City Placement Basic Tips

Joker123

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
24
Hi.
I have some doubts that maybe a lot of people have when it comes to City placement.
What are the best traits we have to look for when settling a city?

For exemple

1. Should it always be placed on a hill, if possible, to gain the extra defense :spear: or should we avoid it to harness more production :hammers:.

2. Is a river near the city a "must have" or is strategic placement more important (coastal cities, Maximize land grab, choke points, blocking access to further land by AI, etc.).
 
There are 3 things to go for when placing a city.

1. Food.
2. Food.
3. Food....

Everything else is secondary, unless you are doing some wierd warrior/axe rush...
 
whether you need the hill for production depends on how many hills you have, and if you have food to work them.

If you have 8 hills in your radius and not much surplus food, it won't reduce your production to settle on one of the hills.


As to defense, of course it is better to have +25% than to not have it. But it is not necessary unless you think there will be fighting there, like if it is a border city or if there are a good amount of barbarians. A hill can make the difference between a warrior being able to easily defend an archer, or not.
 
Perimeter cities against tough neighbors, hills are nice. So is settling behind rivers.

Grabbing lots of special sources help.

Food isn't the only thing. However, remember you can't work tiles if you don't have the food. Especially for production cities, count the food excess. 2 from your city, 1 from grassland tiles with fresh water, 2 from flood plains, and (xi-2) from each food source, where xi is the food yield. Now subtract 1 for each grassland hill and 2 for each plain hill without a resource. If you don't have enough food, you will be limited, and you might think of shifting your city and splitting up the hills.

Commerce, you just need a lot of flat land, and one food source helps.
 
IMO, it kind of depends on the purpose of the city. Generally speaking, though, Food is at the top of the list, followed by production or commerce potential, depending. With a Financial leader, I might swap a bit of production for commerce, while with an Industrious leader I might swing more toward the hammers. But Food is at the top of the list. If you can't feed the people, then you aren't getting either of the others.
 
So this is my conclusion so far:

Food is a top priority, without it cities dont grow, GP can't be used and tiles can't be worked. Thus,Cities near rivers and flood plains are prime targets. Special resources should be sought after when placing a city.

Coastal is a plus.

And using hills AND rivers (forcing the enemy to cross them) are stretegies that should be used in cities that will have an important defensive role. Otherwise just use the production benefit of a hill if few are available.

I dont like to work with RULES and restrictions, but these seem like very good pieces of advice that will help me in my city placement questions.

Thank you very much. :)
 
Coastal is often not a plus unless there's seafood, or you have the GLighthouse for semi-free expansion along the coast. Plain water tiles are bad long-term since they can't be improved. No problem of course if you can claim all the inland tiles later. Coastal is often a good GP Farm location, couple of seafood and couple of land food plus farmable grass on estuary.

You want fresh water where possible, and on river is better than lake. Fresh = extra health, and river = can build a Levee. Health will be your main problem in the later game if you industrialize.

For first cities, if at all possible, place them in the direction of nearby AIs--grabbing good resources and/or blocking off the AI. If you don't grab these locations quickly, the AI will--whereas the AI will rarely settle behing your front lines, so you can settle those spots later. Use SHenge, Monuments, religion or Creative trait to pop the borders.

For my 2nd and 3rd cities, I'm looking for one food-rich and one hammer-rich ideally. Food becomes Settler and Worker farm, and later maybe GP farm [if no better location], while Hammer builds units.

Yes, food is the #1 priority. It's much easier to get production out of food cities [via Slavery whip] than to get food=growth out of any other kind of city. I rate production as the second priority, and commerce potential as the third--it's easier to get "income" from a hammer city [build Wealth] than production from a commerce city.

I find that approach to be more flexible than more 'streamlined' ones, you have more options as the game circumstances become clearer and you need to change plans.

Once you have a bit of an empire going [say 10+ cities], you should be able to specialize a bit more, since you're starting to have enough cities to support several alternative paths.

Of course, if you have a pre-determined play style [eg cottage spam or attack attack], this doesn't really apply. I prefer to stay flexible until around Liberalism, which is the point where you're forced to select a path ahead.

If you have psycho AIs nearby, be aware that getting touching borders will make it more likely they'll attack you, so you might move your blocker cities back a tile or two if you want a quieter life. Build Walls in such cities!

Btw, if you're targeting an early religion, you may want to delay settling your 3rd city a bit if it would be good for the religion to found in your 2nd city--which it will, never in the capital. That can be great if that 2nd city is an AI blocker [the 5 culture really pops it quickly], or alternatively a good site for Wall Street--gives the option to spread the religion and build a shrine.
 
Coastal is often not a plus unless there's seafood, or you have the GLighthouse for semi-free expansion along the coast. Plain water tiles are bad long-term since they can't be improved. No problem of course if you can claim all the inland tiles later. Coastal is often a good GP Farm location, couple of seafood and couple of land food plus farmable grass on estuary.

Yeah, water tiles aren't that good. But without coastal cities you can't produce ships.. Coastal access also gives some health via harbor, which is a plus. So generally coastal is a plus, but you should settle so that you have as few water tiles as possible.
 
I find that my city needs to have access to as many desert and peaks as possible, for obvious reasons.
 
Yeah, water tiles aren't that good. But without coastal cities you can't produce ships.. Coastal access also gives some health via harbor, which is a plus. So generally coastal is a plus, but you should settle so that you have as few water tiles as possible.

Unless you're Willem, and then it doesn't matter.
 
Unless you're Willem, and then it doesn't matter.

Especially in those games where you can wait on Astronomy. Colossus and Moai and dike (and lighthouse, of course)....
Then add a Golden Age for 2:food: 3 :hammers: 5 :commerce: from a boring coast tile.

OK, OK, so it's situational. :)
 
Isn't it nice how Willem can change a nice little coastal square into a US mini-town on flat grasslands?
 
Noted.

The more i learn, the more i see that adaptability and practicallity are very important for success.

normally, at the start of a game, i cottege spam like there is no tomorrow, leaving only enough food for the city to grow. Now im starting to play more with GP's and i notice that isn't always the best way to do things.

PS: Good thing you guys pointed out the coastal city issue, very interesting.
 
I find that it is VERY useful to have at least one high production costal city. Find me a site with costal access, a fish, a secondary food resource, and lots of hills, and I will show you my West Point city. Such a site will crank out almost my entire navy.
 
Back
Top Bottom