City placement? Bonus question: Archers

[adricv]

Hello,

I was wondering how people chose to place their cities. It's my understanding that cities only have a single tile radius, no? So what's the best balance between trade, shields and food?

I thought it was a bit of a shame that there's no complexities in the terrain types but I guess this just makes the gameplay more streamlined.

Also, how do you manage to take cities in the early game when the AI has archer-spammed his cities? I fail to understand the combat mechanics other than the obvious overrun when you've got 5x the opponent's strength.

Archers in cities in early games make me mad

Incidentally, I'm playing the DS version of the game. Perhaps there's less subtleties in it than in the console versions.

 

[CivMonger]

Your cities expand another radius outwards if you build a courthouse in them. I thought the same thing too when I fired up my first learning game on chieften... As for balance of trade, shields, and food that depends on what you have and what you need. Food isn't a huge priority in my mind because you don't use it to support the population, only to grow more. 2 grassland should be enough for this.

As for archer spam, I've been building legions and forming armies with them (three legions together), and once I get mathematics I do the same with catapults. Its not foolproof, but its working for me on King at the moment.

Oh, I've won a game on chieften, warlord, and king (one a piece). Most of my civ experience is from Civ IV and not rev, so if somebody comes along in this thread after me and counters something I said, I would suspect they are right and I am wrong.

 

[cIV_khanh93]

well city specialization is pretty important, but theres no ned for lots of food. You want trade or hammers, i find trade to be MUCH more important. Best trade is from the sea. As for archers, might i have a suggestion? Go for an earlier rush. That or gain an aggressive tech lead and hit cats. Reallly the point is that you will lose some. Come prepared.

 

[Divaythsarmour]

I place my cities to get maximum benifit from resources. I might choose to change my tech path to get more benifit from those resources.

I wouldn't say that "there's no complexities in the terrain types." Each tile has it's value, just as in all the other Civ games. The only difference between Rev and IV is you're not building improvements on those tiles. You manipulate the tiles by sending population to work the tile and then modifying that work through the buildings you create in the cities. Obviously there's some manipulation with government civic choices as well. I would agree that the whole mechanism is less complex in Rev than in IV. But it still requires thought and planning in order to make good things happen.

One way to take cities in the early game is to prioritize HB (horseback..). The quickest way to do that is to settle in place, and put your population on sea tiles only (so that you're only producing research). You'll have HB on the next turn. Then switch your population over to working forests and start producing horsemen. You can use your first 2 horsemen to fight barbs and get experience. By the time you have your third horseman, you can form an army that has been promoted and go take a few cities. This army still won't be capable of taking a capitol. But if you get there quickly, it can take secondary cities easily and from a hill top stop further AI expansion (as you can attack anything that moves). At least this works fine on Emperor level. It's especially effective with Montezuma.

After creating that horseman army, I would devote all the workers in my first city to food tiles, to raise the population ASAP and then go to "balanced" or whatever.

 

[Divaythsarmour]

After basic defense, I would consider maxing population to be the highest priority. You need food to do it. The only way to get hammers and research is by having the population to work those tiles.

 

[Whizard72]

Very good strategies sir.. I might take out one or possibly two civs early on with the rush and then build myself up and overwhelm a couple more with sheer numbers. Then I usually start deciding which victory condition I want to aim for.

Nice thing about civ games, All games are different in at least a few ways.

After basic defense, I would consider maxing population to be the highest priority. You need food to do it. The only way to get hammers and research is by having the population to work those tiles.

 

[Divaythsarmour]

I was playing a game last night as Rome on Emperor. I rexxed out to about 7 cities before the AI dogpiled. It was "touch and go" for awhile as I only had one archer army a piece (in the cities that were taking the brunt of the attacks). I ended up winning a culture victory, as Tokugawa was sending up spaceship parts. It was close.

Yes every game is different.

The only leader that I haven't tried yet is Napoleon. I'll have to take a look at his attributes and plan a strategy.

 

[Whizard72]

Napoleon gets a Cathedral in his capital at start which means good culture start. The French special units are Trebuchet and Howitzer with Trebuchet being a catapult on steroids so it's great for attacking cities early on. Tech wise you start with pottery and get 1/2 price roads in medieval age.

Seems kind of a turtle civ at first relying on culture from your capital. I would horse rush and then go right to math for the trebuchet. Take out a civ or two with the rush and build your empire around the 1-2 capitals you take.

I was playing a game last night as Rome on Emperor.

The only leader that I haven't tried yet is Napoleon. I'll have to take a look at his attributes and plan a strategy.

 

[Divaythsarmour]

I did a population rush in Paris first just to "prime the pump." Then a horse rush to dominate the early lay of the land. I took a couple of secondary AI cities with that same early horse army and bought more time with a single blocking move (a settled city) to keep the AI out of my land mass a little longer. I built the Hanging Gardens in Paris. Then I expanded just enough to create some specialized cities.

I kept settling my cultural GPs in the "border cities" putting pressure on the AI. It was kind of funny because prior to building Hollywood, my culure was so high that my borders were wrapping around the walled AI cities.

Tokugawa harrassed me the whole game. A couple of my cities changed hands several times. I actually didn't worry about that. I just kept my focus and eventually had an easy cultural win.

It turns out that I still have one more leader before I'll have won with all 16 on Emperor. I think it might be Mao.

 

[Whizard72]

Wouldn't it be easier just to build french fries and clog the arteries of the enemy so he can't fight back?

Ah crap, that's not an option...

I did a population rush in Paris first just to "prime the pump." Then a horse rush to dominate the early lay of the land. I took a couple of secondary AI cities with that same early horse army and bought more time with a single blocking move (a settled city) to keep the AI out of my land mass a little longer. I built the Hanging Gardens in Paris. Then I expanded just enough to create some specialized cities.

I kept settling my cultural GPs in the "border cities" putting pressure on the AI. It was kind of funny because prior to building Hollywood, my culure was so high that my borders were wrapping around the walled AI cities.

Tokugawa harrassed me the whole game. A couple of my cities changed hands several times. I actually didn't worry about that. I just kept my focus and eventually had an easy cultural win.

It turns out that I still have one more leader before I'll have won with all 16 on Emperor. I think it might be Mao.