiness limitation, so overlap is not a big problem and sometimes desirable.

This is especially good when you use whipping (slavery), since half the time your cities will be too small to work all their tiles.

Another common trick is to build cities that overlap your capital, and build many cottages around the capital (especially good for riverside capitals). When the cottages produce 1,2, or 3 commerce per turn, let the satellite cities work them. Once they mature, let the capital work them. Make sure to get a greate scientist and build academy in the capital, and run bureaucracy to get 50% extra commerce there.

Other tips: farms and food resources +granary +slavery are better for production than mines. In the early game this is how you should produce in most cities (grow->whip). The capital is usually an exception since you want to focus it on commerce.

 

[Chris Stalis]

Good luck, and welcome to the addiction!

The sentiment towards my future sleepless nights is appreciated

Ok, so I've seen everyone here make mention of how food is absurdly powerful, and since posting this thread, I've done some very whip heavy games, usually until around 1 AD. I knew after my very first playthrough of the game that slavery was powerful, but now I'm very, very much liking it even more. So, on to my next two curiosities:

4) Forest chopping. Personally, I hate it. Forests provide health, an extra hammer in early game, 2 extra hammers in late game w/ Lumbermill+RR, and essentially let you turn a regular grassland into a mined hill sans minerals. Yet many threads in the strategies discuss chopping not just as a good idea, but as an almost necessary one. Why is the short term payoff considered so favorable?

5) Workshops. With all this talk about food, it sounds like these little guys are underutilized, perhaps even a bad idea unless they're built for your hammer city. Are they something I should toy with at this stage? Please note also that I'm not inclined toward the State Property civic, as my experiences suggest that trade routes via the Free Market are more valuable.

Again, thank you for the comments and insight. I'm already starting to apply suggestions from this thread to my games. Maybe one of these days, I'll even go crazy and discover gunpowder

 

[silverbullet]

Chris, are you playing BTS or basic CIV4? It matters for workshops.

Forest chopping is essential to keep up with the AI on higher levels. With a few workers you can chop a wonder in a few turns (especially with the right resource for 2x production) or you can raise an army quickly (especially good for axe rush).

The hammer bonus in early game is NOT valuable. As a general rule of thumb, your cities should almost never work unimproved tiles. If you can work a forest for 2F 1H, you better use that citizen to work a cottage. After 30 turns you get 2F 3C. If you prefer to whip a lot, work a farm. The extra 1 food translates to more hammers than the extra 1H with slavery.

Workshops are great in BTS after guilds and chemistry. I am not sure about regular civ4.
With caste system you can get 1F 4H or 0F 5H tiles, beating any mine. And you don't have to be in state property to use them. Once you have biology your farms will support more workshops, and if manage to get the sushi corporation you don't even need that many farms.

State property is useful when you war a lot and have a huge land, spanning accross more than 1 landmass. The distance maintenance is reduced to 0 is SP.

 

[Joshua368]

4) Forest chopping. Personally, I hate it. Forests provide health, an extra hammer in early game, 2 extra hammers in late game w/ Lumbermill+RR, and essentially let you turn a regular grassland into a mined hill sans minerals. Yet many threads in the strategies discuss chopping not just as a good idea, but as an almost necessary one. Why is the short term payoff considered so favorable?

Forest chopping certainly is not bad, it's another way to speed production along, expecially during the 10-turn gap between whipping (so as to not stack unhappiness).

For removing a great production tile... your main production should come from hills. If the forest is on a hill, then chopping it at some point is a no brainer, as a mined hill is better than a forested hill.

Grasslands are great tiles so chopping down forests to get them is usually fine, unless you really need the forest production (in which case you probably have plenty of grassy fields already). The main thing with grasslands is they make great cottage real estate, get as many of those as you can!

Plains and tundra forests are the only ones I really think twice about cutting down in a time of need, as the tiles beneath them suck. You might want to leave forests there because you won't be able to do much to the tile once its cut down.

As for the health bonus, it depends. If you have no fresh water or a lot of floodplains, than yes it may make sense to keep forests for health. But usually (health resources tend to be common, plus fresh water) the happy cap comes into play before health cap, so it won't hinder you much.

Note that forests give you .5 health each, so if you have 3 forests you might as well cut 1 down, you'll get the same health benefit. Also forests can slowly regrow onto unworked barren tiles, so they won't be gone forever until you farm/cottage everywhere.

 

[Chris Stalis]

Chris, are you playing BTS or basic CIV4? It matters for workshops.

I should have mentioned this in the OP. I'm playing BTS, mostly because I like more frills for my money

Workshops are great in BTS after guilds and chemistry. I am not sure about regular civ4.
With caste system you can get 1F 4H or 0F 5H tiles, beating any mine. And you don't have to be in state property to use them. Once you have biology your farms will support more workshops, and if manage to get the sushi corporation you don't even need that many farms.

Ok, but that sounds like midgame. Would it be wiser to farm first on those squares and then workshop it, or build the workshop and let my population grow into it?

State property is useful when you war a lot and have a huge land, spanning accross more than 1 landmass. The distance maintenance is reduced to 0 is SP.

Ah, yes... I played a number of Pangea maps when I was doing late game stuff, and so never experienced the intercontinental maintenance tax.

Plains and tundra forests are the only ones I really think twice about cutting down in a time of need, as the tiles beneath them suck. You might want to leave forests there because you won't be able to do much to the tile once its cut down.

See, I'm inclined to farm pure plains, but I'm also not so great at specializing plots yet, so that might be a bad idea. I think if I had the 2 food boosts, I'd be able to handle workshopping it.

Note that forests give you .5 health each, so if you have 3 forests you might as well cut 1 down, you'll get the same health benefit. Also forests can slowly regrow onto unworked barren tiles, so they won't be gone forever until you farm/cottage everywhere.

Actually, I believe I read that the health bonus is .4, but I have no idea how the game handles rounding.

 

[silverbullet]

I should have mentioned this in the OP. I'm playing BTS, mostly because I like more frills for my money

Me too

Ok, but that sounds like midgame. Would it be wiser to farm first on those squares and then workshop it, or build the workshop and let my population grow into it?

I almost never build workshops in early game. It's best to spam them after guidls+chemistry or at least 1 of them +caste system.
I would build them sometimes in early game if I am in caste system and there is no other way to get production in a food rich city. Normally I am in slavery in early game so farms are better.

See, I'm inclined to farm pure plains, but I'm also not so great at specializing plots yet, so that might be a bad idea. I think if I had the 2 food boosts, I'd be able to handle workshopping it.

I would suggest that you ALMOST NEVER (never say never in civ) work ANY plain in early game. The exception would be a cottage on a riverside plain. I can't stress enough the importance of working GREAT tiles only. Farmed plains give you 1 extra hammer for 1 extra citizen. It's better to work a grassland cottage.
If you city is so big that it can only work plains, run specialists instead.

Actually, I believe I read that the health bonus is .4, but I have no idea how the game handles rounding.

It's 0.5 in BTS.

 

[JackOfClubs]

4) Forest chopping. Personally, I hate it. Forests provide health, an extra hammer in early game, 2 extra hammers in late game w/ Lumbermill+RR, and essentially let you turn a regular grassland into a mined hill sans minerals. Yet many threads in the strategies discuss chopping not just as a good idea, but as an almost necessary one. Why is the short term payoff considered so favorable?

I generally don't do as much chopping as other players, but there are some times when it is definitely a good idea.

Where to Chop:
1. Forested hills. There is no down side to this. A forest adds 1P but a mine adds 2P so there is a net gain even without the ~30P you get from chopping.
2. Riverside grasslands. This basically trades 1P for 1C, since the forest hides the bonus commerce you get from a river. This is a little less of a no-brainer than point 1 since you may need the production more than the commerce at some points in the game, but the ~30P you get from chopping usually makes this a fairly straighforward trade. Plus you get to make a farm or cottage on the tile, which is usually more important than the 1P.

This thread lists some other rules of thumb, but I don't necessarily agree with them.

What to Chop:
1. Settlers
2. Workers
3. Wonders
4. Early Infrastructure (ie Granary, Barracks, Library, maybe Courthouse in mid-game).
5. Other buildings or units only in an emergency.

When to Chop:
Usually only in the early game. After Medieval/Renaissance periods there are usually better ways to speed production and your cities generally are developed enough that it shouldn't be necessary. But this is my preference and other people differ greatly.

5) Workshops. With all this talk about food, it sounds like these little guys are underutilized, perhaps even a bad idea unless they're built for your hammer city. Are they something I should toy with at this stage? Please note also that I'm not inclined toward the State Property civic, as my experiences suggest that trade routes via the Free Market are more valuable.

I generally ignore workshops until the Industrial era since they are not much use before that period. A workshop built on any flat terrain is equivalent to a forested hill on the same terrain which is usually considered unimproved land. A workshop on a hill is worse than a mine since you lose 1F. Once the various technologies and civics are in place, workshops can be very good for production cities assuming you have enough food to work them.

 

[civvver]

Another thing to realize is the difficulties on civ4 are WAAAY different than civ2, far more polar. Settler is ridiculously easy, while deity is impossibly hard. Try playing a few on settler just to get the concepts down, then I'd suggest playing on warlord until you can comfortable win games, then noble (the "standard" level) /prince.

In civ2 you could rapidly expand and overcome the difficulty level cus the AI never expanded as fast. In civ4 that's just not possible.