Building orders in the early going

[Shortyman]

Keep on building settlers and building cities until there is no room left on the map. Every city of mine builds at settler first thing so you can expand your empire early and get more territory. Nobody will attack you unless you are a jerk to them. You do not need a military until they get a military. So just build settlers and a few workers here and there and you will have a big empire in no time.

 

[soul_warrior]

hi,
1- expand like mad
2- forget temples, use the lux bar if needed
3- get all those bonous tiles worked
4- use core cities as unit pumps (veteran ofcourse), outer cities for basing your army and building catapults
5- on coastal cities - harbour and galleys, get o foot hold on every continent you can, you need it later when those aztecs start annoying you.
6- dont do wonders. let the other civs do 'em, then take em.

 

[QuinEd]

2- forget temples, use the lux bar if needed

I personally will build a temple or library (depending on what civ I am playing) in almost all of my cities for the culture benefit. I think it is especially important on your border towns to prevent culture flipping.

 

[Octavius]

I second that. Temples and librarys are really useful in expansion because they net more territory to be worked early, and then you can just repeat this as much as possible. I don't profess to be a master strategist at all, but i would say that sun tzu's is really useful, especially if you have a spare leader hanging around. you can rush the wonder, then build loads of vet units and seriously prod buttock.

 

[Tomoyo]

You won't need Temples or Libraries if you build you cities with three tiles in-between. Any more usually wastes too many tiles.

Sun Tzu's is great and all, but strictly speaking, it pays for itself after 15 barracks, so you could have used that production to build some infrastructure (early Medieval Age is a great time to build infrastructure) and the only reason you want Sun Tzu's is when you are going for continental conquest, because of the instant barracks in captured cities.

 

[QuinEd]

You won't need Temples or Libraries if you build you cities with three tiles in-between. Any more usually wastes too many tiles.

Well, I have recently gone to a cxxxc placement. However, after making adjustments for hills, mountains, bonus', and other terrain features, I find my cxxxc placement is only an average. Sometimes it is cxxc or cxxxxc as I adjust the placement according to terrain. And, at the end of the expansion phase, few cities will have a complete 21-tile radius.

As a result, one of the first improvements in most every city is something to expand the cultural border. Please don't misunderstand me, though. I am not building temples when I could be building settlers. The expansion of the cultural border, while I believe important, is a lower priority to expansion (or even defending your border from the Germans next door).

 

[allin1joe]

Like always it depends on the situation. I am just starting out on Monarch, and I decided to concentrate on expansion as much as possible. Well, I concentrated on it so much that when an Arab warrior decided to cut through, I couldn't really say no. Well, the bumb went right for one of my empty cities, declared war and took it.

So yes, concentrate on expanding but don't ignore your military. Also, things like temples, granaries and the like are good things to build while your city's population is recovering (if it can't sustain the rate of popping settlers/workers). I NEVER produce a military unit from a city that does not have barracks.

Someone in this thread stated their first build in a city was a settler. Mine is a worker unless the worker would be done before the city is due to grow. If that's the case, I'll build the cheapest improvement first, then a worker. I find it important to get that city productive faster, and spitting out a worker first will accomplish that.

 

[QuinEd]

I NEVER produce a military unit from a city that does not have barracks.

I usually have some warriors hanging around to deal with those pesky barbarians. I rarely have a barracks in place when I am producing these guys. They are also good for exploration. I prefer to use scouts for exploration, but as you know they require an expansionist civ. The horsemen are also excellent for exploration and early defense. But, for some reason, whenever I get the tech early enough to use it, the horses are not available to build the doggone things.

You are 100% correct about workers. My game improved so much once I started building these in-mass. I used to be very slow and methodical about building workers (and settlers, too). Now, I just crank them out as fast as I can and there is always something for them to do.

 

[soul_warrior]

@ allin1joe - you are right. building those cheap improvement when recovering from a settler is the way to go. also, i build 1st thing in a city is a worker. let the older established cities build improvements and troops.

another note - i find that in a CxxxC layout the AI will rarely build inbetween. so those culture expanding improves can wait a bit, lets say a library, or a temple for a quick growing city (that happy face can save you a bundle sometimes). but i will build them eventually.

 

[Abaddon]

i slap towns on every available bit of map, and then rush temples... good for inducing flipping from other nations citys! Also, even the crappiest village, locked at 1 pop can be sold to rival civs for a tasty bonus... and u know full well it was worth nothing to you.(they always want to flip and corruption is insane)

 

[QuinEd]

Also, even the crappiest village, locked at 1 pop can be sold to rival civs for a tasty bonus

I can never get an AI to buy a city from me. Not even for 1 piece of gold. What kind of deals are you getting?

 

[Arathorn]

@slozenger: You really should update to the latest patch. Such exploits (not that just selling a city is bad, but there are lots of ways to really exploit it) aren't available then.

Arathorn

 

[Abaddon]

as far as i was aware i did have the lastest patch.. i thought theres only been one released in a age anyway?

i get better deals the bigger the map/more successful everyone is.. but 20-->40 gold a turn isnt unusual. Of course sometimes noones intersted/gives very little.. but they are always good for giving away as a peace offering.


And how is that an exploit? surely selling off citys etc for cash/peace is fair?

 

[Arathorn]

Selling cities hasn't been allowed since about patch 1.07 of vanilla. If there are cities on one side of the negotiating table, the other side can only be a peace treaty. Else, the AI will not accept it. Been that way for a LONG time.

The reason is that people would sell the AI a city for incredible amounts, then attack and recapture the city immediately -- or would sell the AI a city with EXTREME cultural pressure and just wait for it to flip back and then resell. The AI never could figure out that defending a city is an important part of its value. The coders just removed the option...a LONG time ago.

Lots of people have argued that making the AI better would have been a better solution. I think pretty much everyone agrees, even the coders, but it wasn't something they were willing/able to devote time to. So, it's just off the table.

Arathorn

 

[Abaddon]

oh.. well i got the patch only a month or so off the official website.. how odd. Dont know hoe ive been managing it. Never thought of those exploits before! Dont plan to use them...

i know all "cheats" say it, but i figured selling a city off, and maknig no attempts to reclaim it.. merely using it as a bargaining tool were fair.