City placement help

[xxaaaxx]

Hi. I playing at Chieftan, and before I move up to Warlord(?regent?), I wanna make sure I'm getting the basic stuff right. The things I'm concentrating on are City placement and terrain improvement. Am i gettin either right so far? do i need more? should i have picked better sites? I was pretty much bottled up by the French and English right from the get-go, so unless i start expanding into the HUUUUUUGE jungle to the north (which, while unsettled but for Marseilles, stretches from there to the coastline ~25 - 30 tiles away), i'm pretty much stuck with the land i have.


(praying for the pic to work right...)

 

[DiamondzAndGunz]

Your city placement is fine, really, except for Edo. Since it's not next to coast, it can't build a harbor. However, it will have those coast squares in its radius, and will only get one food from them without a harbor. You could've moved it either one square close to the coost, or one square away.

I noitced you are irrigating a lot of the grasslands (that's what those bright-green splotches are, right? ). You're also under Despotism. That's pretty wasteful. Under despotism, anything that produces more than two food is reduced by one. Therefore, those grasslands produce two by default, the irrigation adds one, and is cut down by one by despotism, bringing it back to 2. Pretty common mistake.

Don't be intimidated by the huge jungle. Go ahead and expand into it- once you get all your workers to clear it out, you'll have lots of nice, fresh grassland, and your cities will thrive.

Not too bad though. I'm sure others will also have some comments.

 

[Beanzy]

I just want to say that what DiamondzAndGunz said about jungles is so vital for a beginner (which I was until very recently... at least, I think I'm no longer that much of a beginner). Once I realized that jungles were just a minor inconvenience sitting on top of a wonderful grassland, I began to expand right into them. Thanks to this realization I have become a much better player, so take this advise to heart!

 

[Gula]

not to mention all the bonus production you get from clearing out the jungle tiles

 

[Shillen]

Mostly mimicing what others have said. Avoid settling cities 1 square away from the coast. Mine your grasslands in despotism. Irrigate cattle, wheat, and any other bonus food tiles. Irrigate plains as well.

As for jungle, I'd avoid settling it early on, but definitely don't be afraid to settle it once you've got your core cities in place. It will take a long time to make jungle cities productive, especially with a non-industrious civ. Gula is mistaken though, you don't get extra shields from clearing jungle.

I have some other comments that aren't what you asked for though. Why are you building a courthouse in Tokyo? It's one of your core cities and should not need a courthouse. Generally I don't bother building courthouses unless the city is 50% or more corrupt. Tokyo would be better off building a marketplace, library, or barracks, or pretty much anything other than a courthouse. On the other hand you have a lot of outlying cities producing libraries. Make sure they get courthouses first. It appears you built temples in them first, which is good, and enough to keep the culture pressure on the bordering civ.

I'm not sure why you're building the Great Lighthouse in a size 2 desert city. It needs a harbor to grow so I'd make sure it gets that instead. It's one of your core cities and it's stuck in a nearly useless state.

Well, hope this is helpful, if you didn't want advice on what to build then just ignore what I said. Good luck.

 

[Moonsinger]

To xxaaaxx,

Bamspeedy wrote an article on this quite some time ago. I recommend that you should read it first. Everything you need to know about City Placement is in there.

 

[Renata]

Originally posted by Gula
not to mention all the bonus production you get from clearing out the jungle tiles

There's no production bonus for chopping down jungles, just forests. And even then, only once per tile per game.

Renata

 

[Grille]

Welcome xxaaaxx,
another decent note, linked indirectly with city placement: When you plop a city not needing an aqueduct (e.g. river site) with rich food supplies, thus growing too big to cope with unhappiness in early game, you might install just one scientist there for keeping up the research progress at the worst rate. Then you can continue at 0% research rate and develop 'Republic'. In your case, the Great Library is finished soon and you get 'Republic' under certain circumstances for free, so it probably doesn't matter. (Although I guess your leading well in tech on this level.)

 

[switch]

The only suggestion I have is you could put a city on top of canterbury, on the hill. You culd hurry a temple or library and get some quick culture, and gain yourself access to more of that coast.

 

[xxaaaxx]

well...
1. Thanks. I actually hadnt noticed that Tokyo was building that....

2. This sounds silly, but I started the Lighthouse mainly because I didnt want the other civ's to have it, (and believe it or not, at the time that cize 2 city was the fastest place i could get it built)and they had started it first. But by the time I wheeled and dealed for maps and found out that i was on 1 giant land mass, it was only like 30 turns away, and too many wasted shields to switch

as for Edo, ...d'oh!

 

[elpadrino87]

If you haven't built the Forbidden Palace, you might consider building some galleys, loading them up with spearmen and settlers, and maybe attempting to get a strong foothold west of French territory. I'm not suggesting abandoning the jungle to the north, but at least have some galleys ready to move there. Then, start building the Forbidden Palace in a city over there, and you wouldn't have to worry about cities flipping to the French due to the distance of capitals.

Another tip that applies to everyone, which I have observed time and time again, DO NOT use the GoTo command for units that are going to that location to build a city or save the space for a later time to have a city built there. The AI somehow 'knows' that a unit is going there, and if it considers it a useful place for a city, it will almost always send a settler there to beat you to that spot. This can really be a pain in the butt, when you use the GoTo command to send some galleys to a part of your continent to secure some resources, and another civ on your continent gets there first. It's happened to me so many times that I think everyone should be warned about this "advantage" that the AI has over human players.

 

[YNCS]

Thanks, elpadrino87. I didn't know that about the AI. I have noticed that I'll send a settler to a nice place and, by the time he gets there, an AI civ has already built a city there.

I learn something new every day.

 

[farting bob]

i recommend building a city 3 squares norh of nagoya. it wil be next to a river and allow further expansion norh, hopefully before france do the same.

 

[AceDragon]

To xxaaaxx,
Bamspeedy wrote an article on this quite some time ago. I recommend that you should read it first. Everything you need to know about City Placement is in there.

Ya down with OCP?

Sorry, couldn't resist. Anyways OCP stands for Optimal City Placement thats what BamSpeedy called it. Quick and dirty it boils down to placing cities in rings around your capital and forgotten palace. His article goes into strategies and provides pictures also.

 

[Viking163]

I try to have always 4 squares between cities... is this too much, because I see here 2 squares sometimes. I know, you can't always do it right.

And I see a lot of irrigation here. Is it wise to set the workers at automate (they biuld mines then), or better build irrigation yourself ? (instead of mines)

I know, I'm answering with a question sorry

 

[Shillen]

Originally posted by Viking163
I try to have always 4 squares between cities... is this too much, because I see here 2 squares sometimes. I know, you can't always do it right.

And I see a lot of irrigation here. Is it wise to set the workers at automate (they biuld mines then), or better build irrigation yourself ? (instead of mines)

I know, I'm answering with a question sorry

If you like to have a lot of metropolises in the late industrial and modern age then go ahead and space them out 4 squares. On the other hand it will significantly weaken your empire in the ancient and middle age. Your cities will only reach size 12 and don't need 20 tiles to work. If you can get your cities to work about 12 tiles each you're getting a lot more benefit. The people who space cities out 2 squares apart are either looking to take control of the game extremely quickly, or they have some other objective in mind, like generating culture. In the ancient age really tightly packed cities will make your empire a powerhouse because you're working every tile. The problem is later in the game they have a serious lack of production. You can counteract this by pillaging resources so you can build ancient units, then upgrade them to the more advanced unit.

About the irrigation. I've noticed the opposite. Automated workers will tend to irrigate more often than mine. You shouldn't automate workers. Some general rules for despotism worker management. Road everything, mine grasslands, irrigate plains and deserts, irrigate flood plains, mine hills (but do the grasslands first), irrigate bonus food tiles (cattle, game, wheat, etc). Cracker's Opening Moves guide in the war academy is great if you don't know what to do with your workers.

 

[Viking163]

Ok, great !
I think I'm gonna try a different way of building my empire

I didn't know that tightly packed cities generate more culture.

Thanks

 

[IceCreamEmperor]

Well, presumably they only generate more culture if you build more cultural buildings in them; it's just that since you have twice as many cities, that gives you twice as many temples (or libraries, or both) -- and if you're doing that in the ancient age, the increased efficiency means you get more of these improvements done earlier, which is crucial for culture due to the cumulative effect and 1000-year bonus.

Despite all this, I still can't seem to bring myself to build cities closer than 3 tiles, and even then some part of me is always wincing.

 

[AceDragon]

Strategic Planning Vs. Land Grab

At some point you should weigh the importance of founding new cities optimally vs ensuring you get to put down new cities. Optimally I go for 4 Square placing ensuring city radius is 2 in each direction. I do make certain 'greedy' exceptions. If you have to move over one to include a luxury or strategic resource, then I'm movin over one. If I see a settler movin in on territory I plan on claiming I may put a city down closer.

Sometimes geographical constraints may lead you to stop in a certain direction - running out of land, etc.

You can see the effects of corruption occuring gradually as you go outward from your capital, and you can see your ring(s) of efficient cities. Later, plan on building around a City with the Forgotten Palace the same way allowing for the rings to be the same size as the original core.

Roughly thats a better take on OCP. Apologies if my earlier post was too brief and not enough info.

 

[amirsan]

Originally posted by AceDragon


Ya down with OCP?

Sorry, couldn't resist. Anyways OCP stands for Optimal City Placement thats what BamSpeedy called it. Quick and dirty it boils down to placing cities in rings around your capital and forgotten palace. His article goes into strategies and provides pictures also.

I 120% agree wit this, even though it is not that great for medevel age you need to think about your empires future. Because your plans for domination or Conquest in Medevel age may not work as well but when you get to Industrial/ Modern Age you will realy thank yourself you did that.