Civilization Start Bias, from the XML

[Ahriman]

Almost every single civ started on a river, maybe even every single one. It was even more important for civs in eras with less advanced technology. Like people said, the Tigris, Euphrates, Nile, Ganges and Yellow (forgot the other Chinese river) rivers are famous for being the beginnings of civilization.

Add Indus to that list, and Mekong to some extent.
And then later, Rhine, Danube, Volga, Niger, Mississippi.

 

[Thoras]

That explains wulf's comment. I also find it odd that the code seems to be better documented than the civilopedia is.

Priceless

 

[JanissaryRush]

Wow, America gets the River? Because the United States of America TOTALLY started on a big river in reality, yeah right! Thats dumb.

They start next to a river so it can drown away the player's tears from having such lousy bonuses.

 

[Ahriman]

Because the United States of America TOTALLY started on a big river in reality

Washington: river.
New York: 2 rivers.
Boston: 2 rivers.
Philadelphia: river.
Chicago: river.

 

[the_lor]

Washington: river.
New York: 2 rivers.
Boston: 2 rivers.
Philadelphia: river.
Chicago: river.

Chicago does have a river, but it is not a dominant feature. If you’re thinking of the Mississippi it’s a couple hundred miles from Chicago.

But that's really neither here nor there.

 

[Abegweit]

Washington: river.
New York: 2 rivers.
Boston: 2 rivers.
Philadelphia: river.
Chicago: river.

Let's not forget the Plymouth River.

 

[Fool Inc.]

Chicago does have a river, but it is not a dominant feature. If you’re thinking of the Mississippi it’s a couple hundred miles from Chicago.

But that's really neither here nor there.

The Mississippi River is a huge reason for the growth and prosperity of the US, so I could see America starting on river for that reason. At the same time, you could say that about a lot of civs.

 

[King Jason]

Speaking of starting points, are most of you founding your first city at the initial spot or are some looking around a bit?

I find myself being less afraid to waste a turn or two finding that perfect cit spot in the area than I was in civ4, even on higher difficulties. In fact, my first OCC cultural win saw me suffer a 3-4 turn start penalty because I decided to look for some marble. Which I found.

 

[TiVO]

Speaking of starting points, are most of you founding your first city at the initial spot or are some looking around a bit?

I tend to just take the starting location. My experience so far (only three games) has been that there are additional resources in that area that become available once I hit the right techs. Could've just been random so far though.

 

[Ahriman]

Chicago does have a river, but it is not a dominant feature.

Strange, every time I've been to Chicago the downtown area has been clustered around the Chicago river. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River

A very small river, to be sure, but important once it became connected to the Mississippi through the canal.

Anyway, issue of semantics. I agree the lake is far more important, and that the river is much less important for Chicago than for the others.

And I agree with the general point that its weird that the America civ, more than others, gets a river bonus.

 

[ThorRex]

Played once as babylonia and had two rivers very near to each other. Looked historic.

 

[gibson1314]

I started as Arabia next to desert thinking that will be for oil since my special feature is double oil supplies, guess what no oil!!!

 

[Seven05]

Strange, every time I've been to Chicago the downtown area has been clustered around the Chicago river. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River

A very small river, to be sure, but important once it became connected to the Mississippi through the canal.

Anyway, issue of semantics. I agree the lake is far more important, and that the river is much less important for Chicago than for the others.

And I agree with the general point that its weird that the America civ, more than others, gets a river bonus.

It is so essential to the local commerce and industy that we let a bunch of drunk politicians dye it green for St. Patrick's day, 'nuff said

 

[MaXimillionZero]

I'd really like to know why Aztecs don't start next to a lake, considering their UB. Iroquis get to start in a forest, after all.

 

[JudgeDeath]

I'd really like to know why Aztecs don't start next to a lake, considering their UB. Iroquis get to start in a forest, after all.

And in fact their Civ was centred on a lake (cf Tenochitlan).

 

[kajillion]

There are rivers almost <i>everywhere</i> http://whyfiles.org/131fresh_water/images/rivers.gif America isn't uniquely fluvial.

 

[uberfish]

Every major city founded prior to the industrial era is on a river...

 

[DrwHem]

The Aztecs should always start by a river or a lake, as per their special building.

The Iroquois have some insane insane starts! With a 3-4 city empire, I find they can save more money than Arabia receives on trade routes, and since production is so very crucial in this build, their longhouses make a huge difference early-mid game.

well historically the aztecs should start near a marsh siince their main terrotory they settled was a marsh until they filled it in over the years.

 

[KhanIndustries]

Don't forget that if you do not like start bias you can disable it when you start a new game, go under advanced setup and check "disable start bias" for a truly random start. Make sure you start the game from the advanced screen (don't check it and then go back as it will start normally). You are not penalized point wise for selecting this it seems.

I do agree with the one poster that starting in the desert is a BIG disadvantage for those civs.

 

[Anastomosis]

I've started with Babylon 3 times, and each time, I'm next to 2 rivers. Don't know if that's coded in, but seems to make sense. Strange coincidence if it's not coded.