Coast/Ocean Tiles - City Need to be a Coastal City?

[Bleser]

I can't seem to find any clarification in the Civopedia and was hoping someone here could clear it up for me.

If I have a city that is not a coastal city (maybe just one tile away form the coast), can it work the water tiles, such as fish and pearls? Obviously the work boat would have to be built by another coastal city somewhere, but is the only downside that I can't build a lighthouse? Should I choose this setup in favor of the city to be on a river over being on a coast?

 

[Thunderbull]

Why you need your city on river? for neverbuilt watergranarymill?
you can use fish/whales from ocean, alothough ye, no beloved seaport.
but the worst is to build city on hill

river/coast/nonhill/resource covered by mix of jungle/hills with resources - so unbeleiveable.

 

[Bleser]

Well, I'm still adjusting to Civ 5 city placement and had to choose between being on a river and being on a coast and chose the river. I guess maybe the coast was the better option (forgot about seaports!). Oh well, live and learn! I should post a picture of the city location and see what others would have done.

In general, is everyone striving to put their cities next to "fresh water"? In Civ IV that was big due to health issues but maybe is a non-factor now? Is the only advantage water mills on rivers? Do lakes buy you anything?

 

[Mannu]

I like to build my cities one tile back from a river, especially for a defensive city. I can still reach the far side of the river with my city's ranged attack, but invaders need to attack my defensive unit's over a river. Plus I get an extra river tile to work with either a farm or a cottage.

If there's more than one coast / sea resource I like to build on the coast for the lighthouse / seaport combo and if there are many I may try for the Colossus (it get's built pretty quickly though).

 

[Paeanblack]

Well, I'm still adjusting to Civ 5 city placement and had to choose between being on a river and being on a coast and chose the river.

City placement in Civ 5 is not nearly as big of a deal as it was in 4. You really can stick them anywhere, with almost zero regard for the terrain.

There is no need to optimize the workable tiles within the city radius. If you ever grow a new city large enough to work every tile in its radius, you'll already have been able to win by whatever means you wish.

Settling directly on top of or right next to a luxury you don't already have is probably the strongest reason for picking a city location.

 

[bryanw1995]

or settle on top of horse/iron if you're playing deity. those few turns can make you or break you.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Yeah, city placement is largely irrelevant.

Personally, the only river site I keep an eye out for is one that's optimum for production.
Coastal if possible, with multiple sea resources (particularly fish), next to a long river (or two).
Recently, 'cos I've been playing Russia, also multiple strategic resources .. grassland/horse, hill/iron, etc.

Just 'cos, no matter which victory condition I go for, I'm going to need to spend many turns building stuff.

Well, except for domination .. but that's boring.

I think there's something wrong when the cities I'm most proud of are size 20+, where every single tile worked produces both food and hammers.

 

[zuraffo]

River cities also give you the late game production boost with hydroplant(?), which you'll welcome if you are going after science or diplo victory.

 

[eric_]

If I have a city on a given coast, and settling another city one or two tiles off that coast will allow me to grab a critical inland resource more quickly, I'll settle one or two tiles off.

 

[Zachriel]

If I have a city that is not a coastal city (maybe just one tile away form the coast), can it work the water tiles, such as fish and pearls?

Yes.


--