[GS] Early Game - so many decisions... Build orders are extinct.

[GKShaman]

I just played Civ 6 with all DLCs and Expansions - man oh man as a strong Civ series player and someone who plays RoN and Age series I wanted to give my thoughts here and see if people have similar feelings about the early game.

What is your opening?

The discussion behind this is I feel like the opening BO determines SOOO Much - Did you meet religious city states? If you meet two might as well do quests and get that holy district up. Did you meet a commercial city state? Then build that archer for a quest and a commercial hub for a trade route that DOUBLES ur turn 15 income.

<kindarant>

I try to maximize the situation and I feel like if I do a campus library and holy district and shrine I will be able to get a religion and generally keep up but I will miss out on early military conquest of neighbor or early suzerainship.

This game just feels like a lot of FOMO (fear of missing out) and just build orders are gone.

Like I have found that in the past building a library and Writing was super key but now with districts and district limits it makes prioritizing science tough.

The answer to this might be play wide - but realistically pumping out workers settlers and scouts means u have no districts. if you wait till govt plaza and govt buiilding - then u have no land.

Lack of land may push u to military but then it feels as iff either A - u need Science for war because its an upgrade race or mass tech relevant enough ranged troops. But making those troops makes the districts have a time cost.

I guess there was a mix of generic and district specific buildings. Like u can build a market in the city center but to get a Bank and stock exchange u need a commercial hub.

</kindarant>

 

[Kwami]

One or two Scouts to start is so good, though. Unless you get really unlucky, you aren't likely to die so quickly that you can't afford a Scout or two. Getting all of those first meets, tribal villages, and other early bonuses is just so important.

 

[kb27787]

No option for slinger first...

 

[GKShaman]

Added Slinger first. Honestly I never did that. Is it just to avoid Scout? More I think about it - the opening Slinger is more effective forever.

 

[XplosiveLun]

Scout -> Settler -> Holy Site

 

[Leucarum]

I love a scout opening. It is high variance but when it works out well it can completely change how the game and make the experience that much more unique afterwards. The ability to bait barbarians or AI makes this feel less risky than opening with something greedier like a worker. The main case when I deviate from a scout is if my starting landmass looks tiny, e.g. archipelago or very constrictive terrain

After that though, adaptation is everything and I'm not particularly fixed. Eaely expansion is my preference but if you don't build up your millirary when you are next to Monty for instance then you should expect some pain.

 

[The Highwayman]

Scout -> Warrior -> Settler on Deity. If it appears I'm in a corner with few exploration directions: Scout -> Settler -> TBD. I always go scout first, as map info is too important. Slingers are hot garbage...never first or second. They just get wrecked solo so I'll only send one to accompany a warrior for the eureka but not at the cost of delaying my first settler.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Pretty much changes every game. Usually Builder ---> Warrior ---> Settler ---> Scout but I fit more warriors in if barbs are bad, and just do builder settler---> on safe starts like coastal or surrounded by CS's so they'll deal with barbs. On starts that can't improve tiles, it would be scout ---> warrior ---> settler.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Builder-Settler, I don't use the initial warrior to explore, just walk around the capital to ensure there's no barbs nearby.

 

[jaget80]

Scout - Slinger - Worker/Settler depends of workable tiles.

 

[acluewithout]

Scout first is the most fun option. Builder is the most powerful opening, but I tend to only builder first if I have a very weak start or a very strong one. Then settler. If I’m relatively safe, I’ll try to get out another settler. If not, I’ll get out a warrior.

I used to prioritise a monument in the my second and third cities. Now I get them to build a warrior or two. That helps discourage early AI aggression but still let’s me build settlers in my capital instead of units.

 

[leandrombraz]

I like to start with a Scout because that's what I been doing since I started playing Civ and that's what I will do until the day I die. After that anything can happen. It change based on the Civ I'm playing, my strategy, the tiles I have, all that stuff.

 

[ezzlar]

warrior, warrior, settler, warrior, settler

 

[GrumboMumbo]

Scout first, but after that it depends on the cards I'm dealt (my civs bonuses, what CS i have met, terrain etc) If I have met an industrial or military CS I usually like to lean on the bonus production they give (buildings if industrial, units if military)

I find in the early game you don't need to prioritise science yields, because it's usually quite easy to get most of the early eurekas if you micro well enough. And if you are producing too much science you often miss the boosts, which I feel is just wasted science.

Sometimes it depends if I am trying for a unique strategy, but mostly I find leaning on whatever bonuses the map spawn provides is the most optimal.

My most common BO is probably something like: Scout - Settler - Warrior/Slinger - Builder

 

[Chefofrats]

As previously discussed on this forum, the initial build order depends to a huge extent on the difficulty setting. On my favourite King, when I generally do not have to worry about early war from my AI neighbours, I can stick to something like Scout>Worker>Settler, or possibly Scout>Warrior>Slinger>Worker>Settler if barbarians are near. On higher difficulties, having a bigger army early on is more important.

It also depends on the map type. For example on island plates, when you do not yet have Shipbuilding, I skip the scout and go straight for a worker (or a military unit, if barbarians are near).

 

[Victoria]

Situation dictates so much. Start in a jungle and you cannot use a worker, perhaps for quite a while.
A tend to dislike building my troops without agoge, it feels like such a waste so while delay is risky I do try to use a scout to hold barb scouts off and do find that 1 turn less can be a difference in stopping them
I also now find myself coming off hills, certainly grassland hills, as these are a beacon because while you get no additional visibility for being on a hill, you can see hills and items on those hills 1 tile further away. Plains hills are harder to justify coming off and I tend not to but if I am in the middle of a continent I possibly will. It is a way of guaranteeing yourself the bronze working eureka.

I never use the build queue until late game, but then it is a real blessing.

 

[criZp]

There is nothing strategic about pre-determined build orders. I just build whatever seems good for the particular start location.

 

[blackcatatonic]

I don't build Slingers early as I find I can usually buy one by the time I need one. Only exception is if I have barbarians nearby.

Always, always Scout > Settler for me. After that, it can vary a lot. But I play on King so I tend to have a lot of flexibility.

 

[ezzlar]

Difficulty does of course alter your alternatives. Low level enough and you can start with Great Bath.

 

[LMT]

Scout -> Settler -> Holy Site

This is usually my build order. I play on Emperor or Immortal and almost always go for a religion. I know getting a religion isn't an optimal strategy (except for a RV), but I just like getting one.

After holy site, I usually build either another settler or a slinger, depending on how close/who my neighbors are.