Granary - How Important?

alpert@snowcres

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
9
I'm just starting to play Warlord level. I've heard on this board to not go "Wonders Crazy," so I didn't the last few times when I played Chieftain level. The only Wonder I simply cannot live without is Leonardo's Workshop (half price upgrades, right?).

So what should I be building? Should every city have a _______(fill in the blank). Should every city have a temple? Should every city have a granary?

Thanks!


Anthony
 
I do not see much value in granaries after the first couple, unless it is town on a river with a food bonus.

At Warlord, I don't think every city needs a temple either. You have 3 born content, so it should be a while before you have happiness issue. Shields are precious in the ealry turns.

I can't think of any structures that should be in EVERY town. Some towns should not have any structures at all.
 
It depends on what you want.

If what you want is to prepare for higher levels (monarch or above), then look at each city as a separate specialty. Some will be growth cities (high food), that kick out settlers/workers - these should all have granaries.

Some will be military cities - these will have good shields.

Some might be science cities - all of these should have libraries/universities

Large cities should, usually, get marketplaces.

Reasonably corrupt cities get courthouses/police stations.

Totally corrupt cities get taxmen/scientists.

Coastal cities get harbors.

If you are going cultural, or have no luxuries, some cities get temples/cathedrals - even colleseums!

Small, corrupt cities that can't grow large, but secure an important resource get walls.

It kind of depends on what civ you are playing, too. If you are egypt, it seems kind of silly to not take advantage of cheap temples, so building those makes sense.

If you are china, build more barracks than normal.

if you are england, harbors/commercial docks.

Normally, youi don't build granaries except in cities that are driving growth. It's much easier to grow large cities by merging workers, and much faster, too.

Course, on warlord, you *can* build every type of improvement in all your cities, at least the core ones. And you can get most of the wonders, if you want. The key is to think about what you are trying to accomplish - you can win without a plan on warlord, but you sure can't on deity. Even if that plan is "survive as long as we can", that's a plan and it drives your decisions.

For instance - if your plan is to win by diplomacy, you will build a lot of libraries, and have at least one very high shield city to build the UN. You might not build as many barracks, because you aren't planning on going to war a lot. You will probably build a lot of marketplaces/banks/etc, so you can trade easier and get on everyone's good side.

If what you want to do is conquer the world as fast as possible, you might only build barracks in towns.

If what you want to do is play a lot of modern warfare, you will build a good infrastructure, so you are in the race at the end so you can use your paratroops/etc.
 
alpert@snowcres said:
So what should I be building? Should every city have a _______(fill in the blank). Should every city have a temple? Should every city have a granary?
You have no idea how refreshing this is... a new player who has the right questions.

Read vmxa's advice, and think in terms of "specialized cities". If a town is shield rich, build a barracks and units. If a town has a lot of food, build a granary...workers and/or settlers. Lots of tiles that offer bonus commerce? Skip the barracks, and build markets/libraries.

Consider this: Don't build what "the city" needs. Build what the Empire needs the city to build.

...and one more thing... welcome to CFC!

Edit: Automated Teller gives some good advice as well... keep asking questions, post some saves or screenshots. There are many here who like to help new players become good players.
 
1 more thing: your core 5-8 cities (capitol and the first ring) are likely to do double duty. Two of them, for instance, might be great military barracks towns - but if science is important, put a library there, too. These are the least corrupt cities in your empire, and quite likely have the best developed land, so they will be generating the most commerce and are the best places for the multiplier buildings.

Course, if you dont' care about science (maybe you are running a tiny pangea and just want to beat the heck out of the AI and if you see the middle ages, you will be sad ;), then don't bother with the libraries.

This is actually important to think about in terms of aqueducts - you might, reflexively, put one in any town that doesnt' have fresh water, so it can grow... but make sure you want that city to grow. Can you handle it from a happiness point of view? Will be have enough food to be a good specialist farm? Do you even want to invest the shields for it to grow?
 
Thanks for the responses. I'd love someone to critique my game (Civ III Vanilla 1.29)

I’m Persia. I played this game once before, went Communist, destroyed Zululand, had a HUGE army, but was 3-4 tech behind the rest, not much money in the treasury, and lost the UN vote 6-1 (I was the only one was voted for Persia).

I restarted at about 700 AD. I didn’t destroy Zululand. I went Democracy (that made a HUGE difference in gold). I haven’t built a huge army and focused on techs and money. Germany declared war on me, and my friends England and Russia helped me. They both made peace with Germany. I want to destroy Germany, but WW is setting in.

This is about my 15th game. I played about 10 on Chieftain, easily winning the last 7-8. This is about the 5th Warlord I’ve played, losing the first three rather quickly, and lasting until the UN vote on the last won (this same game that I reset after losing the UN Vote). I think I can win this one.

Any help/criticism would be appreciated.

Damn this game is addicting! This is the first game I’ve bought since Railroad Tycoon in about 1992. That was also an amazing game.


Thanks!


Anthony
 

Attachments

General thoughts:

If you are behind on tech, you can still easily built the UN - just start building something else, like a palace, in a good city, trade as you can to get ahead and power research. Best way to not lose the vote is to control the UN and have no votes ;)

And, if you want to win the vote... declare war on your rival and bring everyone else in on it :)
 
Another easy way to win the vote, is to gift things to the other civs a few turns before the vote. I've been a warmongerer the whole game and then did this before the vote and still got all the votes, except of course from my main rival.
 
First it is good to let us know this is an AP game, but thanks for noting it is vanilla. So my first advice is to never play AP again. It just distorts the game so much.

Second, due use the preference to enable Always Wait At End Of Turn. This lets you go around our empire and see if you over looked something.

Now I see that you are building the ToE at 17 more turns to go and that is just going up in smoke, unless you have another structure to switch to in 5 turn or so.

You wonder city is very weak. It has mostly irrigated grass and makes 22 net shields. Compare to Rhiem making 46, you can see you have no chance to beat them to anything.

Three citizens are jokers, that is more than 1/3 of the pop doing nothing. No market? No factory? Of course no coal plant becasue you have no factory. You would have more than double you production in that town and with a market, those clowns could go back to work.

Did you research communism and Sanitation yourself? They are optional techs and at least could wait until you had the ToE in the bag.

What was the point of researching Industry and not making any factories? You have almost all of your troops tied up as defenders or slow movers and half of those are still AA ones (immortals).

Ur is starving and all you have to do is put one joker back to work. Arebla is the same.

I am very much oppossed to trading coal and you are doing it to two civs. That is too strong, if they cannot make rails, I want to keep it that way.

Lots of cities on wealth, but now is not the time for that, now is the time to take down others and gain land. This means you need troops. Not 101 gpt piling up. You need calvs and artillery and lots of them.

Anyway I feel very strongly that AP is not a good way to learn the game. If I was playing an AP, I would have puked out so many settlers/workers that I would have a lot more land.

Land is the coin of the realm in this game. Workers and troops are the best ways of getting and keeping land.
 
The wonders I usually try to get are The Great Library, Smith's Trading Company, Theory of Evolution, Leo's workshop. As they all do something:
The great library - gives you 2 tech advances the other civs have (I don't know about anyone else, but I normally get a government monarchy/republic)
Smith's Trading Co. - pays maintenance fee for trade based improvements (i.e. Harbors, Markets, banks, airports - this can make the world of difference on your GPT (gold per turn)).
Leo's workshop - as someone said (might have been you actually) half proce obsolete upgrades, and can also trigger golden age for militaristic civs.
Theory of evolution - gives you 2 tech advances (that you can choose) for FREE. It's brilliant.
 
The Great library actually gives you any ech advance you don't know, that any two other civs that you know have.

So, if you are germany and don't know monarchy, currency, horsebac riding and republic and
you know England (who has Monarchy and Currency), Persia (who has MOnarchy and horseback riding) and France (who has currency, horsebackriding and Republic), you will get monarchy,currency and horseback riding, but not republic. And that will continue until two civs learn education (or you research it yourself, of course)
 
Back
Top Bottom