Hill start/settler movement

[softcactus]

Hello, I've seen a few mentions of the hill start being important. If you have what looks like an OK move in one turn to a hill that won't cost you a coastal placement is it worth moving? (I don't like genning multiple starts)

Here's a screenshot of a map I'm about to start. What do you think of the movement I'm showing? Is it a no brainier or not actually that important?

Spoiler :

Thanks!

Oh another unrelated question: I'm using the Huns for my first BNW Immortal game, and I wanted to have fun with the Horse Archers. Is it worth expanding before pumping a few out and going for my neighbor? Or would I be better off staying OCC until I have the horse archers hammered out? I've never gone for UU aggression in ancient era so I'm not sure what that looks like and I don't want to fall too far behind being aggressive.

Edit: This is BNW if that matters . Also thinking about it more I guess the trade off is losing the river for garden/water wheel?

 

[civ54lyfe]

i'd almost want to just go 2 right and settle by the river, which violates the Hill Rule. you would end up getting 3 pastures (all three would be in your 3rd ring from the capitol so you'd have to take Tradition to grow borders) which would maximize your Stable's effectiveness. you'd lose the hammers right off the bat from being on flat dirt, still be eligible for Water Mill and Garden. you also get max Horses. and great population growth with 2 Wheat, 2 Flood Plains. no other move would max your Horses by what is shown.

 

[softcactus]

i'd almost want to just go 2 right and settle by the river, which violates the Hill Rule. you would end up getting 3 pastures (all three would be in your 3rd ring from the capitol so you'd have to take Tradition to grow borders) which would maximize your Stable's effectiveness. you'd lose the hammers right off the bat from being on flat dirt, still be eligible for Water Mill and Garden. you also get max Horses. and great population growth with 2 Wheat, 2 Flood Plains. no other move would max your Horses by what is shown.

Yeah that seems like it might be the best spot if I settled this turn.

 

[Arachnofiend]

I would've moved my warrior onto the gold hill first to see what's on the other side. With the information available, I'd settle one to the northeast; since you have a hammer in the first ring with your wheat the initial lack of production won't be too terrible.

 

[civ54lyfe]

1 NE would just be an equivalent move (it's just another Gold hill)? why not settle in place then, unless you mean he gets those two Horses faster? although don't you get the hammers from auto-chopping the Gold hill Forest when you settle a city on it?

 

[FeiLing]

You get the hammers for settler-chopping in and if another city is nearby, not in the newly found city. So for the capital you get nothing

The forested gold hill seems safer than the other gold (gamble as you don't see half of the tiles the city will have access too). Forested gold hill at least gives quick horses guaranteed and also a flood plains tile in the 2nd ring.

 

[softcactus]

I would've moved my warrior onto the gold hill first to see what's on the other side. With the information available, I'd settle one to the northeast; since you have a hammer in the first ring with your wheat the initial lack of production won't be too terrible.

I thought the warrior started to the right of my settler but now I'm not sure. I'll settle that that hill and go from there.

It does seem like the answer to my question though is YES move off the river tile onto a hill?

Thanks guys.

 

[FeiLing]

Well if the warrior scouted towards those juicy desert tiles that would have been a good location too with many horse and sheep and lots of fresh water desert (hills!), maybe a mountain too - stuff I could imagine settling on turn 2 or even 3 for.

 

[softcactus]

You get the hammers for settler-chopping in and if another city is nearby, not in the newly found city. So for the capital you get nothing

The forested gold hill seems safer than the other gold (gamble as you don't see half of the tiles the city will have access too). Forested gold hill at least gives quick horses guaranteed and also a flood plains tile in the 2nd ring.

Risk payed off salt and MORE horses. And plains. Feels very Hun.

Edit forgot picture:

Spoiler :

 

[civ54lyfe]

i highly doubt the north Desert holds an alpha area that's richer than his start area. also i'd just settle in place if he want horses now-ish. by the time he's actually gonna build some, his city should capture the NW horses in its border.

ed: oh-ho busted! but glad it paid off

 

[softcactus]

Well if the warrior scouted towards those juicy desert tiles that would have been a good location too with many horse and sheep and lots of fresh water desert (hills!), maybe a mountain too - stuff I could imagine settling on turn 2 or even 3 for.

Oh, what makes the desert start so good? Would I go for Petra doing something like that? I've actually generally moved away from desert tiles when settling my capital. Have I been passing up lots of great starts O_o ?

 

[civ54lyfe]

in this game if you're wanting to war it up with the Huns it's less likely that priority would be given to Petra later on. maybe you'll pop a faith ruin and take Desert Folklore and maybe things will change though. or if you're playing Prince or lower you can build Petra no matter what else you're doing.

oh, with your start (which is super-awesome) Petra wouldn't be worth it there anyway. try for God of the Open Sky +1 culture per pasture. or the one that buffs Gold mines.

 

[FeiLing]

Oh yeah that turned out awesome

Desert starts are pretty imba (sure playing Huns seems like it's going to be a conquest victory where it wouldn't really matter. But Desert Folklore + Petra still makes the greatest cities and empires (especially if you got many fresh water desert hills)). [it doesn't look like there'd be many hill if any at all though]

 

[civ54lyfe]

plus Petra's effects purposely ignore Flood Plains IIRC. really little point in building it in his cap at least.

 

[eewallace]

Given a choice between a hill start and a river start, I usually get the river because of the various buildings it unlocks. Not that that hill turned out bad at all--looks great. But how can you see horses before researching animal husbandry?

 

[FeiLing]

He already researched Animal Husbandry. He's Attila.

 

[eewallace]

Ah, I haven't played Attila yet. Maybe I should, if he gets starting locations like that!

 

[Arachnofiend]

1 NE would just be an equivalent move (it's just another Gold hill)? why not settle in place then, unless you mean he gets those two Horses faster? although don't you get the hammers from auto-chopping the Gold hill Forest when you settle a city on it?

1 NE grabs the sheep in comparison to settling in place. Looks like gambling on making a move was the better option in the end, though.

 

[softcactus]

Thanks for the help.

Here's a shot now that I've explored a bit. Just finished NC, settled my 2nd and 3rd city and bought granaries for both last turn.

If I had gambled on a Petra start, would the hill tile north east of the wheat on the river have been the best spot? Right next to where the desert tooltip is.

edit: Also I was planning on using my next to caravans from sailing/engineering to send food to the capital. Is that ideal?

Amusingly enough Gustavus doesn't seem to mind my super close forward settling plan, requested a DOF.

Spoiler :

 

[Johan^^]

Hmm if you did accept the DoF, then you might want to focus on Building your empire up, looks like you have room for more good city spots. Then you can take sweden out onces the DoF runs out. If you didnt accept it, then just go ahead and kill him now