Early borderpop: monument or library?

[JammerUno]

I very rarely use monuments for culture, never if I don't get myst as a starting tech. Why would you? So many reasons to not build them, but players seem to consistently do so anyway. So here's the numbers

Monument
Tech: myst 70
Cost: 30
Gain: 1

Library
Tech: writing 120 (reduced by both pottery and AH)
Cost: 90
Gain: 2, +25%, can run two scientists

So the difference in tech costs seem marginal, with either prereq tech the cost is effectively 100, with both is 86. Writing also gives OB for those AI that don't have it yet

As for building costs, a monument is far cheaper. Can't deny that. It's a 1 pop whip, which isn't great, but it's still far cheaper than a library.

So why do you still build monuments? Is it the 60 difference that makes you research an additional tech?

 

[nocho]

Usually a monument is much easier to build and earlier. Writing obviously needs some prereqs to be researched first, by the time you have it you usually have your first one or two cities settled already so then it's quicker to have researched mysticism and whip that monument asap. Besides, whipping a library often needs a 2-pop whip which means growing to size 4 first, which in turn takes quite some time. Or you have to spend a lot of worker turns chopping, if even there's forrest, of course.

Probably only time I go library first is if the city has no resources of immediate interest in its 2nd ring (or enough good tiles in the 1st) and that it can afford to wait for the border pop, that is, no neighbours close by.

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

I also rarely build monuments, except for Egypt in RFC, where I always feel under pressure to get culture going ASAP.

 

[soundjata]

I my recent games, the pattern is usually like this:

> First cities (after capitol) often build a library first. Very useful for high food and low cap.
like you, early in the game I seldom bother to tech mysticism

> Later on, my cities will not benefit much from an early library. I find that monument first with a chop and a few turns working a forest is best then.

 

[Windsor]

If I need a quick borderpop in several cities I'll go for the monument. The total -savings are substantial. However if there is really only 1 city that could need a monument and my science is struggling then I'll try to place that one city in such a way that it doesn't need that borderpop. If that's impossible I'll delay it until mysticism seems reasonable(post-writing) anyway.

I don't like to whip libraries before granaries and of course if you don't want to run the two specialists in that city the library really hasn't much going for it.

Charismatic will of course make the monument a priority build anyway.

 

[Mylene]

Sometimes you cannot avoid a monument, if a city could not reach an important food/commerce ressource like gold for a too long time.
Of course as you pointed out, the library is a much better building
Depends on your land, on some maps you cannot place cities so they have everything important (for early development) in the first ring. Often these are coastal cities.

 

[Kid R]

Random thoughts springing to mind, arranged in approximate order of relevance to why I build monuments:

• 60 hammers in the very early game, say for cities 2 and 3, is critical (e.g. 4 fogbusting warriors or a worker).
• A 1-pop whip is very convenient when cities will often be a little behind in tile development and otherwise grow onto an unimproved tile.
• Monuments are achievable in the common cases with blocker or resource-claimer cities which e.g. have only 1 forest to chop, or otherwise are very limited in build power.
• Many cities are hammer sites and have no need for the extra 1, 25% or early specialist slots.
• A third of the time we start with mysticism - no leader starts with writing .
• The religious path is occasionally higher priority than writing.

I suspect any deity players who reply will come down strongly in favour of libraries and that's resaonable because the rhythm of the early game is different there. Blocking and specialists are more important right from the off. (Edit - haha Mylene posted same time as me!)

 

[Keilah]

Well in some cities you will never produce beakers or run scientists in which case it makes sense to build a monument if you don't have access to a religion or some other more useful culture building. I pretty much never build monuments either.

 

[coanda]

Monuments are good when you need a quick border pop to block off land, don't have a religion, aren't CRE, and don't have trees to chop.

Also, you've all overlooked the most critical feature of Monuments - you need 3 of them to unlock the Statue of Zeus!

Oh - and it bears repeating in any thread like this. If you are running Caste System, you should never build monuments.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Random thoughts springing to mind, arranged in approximate order of relevance to why I build monuments:

• 60 hammers in the very early game, say for cities 2 and 3, is critical (e.g. 4 fogbusting warriors or a worker).
• A 1-pop whip is very convenient when cities will often be a little behind in tile development and otherwise grow onto an unimproved tile.
• Monuments are achievable in the common cases with blocker or resource-claimer cities which e.g. have only 1 forest to chop, or otherwise are very limited in build power.
• Many cities are hammer sites and have no need for the extra 1, 25% or early specialist slots.
• A third of the time we start with mysticism - no leader starts with writing .
• The religious path is occasionally higher priority than writing.

I suspect any deity players who reply will come down strongly in favour of libraries and that's resaonable because the rhythm of the early game is different there. Blocking and specialists are more important right from the off. (Edit - haha Mylene posted same time as me!)

Snaaty situationally advocates monuments and he's one of the best players we have. This fortunately seems like a decision that's made game-to-game based on what you see, making the game more dynamic.

 

[WelshGandalf]

I would say, because 60 is a lot in the early game, and because you can get your first border pop quicker - so if there's a resource I'd really quite like in the outer ring, I'm almost definately going for monument before library.

Sometimes (especially if going for a cultural victory) I just send a missionary in. Sure it costs 10 more hammers, but those 10 are in another city that can more easily afford it, but as well as the you get 1 and the ability to build temples/missionaries.

 

[Higher Game]

Monument usually means a chop and 5 working turns. Library usually means 2 chops, a whip, and 10 working turns. Usually the library is worth that extra trouble. Early writing and 1000 year old libraries >>> teching mysticism.

 

[NihilZero]

Naturally we would all rather have libraries than Monuments, but the reality is that monuments come very cheap indeed to a young city (a chop or a 1-pop whip deals with it, and usually you have nothing better to do with the pop point anyway as the cty has just been placed for a few turns and has probably got unimproved tiles) whereas Libraries are bloody expensive until a city has grown a little bit.

It comes down to figuring out whether A) you actually need a border pop any time soon, B) what will get you that border pop faster (usually a monument), and C) is there any alternative possibility (building culture, running a caste Artist and religious culture obviously all negate the usefulness of monuments).

In cases where we want to block land the only thing that matters is often getting a border pop ASAP, in which case a monument will usually give one before a library can be finished and so is hammers well spent.

 

[Dirk1302]

Most common scenario is border popping to get fish. Especially if there are no other food resources you'll want that fish asap. Many other situations like this. One whip or a chop + ~ the turns it takes to do the chop gets you a monument. A library on the other hand can easily take 20 turns longer especially early game when there aren't that many workers available for chopping.

So i build them often. Since i have my fish connected earlier this way i can subsequently whip the library.

 

[kossin]

Monuments for: Blocking cities and grabbing resource in BFC.

If you're debating between a library and a monument for a city, then the city probably doesn't need either right away. Building a Monument is easy, just 1-whip a size 2 city. A library is a 3-whip affair or a waste of worker turns and forests or an opportunity cost for almost a whole settler or 1.5 workers
Get a library in 1 city early for 1st GS and then divert your hammers to units for barb cities, expansion and maybe some actually useful infra.

 

[Skallagrimson]

If you already have Writing, IMO it's libraries for high-food, and monuments for not-so-high food (less whip cost as I typically whip whichever one).

If you don't have Writing the choice is easy. :0

 

[Ataxerxes]

Monuments are good when you need a quick border pop to block off land, don't have a religion, aren't CRE, and don't have trees to chop.

Also, you've all overlooked the most critical feature of Monuments - you need 3 of them to unlock the Statue of Zeus!

Oh - and it bears repeating in any thread like this. If you are running Caste System, you should never build monuments.

#3 is true. But really, by the time you have caste available you should have a religion as well. Monuments are only valuable as a build in the very early game.

#2 is a good joke. No wonder got downgraded worse from CivIII than SoZ.

 

[ILLokano]

I tend to be a peace-mongering wonderhog but one thing I can't do without in any game is having Stonehenge. Stonehenge does the equivalent of what Temple of Artemis did in Civ 3. What better way to get a resource that is within your grasp which you absolutely need i.e. horse or iron esp. if you have a warmonger like Monty or Tokugawa next door. I am however one the less-experienced players for Civ IV in this forum, when I REX early on my forces are usually spread thin and still haven't finished a game on any difficulty yet(right now playing the latest NC game on Monarch with Cyrus and in about 20 something turns Lincoln will achieve a cultural victory while I'll place a distant third score-wise(if it can make it to the end in one piece cuz Charlemagne has a SOD on one of my frontier cities composed mostly of artillery and infantry sprinkled with a few SAM infantry against my outclassed and outdated Cavalry,Grenadiers,& Riflemen)

 

[Skallagrimson]

I tend to be a peace-mongering wonderhog but one thing I can't do without in any game is having Stonehenge. Stonehenge does the equivalent of what Temple of Artemis did in Civ 3. What better way to get a resource that is within your grasp which you absolutely need i.e. horse or iron esp. if you have a warmonger like Monty or Tokugawa next door.

Bettter way, hmm, like, maybe settle next to the resource?

I am however one the less-experienced players for Civ IV in this forum, when I REX early on my forces are usually spread thin and still haven't finished a game on any difficulty yet(right now playing the latest NC game on Monarch with Cyrus and in about 20 something turns Lincoln will achieve a cultural victory while I'll place a distant third score-wise(if it can make it to the end in one piece cuz Charlemagne has a SOD on one of my frontier cities composed mostly of artillery and infantry sprinkled with a few SAM infantry against my outclassed and outdated Cavalry,Grenadiers,& Riflemen)

Maybe because... you built Stonehenge instead of units and workers?

 

[ILLokano]

Bettter way, hmm, like, maybe settle next to the resource?



Maybe because... you built Stonehenge instead of units and workers?

Or I can raze my current city and plop a settler on top of said resource; question to your first reply: well how about if it's too near i.e.my city is only 1 tile away from horse or iron and within 15 turns will borderpop and that you know that I know that you can't have another city within 2 tiles from each other (or something like that)