Build Worker, or Warrior first?

[omnimirage]

Assuming we're not playing as Inca: when is it better to start off building a worker, and then when is it better to build a Warrior instead and grow to two population, to then go off to steal a Worker?

 

[coanda]

I've always looked at planning on a worker-steal as a win-harder gamble. If it works, it really, really works. But it might not work - you might not have an AI neighbor somewhere close enough, or the AIs worker movement might end up problematic, or you might send your warrior in the wrong direction initially, or whatever - and then you're stuck without a worker at all for a long time and have crippled your game.

It might be different in multiplayer, or in a hall of fame high score attempt, or on really weird / non-standard map settings (my knowledge on those is limited), but in standard settings with the goal of winning the game I almost never open warrior-first. Worker first usually, occasionally work boat first. Once in a blue moon maybe warrior first if it's a really awkward start where the worker would simply have nothing worth building for a few turns after it finished due to resources and techs.

 

[sampsa]

You should start with a warrior very close to 0% of the time.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

It might be different in multiplayer, or in a hall of fame high score attempt

Yeah the basic question is are you playing this game out regardless or are you throwing it way if you don't get a worker steal?

 

[lymond]

I consider working stealing more of a bonus activity, but not in lieu of getting that first worker asap. There's so many variables to worker stealing to rely on what could be a tremendous delay to the most important part of the game. And if you are having to build a warrior first then forget about it...you are talkin' ages before you will smell a worker ...relatively speaking. And on lower levels - forget which level AIs start with a free worker(IMM I think) - you have to wait for them to build one, IF they build one first.

 

[Anysense]

Assuming we're not playing as Inca: when is it better to start off building a worker, and then when is it better to build a Warrior instead and grow to two population, to then go off to steal a Worker?

When you know that you have close neighbours and play Marathon. Otherwise it is too much of a gamble, unless you play for HoF and - as @Noble Zarkon said - can simply try another map if you don't get what you need.

 

[shakabrade]

There was a map recently where going for warrior first made most sense. We had no starting techs to work the food and you needed Fishing and Mining before BW and therefore chopping was far in the future as well. No use for a worker for some time. I decided to go for a warrior first probably for the first time in 5 years. In general, I think it can only happen in sea starts with no Fishing. It is actually a good idea to consider a warrior first as in the seafood starts, you waste hammers on workboats and neglect a fogbust. One additional and early fogbusting unit can totally change the barb situation. Warrior to capture a worker is a decision to be made on T0, T1, with no info. Pure gamble.

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/darius-fractal-map.668757/

 

[krikav]

To go warrior first with the intent of go and steal a worker is something I have probably never done.
But there are two situations where I go warrior before worker, that I can think of, on the top of my head.

One situation is when you start w/o fishing, but you want to go workboat first.
Sometimes then it does work out growing to pop2 on a warrior before starting the workboat.

The other situation is if you have a really hammer-heavy start. Like if you settle on top of plains hill stone combined with an AH resource like pigs.
Then it can make sense to build a warrior or two before starting the worker, as there will be some time until you unlock the techs, that the worker will need.

Workerstealing for me is purely an opportunistic thing. Whenever I have a early warrior (starting one or extra) and find myself nearby a AI city for scouting and the AI places a worker in a convenient position then I judge the situation and sometimes I try steal it.
Almost always when I do however, I tend to regret it.

 

[drewisfat]

My problem with warrior first in seafood only starts is that settler first is a thing. In shaka's map, you're at the end of a long peninsula, which is very common in seafood only starts. There are no barb concerns in such a layout, in fact that map is one tile wide at a point, so scout can stop barbs from reaching capital. Then it's just a matter of doing a dance with scout/settler to found a 2nd city safely enough. Settler first isn't just an efficiency argument, but a countermeasure to preventing an AI from trapping you in a tiny peninsula with unknown strategics.

Alternatively that map has wheat visible with a logical t0 scout move. So settle 3S, worker->warrior->settler->wb with techs AH->TW->fish. Grab seafood with 2nd city instead. We'll even be pleasantly surprised by horse with Persia.

I think warrior first is very close to 0% indeed, unless RB/hof.

 

[gavenkoa]

Almost always when I do however, I tend to regret it.

Why is so?

Are there techniques to cease fire and restore relations?

I think it depends on the leader. Franklin didn't mind worker stealing in some my games. In 10T or a bit later he is no longer refusing to talk. I did stealing twice and we were trade partners for the rest of the game.

 

[Zavior]

Are there techniques to cease fire and restore relations?

You can use use agressive AI, however this is a bit gamey and not in line with the normal games usually posted here.

 

[krikav]

It's just that whenever I try to do a nice opportunistic workersteal, I tend to get mired down into a long drawn out war with the AI I stole worker from.
Either I have to build units to defend, or I have to build a extra settler to gift away a city for a peacedeal.
And when all is said and done, I have screwed up diplo, possibly with more than the AI I stole the worker from, and I have also set my neighbour back abit making them less likely to build some shiny wonders for me to take later on, and also they develop their land slower making the possible land to conquer less valuable.

I'm not saying that it's bad, I just say that whenever I do it, I tend to regret it.

 

[sampsa]

Worker stealing is so much better on immortal compared to deity. Getting enough power to end the war is easier, the AI is much less of a threat later and so on.

 

[crashmon]

It is interesting that @Lain in his videos builds a warrior first about 30% of the time... But then he is deliberatly playing evil maps, so I guess thinking in his games has to change.

Not Deity (as I don't think anybody has beat this setting on Deity), but assuming Immortal Always War, would this change thinking. I know Always war is not standard, but in this case an extra early warrior might be a consideration?

 

[sampsa]

It is interesting that @Lain in his videos builds a warrior first about 30% of the time...

What? No way. I've seen every game he has posted.

 

[Nick723]

It is interesting that @Lain in his videos builds a warrior first about 30% of the time... But then he is deliberatly playing evil maps, so I guess thinking in his games has to change.

Not Deity (as I don't think anybody has beat this setting on Deity), but assuming Immortal Always War, would this change thinking. I know Always war is not standard, but in this case an extra early warrior might be a consideration?

I don’t think Always War changes the equation either, at least not the way I play it.

Sure, choking AIs early is important on Always War but warriors are no good for that on immortal. The best you can hope for is an opportunistic worker steal. The early phase of Always War games is almost extra important - it’s the only time all game you have to peacefully expand, set up your defensive positions and claim key strategic resources. So you need a fast start and that normally means worker first.

 

[crashmon]

What? No way. I've seen every game he has posted.

I just reviewed a couple of vids where I saw this, he never finished the warrior, seems he put some turns into it, then switched so the worker would be ready when a tech was ready. Looks like he did this when building a worker would leave the worker with nothing to do.

For instance, he had a start with Plains cows, and 3 Seafood tiles but none of them in the first ring. He was russia so did not have AH or Agri or Fishing, so he put turns into a warrior and a barracks. Link below

Again this was a very weird start on a difficult map (he seems to like these). So it was very situational, but it can happen.

Anybody else but Lain would probably have re-rolled the map

 

[sampsa]

Ah. For me, "warrior first" means finishing the warrior.

 

[crashmon]

Sometimes watching Lain you can actually get the wrong idea, as he playes on very difficult maps with weird situations, it can drive him to go down a path which is just not applicable for 90% of standard games.

We should all watch his vids as they are really educational but I think you need at least a basic knowledge of Civ to properly follow them (ie be winning at least at Monarch level, and understand all the fundamentals).

You sort of need to have played the optimal way for most maps first so you understand why and how he has had to adapt to get the most from his vids.

 

[shakabrade]

From my point of view, Lain's game is pretty standard with focus on not dying (a bit stronger preference for self teching the Archery). What you can learn from watching his videos is that he makes decisions for based on SOMETHING. And almost eveything you do in the first 50T is an important decision. He does not just skip turns like new players do.