Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by Callidus Thorn, Oct 21, 2014.
Not just cottages. The ability to share any improved tile between cities can be very beneficial.
Hi Callidus Thorn, and welcome to CFC. That's a fine start you rolled for us there!
There's already lots of healthy discussion regarding the best opening and choice of city placement. As ever, I think it's situational. What you do and where you settle depends on your short- and long- term goals, the level you're playing and your neighbors. I'd be very interested if the resident experts came to a conclusion regarding the optimal opening. Any chance guys?
Regarding your question on the over-lap or not to over-lap problem: there are lots of factors to consider. Further away means more maintenance paid, more worker turns used but also more land blocked and obviously more workable tiles. Closer means less maintenance and allows tile-sharing, useful for continually using premium tiles (say after whipping) or growing cottages for the capital.
Hmm well..land blocking would be much better if you could not take AI cities by force ~~
The reason why overlap gets advertised so much..we know that less experienced players always settle their cities too far away. Okay maybe not 100% always, but you know..
So we have some auto-learning value for them if they start considering such cities.
Example games are best used for showing as many new thingies as possible.
How do you become a good player..? When you start comparing stuff you saw.
Cities costing less would be not so important on this level.
Your first thoughts should be about how can i make new cities useful faster.
There are some key buildings like monuments, granaries or sometimes work boats..and if a new city can borrow 1 strong tile right after being settled, it's development can often be quicker.
Just a minor tip: Settle Orange on the Dyes. It's not much, but you'll get an extra Commerce and the resource as soon as you get Calendar, and because you get the Dyes from the North it's only gain. Also sharing the Ivory is valuable because that city got no production except from the Forrests.
After T50 borders expand to third ring, resources can be pre-improved for a city further away. Its also fair to say that every map is different so you try to make the best use of what you've got.
Looks great so far. I'd settle city 2 on the purple dot location--whip the settler, and time a chop to finish the workboat on the next turn (if necessary you can alternate turns between chopping and mining on a hill). You may want to check for seafood just north of the warrior first. Later city spots depend on what's in the fog, but just based on what we can see now I'd move yellow 1SW and red and green 1NE.
I still think getting the second and third city out quickest is more important than developing huge amounts of early food. And the way to do that is researching BW , chopping two workers then two settlers. And then developing your food so you have three growing cities rather than one.
Anyway I played the save out - killed off two neighbors but kept one to trade tech with. Towards the end I had 20 cities and was going for a space race victory with a nice tech lead.
However, being a "dumbass" , I forgot to check the victory conditions screen and a civ on the other continent won through culture. Duh.
I know the feeling. Sigh.
Nope, sorry, this is wrong. Workers and settlers are not built solely on hammers, they're built on hammers and food (that's why your city doesn't grow while building them.) Your early food tiles are your strongest; that's a fact, not an opinion.
Try it yourself.
Play the first forty turns each way. worker - chop worker both workers chop settler.
Then try it your way or any other way- you wont beat it.
I swear on a stack of dead rats!
:shrug: ok. At turn 50, I have three workers, I'm one turn away from producing my third settler, and I'm working 5 improved tiles. Would you mind posting a screenie of turn 50 with your "ignore food tiles" approach?
If the game can be won by turn 40 with this method, it would look as if you are doing well. But by the time you get to turn 70-80, this approach will fall behind. That is looking at sustainable science, growth and power etc.
I have already tried your method when I first started playing Civ4 a long while ago. Even if you do not use the whip, letting the city grow comes out on top very fast. If you do use the whip, then there is no comparison.
But out of all due fairness, why don't you give us a save at T40 and another at T80. I would like to see if your way is better than the old tried and true. I just do not have a target to compare since I was not able to come out ahead using the method you favor. But I do know that using a dedicated worker to chop and letting the city grow works very well.
no offense, but touting your approach and then losing to the AI in this way basically is self-refuting. I encourage you to rethink your game and learn the importance of food. It's a core principle of this game.
BW first is definately over the top.
The great advantage of developing the Food first, is, that then, you can use the whip (with BW through early Alpha or self-tech) and all of those nice Forrests are wonderful to build a 500 BC attack date army and storm one of your neighbours.
It's not only fastest expansion that makes a game good, especially in the beginning, there is some time 'til the AIs settle really close, and getting large, developed cities through war outweights self-settling greatly. On standard map sizes, I've found myself often found only the most necessary cities myself (like secure Ivory) because one can conquer complete Civs with something like 10-12 Elephants + 5-8 Catapults at 500 BC. Just think of 5 cities, possibly even Shrine cities and the always great enemy Capital for the cost of only some Catapults.
If I did this right the screenshot should appear.
Don't know how to do the spoiler thing. And in fairness I have three workers, but that is because I stole one. I only chopped the two workers and two settlers.
Dumb but honest, that's me. And food is important, you are 100 per cent correct.
But chopping is a faster start. And for the record I learned that from a post I read long ago. May have even been an earlier Civ version. I have been playing since the original game back in the 90's . Love it.
I love me a nice early ax rush followed by and endless parade of horse archers.
Every time you leave great tiles unimproved, you lose hammers.
And if you ignore food, you are not preparing for whipping.
Food is also hammers for settlers and workers, Corn or Pigs turns into an improved copper / iron mine (maybe that will help you value them more ).
But most important and that's where your method really fails, forests are not endless resources. Removing them can be great early, best example would be wonders, but your return is terrible if you use them for expansion instead of doing that with your good tiles.
Note that my opening does not "ignore food". It does place a higher priority on faster production of workers and settlers. The workers do build farms and mines and all once the settlers are chopped.
So I can whip some military and go capture some cities. Often with wonders in them. And then chop some courthouses and such.
First off, great to see a debate going on, that's healthy and educational. Ironic that this one is the inverse of the skipping BW approach. Thanks to all for explaining your ideas, particularly the illustrated tests that allow comparison.
In evaluating the screenshots, it looks like the Chop First approach leads to more improved tiles (7 vs. 5) and cities (3 vs. 2) at the cost of losing some forests (6?) at turn 50. Food First's third city could be founded next turn and it is impossible to say when tile improvements will be ready. That's pretty much what Fippy pointed out, you buy progress at the cost of forests, and it is an intriguing point that every turn a good food tile is not improved and worked you are losing potential hammers. The counter to that would seem to be that the Chop First approach has greater population (can't read third city), which is actually hammers stored in the form of future whips. So Food First has some hammers stored in forests and Chop First has some stored in population. Difficult to compare those two values with the evidence at hand, and one would need to account for whip anger anyway, but Food First does look to have more stored hammers available. We don't know much about infrastructure and hammers invested there, however. Oh, and I missed the fact that one worker was stolen not built.
One could, of course, do a hybrid approach by alternating improving a food tile and chopping. You could start with a chop or with a food for further variation. Frankly, that one can hold this kind of discussion is one of the reasons the game is so good. I should also say that I think lymond's rather uncharacteristic comment that the final result of the game proves the start to be inferior is clearly not logically valid.
I'm interested to hear other reactions to the screenshots.
[edited to reflect correct number of improved tiles, mistakenly had 8 vs. 5]
Separate names with a comma.