Flood plains: good or bad?

[Heffling]

Flood plains offer a base of 3F 1C with a penalty of 0.4 food per flood plain, giving an effective rate of 2.6F 1C per flood plain before development. This, upon casual observation, seems like it could only work in your favor. However, this is not so, because the unhealthyness ALWAYS APPLIES even if you're not working the flood plains.

So, take a city built around 10 flood plains with no other food resources. The initial production in the city will be 2F 1H 1C for the city tile and 3F 1C for the flood plain. This results in a 5F 1H 2C city at pop 1. However, the flood plains will be giving -4F from unhealthyness (Assuming you're at the unhealthy cap). Therefore the net production of the city is 1F 1H 2C. I/E a very slow growing city. I've had capitals in games start off like this. They end up growing very slowly due to the FPs.

Yes, the innate bonus to health and the river bonus can help, but you can end up suffering in the beginning due to flood plains. And because Civ is a game that is based around compound interest growth, immediate gains are more valuable than long term gains.

I have had a game where I had a city with nothing but flood plains surrounding it. The city was worthless until I discovered Universal Sufferage and could rush some +health buildings. Until that time it was a drain on my economy. I would have been better off splitting up these FP between 2 or 3 cities.

 

[KMadCandy]

I even thought you had to work floodplains for it to cause unhealthiness but that may be my aged mind harking back to previous versions.

you're definitely mistaken about that. almost nobody works jungle tiles, we'd not mind the unhealthiness penalty if that was the rule i bet . and actually, flood plains/jungles that overlap in 2 city crosses give the health penalty to both cities. forests work the same way, except there you get a +0.5 to health not a negative. and i do want the health bonus even when i'm not working forests.

taking it further, the overlapping crosses count even when the cities don't belong to the same civ. i lost health and got mad at asoka when he cottaged over a tree that technically was in his culture, but overlapped my BFC.

edit: *giggle* percy you don't even know me and tree wars! sometimes i get obsessed on a mission to chop forests that are in my culture but *not* in my city crosses and they *are* in the other guy's cities. sure, they don't get me as many hammers as the nearer forests will, but they get me a few, and they might be his forests later, so i chop 'em now while i can rob him of the health benefit and get the few hammers myself, and then i head to the forests that are actually like, sane and reasonable to chop. nobody ever accused me of being sane or a good example!

 

[Percy]

i lost health and got mad at asoka when he cottaged over a tree that technically was in his culture, but overlapped my BFC.

[thundering voice]
And so... The Tree War begun.

 

[DaveMcW]

as long as you work all flood plains you'll never be worse off than if those were all grasslands.

True, but a capital surrounded by 20 grassland will get you off to a very slow start.

 

[Phrederick]

I'm the one being quoted.

I didn't mean to pick on you. That quote just reminded me of something that's been bugging me for a while. And obviously flood plains plus jungle is a nasty combination.

Anyway, the problem with this reasoning is that in the case of flood plains, you HAVE to work them to counteract the effect they bring even if you don't work them. So when you don't want to grow your city, and want to use mines or workshops instead, the floodplains you don't work still bring unhealthiness, and so potentially COST you food instead of bringing some.

Since five flood plains give 2 and each flood plain has +1 food over a grasslands tile, if you work 2 for every 5 tiles, then the unhealthiness is negated. So yes, unless you work some of the floodplains they can be a negative, but why build cities near tiles you aren't going to use? Obviously with low happiness limits and low populations can make it harder to work enough flood plains, but I'm going to post some city screenshots when I get home showing how rare it is that they're a net negative.

Mostly, when founding cities, we are not talking lategame!

If you still can't see the point, try playing an OCC and WBing the terrain around you into floodplains. GL and HF is all I say.

Yeah, flood plains aren't productive before workshops. Neither are grasslands, though, and my point is that flood plains are always better than grasslands. 20 flood plains does cause a problem, but has that ever happened? 10 floodplains isn't going to cause any issues; I'm going to post some screenshots to illustrate what I mean when I get home.

So, take a city built around 10 flood plains with no other food resources. The initial production in the city will be 2F 1H 1C for the city tile and 3F 1C for the flood plain. This results in a 5F 1H 2C city at pop 1. However, the flood plains will be giving -4F from unhealthyness (Assuming you're at the unhealthy cap). Therefore the net production of the city is 1F 1H 2C. I/E a very slow growing city. I've had capitals in games start off like this. They end up growing very slowly due to the FPs.

How can you assume you're at the unhealthy cap? At pop 1, you'll have a total 5 : 1 from population and 4 from flood plains. You'll also have +2 from fresh water and +2 from difficulty bonus (if I remember correctly, on emperor). So you'll have a net 1 on a 5F/1H/1C city, giving 4F/1H/1C, the same as a city working a grasslands.

True, but a capital surrounded by 20 grassland will get you off to a very slow start.

Obviously true, and I think neither flood plains nor grasslands are great tiles for a capital. Commerce can wait for the second city, I'd prefer food/production for my capital in the early game, so I'd prefer either a food special and some hills or some flood plains and hills.

 

[Percy]

Since five flood plains give 2 and each flood plain has +1 food over a grasslands tile, if you work 2 for every 5 tiles, then the unhealthiness is negated. So yes, unless you work some of the floodplains they can be a negative, but why build cities near tiles you aren't going to use?

(Emphasis in bold is mine)
Which is exactly why many people say that you should avoid "too many" floodplains, and that it is better to split 5+ floodplains between two cities =)

Obviously with low happiness limits and low populations can make it harder to work enough flood plains, but I'm going to post some city screenshots when I get home showing how rare it is that they're a net negative.

The thing is, sometimes you don't want to work the floodplains, because you'd rather, i dunno, work mines, or specials, or gold mines, or whatever. And then, the unhealthiness is potentially a drawback, early, because you possibly cannot compensate for the bad health. So you're stuck with working your "grassland".

 

[popejubal]

When given the choice between grasslands and flood plains in a city, flood plains are the better choice as long as you have enough health to successfully work the tiles.

Each Grassland is worth 2 plus improvements.
Each Flood Plain is worth 3 plus improvements - 0.4 .

Flood Plains are better than Grasslands. You want to work as many Flood Plains as possible and you want to have as many Flood Plains in your cities as possible.

...Up to a point. If you have 20 flood plains in your city, that's 5 . If you are playing at high enough difficulty, then you could potentially put yourself into a position where you are losing food at 4000 BC (especially if you don't start next to a river). That's a bad thing.

The worst possible start that I could imagine at the start of the game would also make one of the best possible (non-National-Park) late game cities I could imagine. That's 20 Flood Plains without fresh water on the city tile. That's -5 from , +2 food from city tile and +3 food from working a Flood Plain. That's a grand total of 0 food, 1 hammer, 10 commerce for your initial city.

That's quite stinky.

...on the other hand, 20 Flood Plains Towns would be an absolute delight in the late game when that monster city could support all of its population with health resources and buildings. 20 Towns and another 11 Specialists on top of that from the extra Flood Plain , assuming you have the 36 that you'd need to offset the .

Another question entirely is what to do with 20 Flood Plains that you stumble across in the middle of a map. One single city with 20 Flood Plains would be amazing once you get the resources to support it.

2-4 cities that divide up those Flood Plains would be quite a bit better, however. Those 2-4 cities could each overcome a portion of the total Flood Plain on its own and still have left over for other purposes while still working all of the Flood Plains. Additionally, these cities could work quite a bit more of the Flood Plains in the early and middle game since these 2-4 cities will grow significantly faster as a group than 1 single city would on its own. Additionally, these 2-4 cities could a significantly greater total population than the single city could because they each get to count the empire's and resources independantly while the single city can only count them once.

 

[Percy]

Mostly, you're saying (better) what has already been said, but let me insist on some point:

When given the choice between grasslands and flood plains in a city, flood plains are the better choice as long as you have enough health to successfully work the tiles.

Each Grassland is worth 2 plus improvements.
Each Flood Plain is worth 3 plus improvements - 0.4 .

This is incorrect.
Each Grassland you work is worth 2 plus improvements.
Each Flood Plains you work is worth 3 plus improvements
Each Flood Plains is worth +0.4 whether you work it or not.

I know you develop the point later in your post, but really, i think it's worth insisting on it.

 

[popejubal]

Mostly, you're saying (better) what has already been said, but let me insist on some point:



This is incorrect.
Each Grassland you work is worth 2 plus improvements.
Each Flood Plains you work is worth 3 plus improvements
Each Flood Plains is worth +0.4 whether you work it or not.

I know you develop the point later in your post, but really, i think it's worth insisting on it.

Agreed. In that example, I was specifically talking about a city where every tile is worked, but I was not sufficiently clear and it did deserve emphasis.

My own favorite tile, of course, is the coastal riverside Flood Plains.

Yay worldbuilder.

 

[MestreLion]

My own favorite tile, of course, is the coastal riverside Flood Plains.

Yay worldbuilder.

With Worldbuilder, you can even have a grassland coastal riverside floodplains

Yup, thas FIVE food on a tile with NO resource and NO farm at 4000BC... pretty cheap, huh?

Add wheat, add a farm, get biology, and you get yourself a food monster

 

[MestreLion]

Ok, seriously now... i think that, after all that was discussed here, that floodplains are awesome, except when when you play on a high difficulty level and you start at 4000BC surrounded by many of them. Add a couple of jungles and you are in a dead-end.

Ive started a game once where i had so many floodplains (8 i guess), so many jungles (around 4 or 6), that the city was starving since its foundation. Since i had negative food and only 1 hammer, i couldnt even build a worker. No worker means no farm. And no, this wasnt Deity.. it was Prince i guess.

Had to restart

 

[KMadCandy]

With Worldbuilder, you can even have a grassland coastal riverside floodplains

Yup, thas FIVE food on a tile with NO resource and NO farm at 4000BC... pretty cheap, huh?

Add wheat, add a farm, get biology, and you get yourself a food monster

oh if we're getting into WB combos ... try pigs with a pasture on a plains oasis. so much food, commerce and a hammer too, and no health problems! add some plains oasis cottages in the cross too. golly gee that makes a nice city. errrr ummm i mean my friend said her dentist's cousin's sister-in-law said it rocked .

seriously tho, i'm playing my first earth map 18 civs game. i'm freddy and doing fine. mansa musa tho, OMG that guy is screwed from day -1 in that starting position!

 

[popejubal]

double post.

 

[popejubal]

With Worldbuilder, you can even have a grassland coastal riverside floodplains

Yup, thas FIVE food on a tile with NO resource and NO farm at 4000BC... pretty cheap, huh?

Add wheat, add a farm, get biology, and you get yourself a food monster

...oh, no. I mean coastal riverside floodplains. That's coast as in 2, 2 water tile that can have fish loving in it.

If you use worldbuilder to drag rivers out into the water, you can put floodplains out in the coastal waters and even in the ocean. You can also use Worldbuilder to put forests in the waters. Additionally, you can put cottages/hamlets/villages/towns on those tiles as well.

Yes, it's silly, but try out a large continents map OCC where you don't mess with the number of civs, but you do start with a worldbuilder pumped city location. It's quite silly, but still a lot of fun as a sandbox game.

...by the way, some of the tiles in this screen shot look like they produce 4 food. They don't. You just can't see the extra loaf of behind them as easily.

 

[KMadCandy]

...oh, no. I mean coastal riverside floodplains. That's coast as in 2, 2 water tile that can have fish loving in it.

phsaw, no need to go swimming dude!

Spoiler :

i'm telling ya, make your own improvements on oasisesiseseses, they're wicked cool.

no modifiers (no OR, forge, CS, no nothing), that city is giving me 34 production. 79 food without bio (won't change with bio btw). i WBd a future tech and monarchy and adopted HR and handed out free machine guns so that i could get everybody to work mind you . check out those piggies tho! 8 food, 1 hammer, 2 commerce. they're on a river so a levee would apply. you could put them on a hill, but flatlands is prettier which is very important. most tiles i have cottages on, they do grow as you work them on oases, it's just that your workers can't make them so the game forces you to cheat. it's not my fault, see? if you want more than 79 food, swap out some cottage tiles for other stuff, or you can put an oasis on hill tiles too.

i discovered and used piggies on WBonly terrain when playing a fake game to learn how to use nationhood. once i knew the map and had the tech and was ready to rumble, i opened up the WB arsenal. gosh that was fun, i wrecked those guys! doesn't count, but it was fun *giggle*.

 

[Gooblah]

Wait a sec....you can work oasis tiles?! WHAT?! If I had know this earlier....or if you WBed the oasisises (uhhhhh...anyone know the proper spelling?!) Kmad, you caused me unnecessary grief. Also, floodplains are good for cottage spamming, since they can create an awesome Science City due to the extra 1 food coming in on each tile, reducing the need for farms and increasing the number of cottages needed.



Robos are cool (okay, unneeded, but I wanted to say this.)

 

[ParadigmShifter]

You can work oases but you can't improve them in any way, except roads/rails.

 

[UncleJJ]

True, but a capital surrounded by 20 grassland will get you off to a very slow start.

Dave, you build too many cottages

Try building some grassland farms and you'd find an appreciable speed up in city growth

 

[KMadCandy]

Wait a sec....you can work oasis tiles?! WHAT?! If I had know this earlier....or if you WBed the oasisises (uhhhhh...anyone know the proper spelling?!) Kmad, you caused me unnecessary grief.

oh but i had such fun changing my civ's name from my usual Candyland Empire for the purpose of this screenshot silly goose however did you miss it :crazyeyes:. i think maybe you means giggles instead of grief . plus you did open the spoiler box, buyer reader beware!

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

In this thread, I see are posters here who are:

- serious players
- seriously bad players
- seriously good players
- seriously confused players
- seriously sarcastic players
- seriously thick-in-the-head players that can't tell which posts are sarcastic (or not)
- players with flawed logic
- players with flawed logic that beats emperor or above anyway

What's so complicated about floodplains anyway? They're next to deserts, jungles and grassland, and I generally prefer cities with grassland anyway, since they're next to the more useful hills and forests, with a staple food or an animal thrown in.

Correct way to use floodplains:
- Do NOT load up on floodplains in your capital or first expansion (please)
- if AND ONLY IF you hapiness and health resources, and pottery, spam cottages there. Then it's useful without any infrastructure. Otherwise, you can wait until metal casting, democracy, super-slavery or something.
- if you don't plan on having pottery early, please don't use it
- if you don't have pottery but do have writing, DON'T. You won't be able to build the library anyway.