Do you reload till you get a good start ?

[Baron2]

I always play at ''King'' (large maps) and ''Emperor'' (smaller maps), and I must confess that I have a large weakness. I only start games when I have decent conditions. (In the case of Venice, it's obviously ''perfect'' conditions)

TBH, a normal CIV game lasting several hours, it's funnier when you are not crippled by RNG from the start....

 

[Scott Jegg]

I would reroll a completely rubbish start, or something I didn't want to play (not another Petra game), but not till I got perfect conditions.

There's nothing wrong with playing the game how you want to. Maybe you just need an extra bit of help that way until you are better at dealing with slower starts.

 

[Teaf]

Same as Scott Jegg, I'd just re-roll until it's decent.

 

[Roxlimn]

I think the game is balanced around giving all the players random starts, so really terrible stars are kind of part of the game. That said, the isolated island, no hill desert starts start to wear thin after the fourth hand-scrabble clawing.

I find "Legendary Start" setting useful here. It guarantees a resource-rich start while giving comparable resources to the AI as well, so nearly every start is playable without having to redo the start of the game over and over again. The one thing that's bad about it is that it largely castrates the Liberty tree, since much of your empire's power will be in the capital - more than it already is, anyway.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I don't always reroll for the best start, but I will if the civ is very start dependent.

 

[evilcat]

Most starting positions are good, even unperfect is just a factor which i need to play around.
The reroll i remember is when i was on isle, big enought, but mostly empty, no resources, just plains. And no AI so it seems like boring clickfest.

 

[dojoboy]

Never do.

 

[Jaybe]

I have never re-rolled, and plop my settler down where it starts. Before BNW I might have moved 1 hex to be adjacent to a river ... and regretted it as later resources appeared.

I play on large maps; I know if my capital loc isn't the most pleasing, 2nd/3rd city locations will be better and that my situation will change over time. Like later resources, etc.

The only time I've ever given up soon after game start was in the frozen north (tundra). May have even been civ 4 (not 5); but playing Prince level may have something to do with that.

 

[neev]

On Emperor level and below, I take everything I was given, even horrible starts. It's part of the fun, and a big one.

On Immortal, I always just take what I was given, although it happens that I quit on turn 40 when having to face a horrible start (no production available for instance, or lots of tundra) + a very aggressive neighbour. But mostly because I know I'm dead anyway.

On Deity I re-roll until I get something good enough. Although it happened once that the starting location was near perfect, but the surrounding area was garbage.

Oh and I always settle in place, because it is the best bet 90% of the time.

 

[Bakspatel]

I always reload when I get close to tundra, sometimes when the location itself is crappy or I reload when I play a naval-dependable civ but do not receive a coastal start. I've had games when I played Portugal and found out that the coast was only two tiles further (come on, then you might as well place me at the coast). Or when I didn't get a coastal start but Sweden and Austria did.

 

[ToothedBomb]

I re-roll almost every time I start a new game because I'm not satisfied with the starting location or the area around it.

Usually I want a starting location that is somewhat true to where the Civ is located in reality. The Swedes should be near tundra and snow. The Egyptians should be next to a river in the desert. The Mayans should be in the jungle. I re-roll immediately if the game puts me in the desert when I play as the Danes. I know Civ is all about what-ifs and things that differ from reality, but I just think desert Danes are dumb. Sorry. The immediate area should be similair as well.

By the way, I really hate how this game just puts random patches of desert in the middle of lush grasslands, too. The map scripts just put all kinds of different terrain in small areas, which looks ridiculous IMO.

Anyways, the other thing I look for is resources. Some civs need certain resources. The Mongols need horses; The Romans need iron. If I don't have any of that within reach I just quit. I remember playing as the Romans in Vanilla, when Ballistas still cost iron, and having none around. A huge part of that civ is that you have an advanced army early on. I want to use those units, not see that age, and my UU, left behind.

So yeah, I usually re-roll a lot. Like, 10 times or more. This keeps me from playing MP as well, because I don't think anyone else would go through all the trouble...

 

[adwcta]

Ugh, re-rolling starts... almost like cheating. A very "just for fun" move.

You really do get much better at the game when you have to adjust to your surroundings and understand how to make everything work. Example: I have a friend who only did specific starts, with a specific civ, specific map, on Deity (it's not even a cheesy set of condition, just his personal preference). He's been playing the game since Civ 3. He has a 100% win rate on Deity for Civ V (Vanilla, G&K, BNW), still does. I made him try Emperor with random starts as a random civ in G&K before BNW came out, just to see how he'd do. He reported losing about HALF his games (sample size of 6 games). This is a 100% Deity victory guy, unable to win 50%+ of his random Emperor games.

This is also why I have no respect for players who insist on specific starts/maps/etc, and then complain that the game is too easy or broken. Cooking the settings is a "just for fun" move, it makes your experience of the game different than intended, and makes it impossible to judge the mechanics of the game, which are balanced around standard settings random start. It's the equivalent of modding yourself an extra luxury or something, which would be considered cheating by almost everyone, yet somehow this is generally acceptable. If you use a mod, people say "oh no, you used a mod, your experience is different, you have no idea what you're talking about re: game balance"; but if you do only desert-mountain-river-hill 4luxuries godly starts, very few people will question your judgments about game balance. Craziness.

Also, some of my most fun games are from bad starts. What's the fun in having a great start, knowing you'll win, then winning? It's way more fun to try to figure out how to deal with a zulu neighbor, starting in tundra with only 3 resource diversity and a capital with only 1 luxury type, no river/mountain then someone else takes the faith pantheon. It might not be an easy win, but it's a fun win, and it makes you a better player.

/rant.

 

[Davor]

Yeah, I have re-startitis. The way I see it, since I play single player, if I am not having fun, why play on something you don't like the start with? Right now, I am relearning how to play, so having a challenge, I don't care for.

So if I am not having fun, why play when you have a crappy start or something you are not happy with.

 

[Fragamemnon]

All I ask is that there is some kind of reasonable food (riverside tiles or granary resources), and if you are going to put me by the ocean with no river don't give me a single luxury ocean resource and no fish to work with it.

 

[ledfranklin]

I mostly play on marathon, sometimes on epic so if get a horrid starting location I don't mind moving for 3-4 turns see what's around, as it doesn't hinder me nearly as much as if it were standard. All I'm looking for is one luxury resource. If I have that, I'm confident enough to put up a fight. I never play a game I know I can win. If you want to improve (in anything) you have to push your failure point.

Otoh, if I want to just romp some AI ass, I do whatever the hell I want.

Tl;dr it's a game do what you want

 

[VainoValkea]

I only re-roll total rubbish starts. Especially when playing a level I'm comfortable on. If I'm playing on King I'll win from a poorer start anyway...

 

[ahawk]

On Emperor, I find that even a less-than-average start can be competitive. Hence, at that level I take pretty much anything, unless I'm clearly going to be bored by either doing the same strategy as the last two games or by finding something that is too high of an advantage (I actually have re-rolled several games on Emperor where I found El Dorado first and quickly realized I would at least dominate the continent because of also having a good start; that said, I have kept a higher number of El Dorado starts than I have re-rolled, because it is at least enjoyable to see just how far or how quickly I can get ahead).

On Immortal, I take pretty much anything I'd take on Emperor, and feel less bad about El Dorado if I find it first.

On Deity, which I play only rarely, I'll re-roll a decent number of starts, and I still try to get rivers (though it's not nearly as mandatory as in G&K) for Civil Service and other bonuses. At this level, even getting certain neighbors is grounds to consider re-rolling (nothing like a Zulu or Hunnic scout wandering over by Turn 4!)

Ultimately, as some say, it's all for fun, so I sometimes will re-roll just because of something silly, too.

 

[Dogmouth]

I restart mostly for aesthetic reasons. It sounds silly, but some starts -- even good starts -- are really ugly, and I can't stare at ugly landscapes for hours on end.

 

[neilkaz]

I play what I am dealt and feel that I've been forced to learn how to play better buy playing some lousy positions and am not ashamed to lose a game or two, occasionly.

I'm an Emp player for BNW and will soon try Imm.

.. neilkaz ..

 

[Darkflight]

I spend more time rerolling starts then actually playing the game. Just looking at what is possible is more fun for me most of the time then playing. When I deciede to play a game I use both strong and weak starts though.