Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by politude, Jul 31, 2008.
Build a Courthouse and then Spies for the rest of the game.
Sorry... it looks like deer, but its just another furs (the furs 2 W of the city)...
It looks so deer-like though!! But the commerce bonus sorta gives it away...
Also, you can't chain irrigate tundra, if the tundra is not next to fresh water already... you can't build ANY improvements on non-fresh water tundra (making it a little better than desert, which you can't build any improvements, full stop.)
However, you CAN build lumber-mills on the forest tiles, further improving the production bonus... (But that A) Comes late in the game, and B) can't be worked anyway)
So until you get sushi, that city is stagnated at size 2.
It was said earlier that I shouldve settled by the iron, at that point the iron was not visible if that gives any clarification.
Well I would agree on your first point IF there was sufficient food, BUT there isn't, as has been established repeatedly, even by the OP. However, it is still a fine city site due to the excellent resources.
If a food corp wouldn't return an investment in this city (I assume you are referring to my original suggestion), it won't return an investment anywhere else. This city will never have all the commerce multipliers, but the fact that it is small will make corp maintenance lower.
I wouldn't worry about it. Any city in this whole area would be a junker as far as commerce/hammers are concerned. But the city is paying for itself, and the resources easily justify its existence. If you found a food corp later in the game, it will grow, and make you a little bit extra, but build a courthouse first as corporate maintenance is a killer.
The only thing I would suggest is try to make your very early cities food productive, as expansion is critical in the beginning, and the capital needs all the help it can get.
You can't chain irrigate over thundra...
The mind boggles at the people saying this city wasn't worth it. Claiming 2 happiness resources so early in the game is very very worth it. Getting bigger cities before calendar and before monarchy gives you an advantage that lasts the entire game. Plus the city will pay for itself just working those 2 tiles and with trade routes. Plus he can sell the extra resources for cash or trade them for other resources he's lacking.
Plus there's always the chance for positive random events, like the one that gives you a deer resource, or the one that lets you get a great artist.
I think this is actually the better question here, "Is a city that claims 2 very early happiness resources worth it if it will never grow past size 2?"
I say "probably", but since we dont know the exact situation in this game its hard to say "definitely", but if he has 3 or 4 other cities, and its still pre-Iron Working, and those other cities get an extra 2 pop each pre-Calendar/Monarchy, its likely not a wasted city.
The 2nd part of the question is sort of "What could I have done differently to make it a better city, and what can I do with it now that its a done-deal?". Lots of discussion on that already, though.
I'd abandon it and hope the barbs take it, then take it back and raze it. Or maybe gift it to an AI if they'll have it,
I think the city is worth it, but two cities, one on each coast, might have been more worth it.
The city is built so it's moot to discuss where it should have been etc etc etc. But and early+2 happiness is big. especially since it can become +4 happiness with a market and forge. Silver is fairly rare so it has good trading value as do the furs. With mining inc, this city provides 3 resources for the corporation and also provides a backup source of iron in case of pilliaging. Definately worth the minimal upkeep. he can also spread religions there to gain gold if he has the shrine. Crappy little cities like this sre best for game long missionary spam or spy spam.
The thing here is to learn for next time. It has some uses, even if it always will contribute nothing more than the resources and act as a blocker for the AI.
The main lesson is the importance of food. My own game got far better when I learned to count the food appropriately and thus getting my cities at "prime" locations. But I'll still put up a fairly useless city from time to time for a few different reasons, claim an important resource or just act as a blocker city. This should not be done early though, not unless it's a vital resource that it'll claim. Putting such cities coastal is also a good idea, as the water will with a lighthouse allow for some growth and bring in a bit of commerce.
Though you are obviously right -- farmed Tundra is pathetic -- a Biology tundra farm equals a pre-Bio grassland farm. Yes, that's underwhelming for any normal city in the Bio era. But for those sites where you just, can't, get some desired resources without building deep in the tundra, a Bio tundra farm can get them back to a sputtering start, allowing them to at least another tundra cottage, or maybe giving them the extra half a specialist to take them up to another full specialist.
Depends on timing, though -- this really depends on chain-farming, and if you won't be seeing Bio for ages, then you might as well just use the riverside for a cottage in the first place, natch.
EDIT: You can't chain-irrigate tundra. You can't chain-irrigate tundra. You can't chain-irrigate tundra. You can't chain-irrigate tundra.
Food is waaaaaaaay too weak. You want to be working tiles and this city can't do it.
If there is no food available, then go with a coastal city - it will grow with a lighthouse, will have better trade routes, and can actually work some commerce tiles (which are halfway decent if you're financial). Such a city can also work ONE silver mine or that iron while not growing...and in the 3rd border pop would even have a beaver for . Much better game-long potential than the current site, though not great overall.
If you can trade resources for GPT though it does offset the # cities maintenance problems somewhat.
But still, this city is far from bad. I would settle this city any day. The only question is if I would do it this early. If I can get 5 resources in a city I don't care much about food. Let it be a junk city, but it will be a profitable junk city. It is easy to trade furs and silver for other resources. So in short, this city gives you 2 happy and an additional 2 happy/health if traded. Marble is also good to get bonusses on various buildings and can be traded later in the game for more happiness/health.
About the coastal city from TMIT, agree on that one. That way your city will be able to grow and still nicks most of the resources. Right now you could build a courthouse and a library. Work the two fur tiles and this city even brings in a bit of beakers.
I have to agree with Killroyan, this city is a worthwhile investment in the early game. Grabbing those resources is a great boost to the other cities in the empire and will eventually give +4 happiness (with forge and market) and there's several spares to trade for even more resources or sold for gold / turn.
Let's look at the economics. The settler to found the city cost 100 hammers and then a few 10s of worker turns were spent building roads and mines / camps. The city is repaying the hammer cost at 4 per turn (not a bad investment really). The city is currently producing 11 beakers + gold at a cost of 1.5 gold (so there's a clear profit every turn). When a courthouse is build it will produce another 2 EPs and limit any increase in the maintenance due to more cities in the empire (which is capped at 7 gold for emperor anyway, so 3.5 will be a maximum with a courthouse).
People who criticise this city are looking at it on the wrong basis. They are expecting every city to be productive or have high commerce, but cities have other main roles as well, including grabbing territory and resources (and this city does that extremely well). Given that this city adds 2 to the happiness thresholds of all other cities in the critical early game it can be said to be helping the empire more than some much bigger and more productive cities. You might go as far as to say that the "population" of this city is distributed around all the other cities that benefit from its +2 to +4 happiness boost ... then this city has the more population than any other
Conclusion: this city is a worthwhile investment by every measure. Maybe it was possible to position it better and achieve the same objective with more food, but frankly that would not add much as it never going to be a productive city in the tundra. The only counter argument I can see is that there might have been a better city to found at that time. But we'd need to study the OP's game in detail to decide if that was correct.
This is a good discussion as it forces us to examine some of the fundamental parts of the game in detail and look at them in different ways. I just wish I could guarantee to found a city like this early in every one of my games
Wow, your citizens are basically scraping the bark off the trees. Just hope that peak explodes into a volcano and destroys the city so you can relocate. In fact, you could probably settle 2 cities to split the happiness resources between them.
The number of cities in the empire is a big limiting factor for expansion, especially before you get Code of Laws. The reality of this manifests itself in both city maintenance and settler cost.
Even after you get Code of Laws, it's a big task to build a courthouse, especially with the very limited productivity the city has. By then, you've paid a significant amount of maintenance in both this city and other cities (because of the increased maintenance from an extra city).
There are two ways to look at this problem. 1) assume that this is an extra city, in addition to the other cities you would normally have. 2) assume that this city was settled instead of a different city.
For case 1), you're adding maintenance cost in all cities including this city itself, in exchange for 2 extra luxury resources. In the early game, it's counter-productive, since whipping is usually the dominant game mechanic that drives development -- and the side effects of whipping limit total pop count. High population is good only if you can profit from it, and paying excessive maintenance is not the way to make a short term profit (and long-term, there's no discussion either since culture pops from other cities would have grabbed the resources anyway).
For case 2), you're losing a big chunk of productivity in exchange for 2 extra luxury resources, in the best case. However, it could be just 1 extra resources, since that other city might be grabbing a resource itself. Just take a look at the city map -- none of those high-commerce tiles can be worked without starving the city!
In this situation, I would try to position a more productive city relative close to the resources, and hope that with a few border pops, I can grab the resources eventually. That's usually the best play.
you'll need a food corp.
that being said, obviously the city is profitable; I mean, silver is rare anyway(ok, you ain't industrious, so probably not a guaranteed forge in every city, but still) and fur obsoletes late enough. If you keep those 2 resources and sell the other 2 for in total, on average, 20 gpt along the game(starting with 4-5 at currency and going up to 15-20 gpt towards the end) obviously it's worth). That being said, since even those 1 tile island cities are worth in the end, if you do the math, the problem is however one of opportunity. Corinth is the 3rd city for greeks(I think); was this one really such a priority? Did you block someone with it? Because otherwise probably it could've wait... Look at the ai; even the ai doesn't plant their tundra cities start game.
I agree unclejj, but he could have just put it near the coast and got the same resources with MORE commerce :/.
Separate names with a comma.