[BTS] I want to improve my early game with your advices

[Fippy]

I like settling wheat + sheep first, not bad as 2nd city there are also some forests.
Djenne 1w afterwards as suggested for the good copper tile, chopping a library (writing > Myst and libraries are good later unlike monuments)

Something that could be learned on higher levels: road > regular mine for traderoutes.
Huts are also not helping there, you are swimming in already and are not bothered by missing out on some

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

OK, let me summarize and explain:

I chose the place for Djenne because of 3 arguments:

1. Djenne is on a hill and gives +1P long-term and more security.
2. Djenne has 3 resources long-term, which makes it a good production city
3. Because I get 2 more citys from Sury, I have time to choose good longterm-placement and don't need to hurry. Hurrying would mean to get a second settler faster, but getting a second settler would mean 5 citys all-together, which will cripple my finances, because except of my capital no city can contribute to commerce for now.

I understand your hint, that you would say, fast starting production in the 2nd city is everytime more important than choosing a good long-term good placement. Right? Is it still the case, when there are 2 more citys elsewhere?

_____________

Second topic I am interested:
Trade route by sailing or by roads? Building a road needs 12-14 turns for the worker, while building a mine needs just 6 turns and the worker is free again to chop. So in my opinion it would make more sense to get the trade routes with sailing (12 turns, maybe less, with the new cities), for which I can start with the lighthouse directly. In this situation here I will have a massive amount of border cities, which make sailing and Great lighthouse a good goal.

Are my thoughts not correct? Maybe you can help me in calculate it, why roads are really necessary. For now it seems I need neither fast movement nor a trade route by road.


1.4. The attack (2nd part)

I would chose to go for

Fishing -> Sailing -> Stone Masonry -> Agriculture

and Great lighthouse, because another civ could get the oracle before I can start it. After stone masonry I would decide from the new situation.

Capital: Worker -> Library -> Lighthouse -> Great Lighthouse (start with overflow and whip the end)
Djenne: Monument -> 2x WB (1 for scout) -> Library

Worker: Finish mine SW from Djenne, after that prechopping at capital, start building roads to silver

I go for attack Surys cap on the fastest way:

Round 86 before attack. Combat seems harder than I thought at first:

My skirmisher with star and 25% bonus against archer vs. his undeveloped archer: 4.40 : 7.20

Hmm... that was closer than I thought: Lost 3 skirmishers. I think he has no BW, so he cannot whip an archer. Let's try to get his second city with the remaining troops, but but first of all taking the one worker north. I need to chop a monument as soon as possible.

Questions: When obertaking a city, it revolts. Does it need troops there?

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

OK, got 2 workers, second city has only a warrior inside. Let's take it out. Skirmisher and warrior can win, when he don't get an archer next turn.
First captured worker chops the forest 2S of Maso and thenafter will develop copper.

Question: What to do with Hari?
A) Whip monument, worker assists at Surys Cap (after revolt: 16 turns till fat cross)
B) Go for library directly, worker chops (30+90+4 rounds, 12 rounds till fat cross)

I would take B cause of the speedup and the possibility to setup scientists while there's no fat cross. What would you take?

Would you go for lib in Surys Cap too?

Meanwhile situation at home:

Mine and worker ready in 2, Djenne works a water tile, which speeds up sailing by 2 turns and makes the city contributing directly to progress and without using worker time thanks fishing.

 

[AcaMetis]

I chose the place for Djenne because of 3 arguments:

1. Djenne is on a hill and gives +1P long-term and more security.
2. Djenne has 3 resources long-term, which makes it a good production city
3. Because I get 2 more citys from Sury, I have time to choose good longterm-placement and don't need to hurry. Hurrying would mean to get a second settler faster, but getting a second settler would mean 5 citys all-together, which will cripple my finances, because except of my capital no city can contribute to commerce for now.

1. Settling on a grass hill doesn't get you +1 in the city centre tile, that's only if you settle on a plains hill or an appropriate resource. The benefit of settling on a grass hill is the defensive bonuses for being on a hill, which is not worth the opportunity cost of not being able to share food and improve a very solid resource tile immediately (I'd have placed Djenne 1W to share Sheep and improve Copper immediately, for the record).
2. It might make the city better long term, but what about now? What is that city contributing to your empire right here and now, when you're fighting an early war and Barbarians are right around the corner? As is you're building a Monument with an unimproved 12 grass hill forest to get a border pop in...IIRC 30 turns on Marathon? Either way you're waiting on a building to pop borders, then waiting on a border pop, then sending workers to make the required improvements once you've got the reach and tech to do so, and then you've got a decent city with good tiles. Compare this to if you settled 1W: You'd be able to start working a 321 tile immediately, start improving a 24 tile immediately, be in position to hook up a critically important strategic resource immediately (as least I classify Copper as such, since Axes do such a wonderful job cleaning up Barbarians), and a border pop connects the city with the capital since you'll have culture over a coastal route (you only need Sailing to trade over rivers and coast that's outside your culture, for the record). Sure, you miss out on the Wheat long term, but how long will it take for a city to be able to work both Fish and Wheat without just growing into unhappiness? Monarchy, at least? The potential long term gain isn't worth the loss in short term gain in this instance, especially when you consider that 1W Djenne would be productive from turn 1 and contribute enough to your empire to make up for that loss of long term gain in the short term.
3. The long term, in that scenario, is after you've solved the economic crash you're expecting. In that situation you plan for the short term, to get out of that hole ASAP even if it sacrifices some long term potential. Remember that this is a game all about snowballing early advantages: An economy that's back in shape 50 turns earlier is an economy that starts progressing again 50 turns earlier, and those turns amount to an advantage that might very well exceed the value of playing for more long term advantages. Not that slow and steady can't win the race in Civ IV, but if the hare decides to take a nap only after he wins the turtle doesn't stand a chance.

Beyond that if you're interested in learning the game I would highly recommend you plan on the default "learn the game" settings: Standard size map, standard speed, Pangaea or Inland Sea mapscript (most would advise the former, but personally I prefer the latter as it's usually more balanced and has harsher Barbarian spawns, which encourages the critical barb management skills needed on higher difficulties), either the standard number of AIs or +1 AI on Inland Sea, no huts, no events, no other custom options enabled, and all victory conditions enabled. If you want to play the game on Huge/Marathon that's fine, but learning the game is best done on standard settings.

 

[Nick723]

It’s quite hard to give generic advice, when you have gone for a one city skirmisher rush. As others have pointed out, what you have done here wouldn’t have worked on Monarch as they start with archers.

In general however, yes short term effectiveness vs long term is super important to consider. This can have many facets, eg.
- choice of city centre location. Instantly connected? High hammer city centre?
- what tiles to include in 1st vs 2nd ring. Typically to maximise short term effectiveness you want food tiles in 1st ring. Later on when you have more options to expand borders, this becomes less important.
- what techs you have available. Calendar / iron working (to remove jungle) are good examples of this, where some city sites only become good after you have certain techs.

I would say 90% of the time, choosing the best short term location is the way to go!

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

1. Settling on a grass hill doesn't get you +1 in the city centre tile, that's only if you settle on a plains hill or an appropriate resource. The benefit of settling on a grass hill is the defensive bonuses for being on a hill, which is not worth the opportunity cost of not being able to share food and improve a very solid resource tile immediately (I'd have placed Djenne 1W to share Sheep and improve Copper immediately, for the record).

Ahhhh.... right! Then I had misunderstood something. Thanks.

2. It might make the city better long term, but what about now? What is that city contributing to your empire right here and now, when you're fighting an early war and Barbarians are right around the corner? As is you're building a Monument with an unimproved 12 grass hill forest to get a border pop in...IIRC 30 turns on Marathon? Either way you're waiting on a building to pop borders, then waiting on a border pop, then sending workers to make the required improvements once you've got the reach and tech to do so, and then you've got a decent city with good tiles. Compare this to if you settled 1W: You'd be able to start working a 321 tile immediately, start improving a 24 tile immediately, be in position to hook up a critically important strategic resource immediately (as least I classify Copper as such, since Axes do such a wonderful job cleaning up Barbarians), and a border pop connects the city with the capital since you'll have culture over a coastal route (you only need Sailing to trade over rivers and coast that's outside your culture, for the record). Sure, you miss out on the Wheat long term, but how long will it take for a city to be able to work both Fish and Wheat without just growing into unhappiness? Monarchy, at least? The potential long term gain isn't worth the loss in short term gain in this instance, especially when you consider that 1W Djenne would be productive from turn 1 and contribute enough to your empire to make up for that loss of long term gain in the short term.

OK, let me summarize:

1. Settling 1W would give me sheep, but then I lose this tile in my cap. What would you do with the unused citizen? He has only the opportunity to work on an 3P, means capital won't grow as much.
2. Settling there would give me copper. OK, that's an argument when I don't play Mali with skirmishers and when I don't have copper in another city (like here, Surys Cap). I would think about it when there's another game.
3. So trading over rivers and coast inside border is possible even without sailing? That's new to me thanks. Means, I get 2C some turns earlier, let's say, 10 turns, cause we get sailing soon. Means 20 beakers in sum. That sounds not that much...
4. The thought, that 2 food resources are more than I need, is interesting. I need to think about. Well, this comes in handling with some questions I have later. It seems that I build too many farms too and not optimizing citizens. Let me first say my argument: I think, in working 2 food resources, I can faster grow pop and thus whip regularly. So I just grow from 2 to 4 and whip and again.

So all in all I don't know whether the arguments apply here in this special situation. With fishing the new city can contribute 3C until it is grown nough or the mine is ready. Here I could use the sea to get 3C and speedup research and time, that WB will finish exactly when I use the fish tile. So it can contribute 3C nearly steadily, which is actually +15% of my research.

3. The long term, in that scenario, is after you've solved the economic crash you're expecting. In that situation you plan for the short term, to get out of that hole ASAP even if it sacrifices some long term potential. Remember that this is a game all about snowballing early advantages: An economy that's back in shape 50 turns earlier is an economy that starts progressing again 50 turns earlier, and those turns amount to an advantage that might very well exceed the value of playing for more long term advantages. Not that slow and steady can't win the race in Civ IV, but if the hare decides to take a nap only after he wins the turtle doesn't stand a chance.

Beyond that if you're interested in learning the game I would highly recommend you plan on the default "learn the game" settings: Standard size map, standard speed, Pangaea or Inland Sea mapscript (most would advise the former, but personally I prefer the latter as it's usually more balanced and has harsher Barbarian spawns, which encourages the critical barb management skills needed on higher difficulties), either the standard number of AIs or +1 AI on Inland Sea, no huts, no events, no other custom options enabled, and all victory conditions enabled. If you want to play the game on Huge/Marathon that's fine, but learning the game is best done on standard settings.

OK, I could try. I never played normal speed
Sometimes marathon and most times - like here - epic. The thought of no random events is good. Is there a possibility to shut it out while ingame?

I really dislike the technology trading, where the AIs share techs, they havn't researched. Seems that they share only under themselves, so I would keep that out. But in the other options I think about using them too. Thanks.

I would like to read your answers about my questions in Quote 2

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

Haha, I just tried to make a colony, and it said, that I can give Hari to Darius.... mhh... I don't know, whether I should interpret this way to get information as cheating (i even don't have contact to him)

 

[AcaMetis]

OK, let me summarize:

1. Settling 1W would give me sheep, but then I lose this tile in my cap. What would you do with the unused citizen? He has only the opportunity to work on an 3P, means capital won't grow as much.
2. Settling there would give me copper. OK, that's an argument when I don't play Mali with skirmishers and when I don't have copper in another city (like here, Surys Cap). I would think about it when there's another game.
3. So trading over rivers and coast inside border is possible even without sailing? That's new to me thanks. Means, I get 2C some turns earlier, let's say, 10 turns, cause we get sailing soon. Means 20 beakers in sum. That sounds not that much...
4. The thought, that 2 food resources are more than I need, is interesting. I need to think about. Well, this comes in handling with some questions I have later. It seems that I build too many farms too and not optimizing citizens. Let me first say my argument: I think, in working 2 food resources, I can faster grow pop and thus whip regularly. So I just grow from 2 to 4 and whip and again.

So all in all I don't know whether the arguments apply here in this special situation. With fishing the new city can contribute 3C until it is grown nough or the mine is ready. Here I could use the sea to get 3C and speedup research and time, that WB will finish exactly when I use the fish tile. So it can contribute 3C nearly steadily, which is actually +15% of my research.

1. If whipping wasn't in the cards (many factors to consider there), then yes, absolutely work the plains hill forest. Cities can't grow anyway when they're building Workers or Settlers, any excess will automatically get converted into , so for the capital there'd be no difference in working a 3 tile or a 3 tile. It's important for early cities to be able to share food for exactly that reason: Every turn spend building a Worker or Settler is a turn that city is not growing, so if you've got another city that can take the food and grow on it, great, that'll speed up your early game.
2. Setting aside the fact that you won't be playing as Mali with a conquered neighbour with Copper captured after a one city Skirmisher rush as often as you will, there's also the question of actually connecting that copper up to your capital. Say your capital or Djenne needs to build an axe, how are you going to connect Sury's copper?
3. It might not sound like much, but 2 is a solid 10% of your entire empire's annual economic output at this point. That could easily lead to you getting a tech a turn earlier, which gets you something else earlier, which proceeds to snowball further and further.
4. One city can only whip so much so quickly before either running out of things to whip or stacking too much whipping , especially once you've got Granaries up and going. This is a another reason why cities being able to share food is important: One city is out of things to whip, or is on whipping cooldown, or working cottages/specialists and can't afford to lose population? Give it the plains cow and grassland farm to feed itself while another city takes the wet corn and grows on it. Obviously this is another thing that's highly situational, I can't say with confidence that in this specific scenario Djenne couldn't use the Wheat effectively until at least Monarchy, but in general it's better to be able to share strong food tiles than it is to have individual cities unable to work said strong food tiles in the early game. Lategame that does hamper how large those early cities can grow, yes, but you're not worried about growing cities circa 1800AD, you're worried about growing cities circa 1800BC.

OK, I could try. I never played normal speed
Sometimes marathon and most times - like here - epic. The thought of no random events is good. Is there a possibility to shut it out while ingame?

I really dislike the technology trading, where the AIs share techs, they havn't researched. Seems that they share only under themselves, so I would keep that out. But in the other options I think about using them too. Thanks.

I would like to read your answers about my questions in Quote 2

Short answer is that changing settings mid-game is not possible. The long answer is that it's possible to an extend, but it requires a lot of effort outside the game itself to set things up. And even then it's a hacky solution at best.

Tech trading is one of those aspects of the game that gets more and more important the higher up you go in difficulty, mainly because the AIs will be better able to keep up. On Noble you can run circles around the AIs so hard you can be an era ahead in tech basically the whole game, whereas on Deity carefully brokering techs and trading with the right people at the right moments has turned many a hopeless game into a clean(-ish) victory. Again, if it's an option you want to play with you can, but for learning the game I would highly recommend default settings as much as possible.

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

1. If whipping wasn't in the cards (many factors to consider there), then yes, absolutely work the plains hill forest. Cities can't grow anyway when they're building Workers or Settlers, any excess will automatically get converted into , so for the capital there'd be no difference in working a 3 tile or a 3 tile. It's important for early cities to be able to share food for exactly that reason: Every turn spend building a Worker or Settler is a turn that city is not growing, so if you've got another city that can take the food and grow on it, great, that'll speed up your early game.

OK, that's comprehensible. In past I had the belief, that city overlapping, especially on special tiles is bad because on long-term only one city can work on it. But that it's one tile less to work on is a big point.

2. Setting aside the fact that you won't be playing as Mali with a conquered neighbour with Copper captured after a one city Skirmisher rush as often as you will, there's also the question of actually connecting that copper up to your capital. Say your capital or Djenne needs to build an axe, how are you going to connect Sury's copper?

That's easy. I have sailing for that reason and I have scouted the whole coastline. So Surys Copper will be the first copper fo the empire, the other one the second. Without that I would say "delay the copper, build skirmishers instead of axes". And if not Mali, well... then the situation would be completely another...

3. It might not sound like much, but 2 is a solid 10% of your entire empire's annual economic output at this point. That could easily lead to you getting a tech a turn earlier, which gets you something else earlier, which proceeds to snowball further and further.

But here I need to argument. Thinking about the fact, sailing is ready in ~10 turns, this only makes 20 beacons all-in-all. That's not even one tech, it's just an exchange beacons against city position. So... hum... I accept the argument with the sheep and the aspect of growing faster. But this is only a negligible thing of just one turn research... so what could I do with just one turn more research?

4. One city can only whip so much so quickly before either running out of things to whip or stacking too much whipping , especially once you've got Granaries up and going. This is a another reason why cities being able to share food is important: One city is out of things to whip, or is on whipping cooldown, or working cottages/specialists and can't afford to lose population? Give it the plains cow and grassland farm to feed itself while another city takes the wet corn and grows on it. Obviously this is another thing that's highly situational, I can't say with confidence that in this specific scenario Djenne couldn't use the Wheat effectively until at least Monarchy, but in general it's better to be able to share strong food tiles than it is to have individual cities unable to work said strong food tiles in the early game. Lategame that does hamper how large those early cities can grow, yes, but you're not worried about growing cities circa 1800AD, you're worried about growing cities circa 1800BC.

OK. This point I will remember for the future. And 2 shared food tiles are even better?
May I ask, how you would manage the city in monarchy? With 4 base happiness and silver, which would be connected soon, how many troops would you use until you stop growing and going for mainly production or commerce? Is there any rule? This mid-term-city-management is one of my sticking point...

Short answer is that changing settings mid-game is not possible. The long answer is that it's possible to an extend, but it requires a lot of effort outside the game itself to set things up. And even then it's a hacky solution at best.

Tech trading is one of those aspects of the game that gets more and more important the higher up you go in difficulty, mainly because the AIs will be better able to keep up. On Noble you can run circles around the AIs so hard you can be an era ahead in tech basically the whole game, whereas on Deity carefully brokering techs and trading with the right people at the right moments has turned many a hopeless game into a clean(-ish) victory. Again, if it's an option you want to play with you can, but for learning the game I would highly recommend default settings as much as possible.

Maybe next game I try it but still without tech brokering, which I still have my problems with.

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

1.5. After the war: City and research expanding

Turn 88 I had +19 beacers, turn 94 it's +27 beacers (+32, when I want it hard), and librarys are still not ready yet.

I made a little mistake in my new cities: Instead of developing the mine I chopped the forest just to see I need 7 turns more to finish lib. Had I developed the mine and thenafter chopped, the lib would be there earlier.

Another calculation mistake is with the worker in the second city: He is too fast in chopping the forest, means the city loses too many P that lib is one move later ready. I understand: focussing the workers on one project is often better. I had could send em both on the mine and thenafter for chopping the forest in the smaller city, then BOTH librarys would be earlier and I had not even to chop in the bigger city. I won't turn that back, instead letting him build a comparable useless road in the forest...

The old area develops well, after sailing is ready. I have time now to connect the silver and chop the lighthouse.resp. the great lighthouse:

But there's one point I don't understand:
I know the whole coastline, by my two citys are not connected!

Does that mean, there must be another foreign city in between there?
So it's not a problem, both cities have a trade partner, and when the village is barbarian, I may get gold.

What would you do with the village? Razing or taking, even if it's not on the best spot?

 

[AcaMetis]

OK, that's comprehensible. In past I had the belief, that city overlapping, especially on special tiles is bad because on long-term only one city can work on it. But that it's one tile less to work on is a big point.

Civ IV is all about snowballing early advantages. Sacrificing faster growth/higher food caps in 1800AD to get a better empire up faster in 1800BC is worth it every single time. Obviously the question of where to place cities remains highly situational, but a compact empire tends to be better early game.

That's easy. I have sailing for that reason and I have scouted the whole coastline. So Surys Copper will be the first copper fo the empire, the other one the second. Without that I would say "delay the copper, build skirmishers instead of axes". And if not Mali, well... then the situation would be completely another...

And if a Barbarian City spawns on the coast, cutting off your trade route? Unless you're going to fog bust the entire coastline, but that would cost a fortune in unit maintenance. Is that a good solution considering it'd slow down your tech rate (Goody Hut economy aside)? And on the other side, what was the opportunity cost of going Sailing in that instance? Did it justify the full cost, or could you have gone for another, better tech instead if you had a different solution for the trade route problem in place?

Not saying that going Sailing in that instance was definitely not the right decision, highly situational and all that, but this is one of those ways in which everything in Civ IV is interconnected and complicated. Worker management and resource placement changing tech choices, which determine all that and more down the line, etc.

But here I need to argument. Thinking about the fact, sailing is ready in ~10 turns, this only makes 20 beacons all-in-all. That's not even one tech, it's just an exchange beacons against city position. So... hum... I accept the argument with the sheep and the aspect of growing faster. But this is only a negligible thing of just one turn research... so what could I do with just one turn more research?

You'd get a tech one turn faster, which means you'd get started on the next tech a turn faster, get a worker or infrastructure tech done a turn faster and get started on building that stuff a turn faster, which in turn starts contributing a turn faster, etc., etc.

I know it doesn't sound like much, but early game Civ IV is basically a game of stacking innumerable small advantages like that until it eventually turns into a big, decisive advantage. Tech trading is actually a prime example of that: What's the value of getting a tech one turn earlier? Well, if that means you can trade the tech around before others do you can influence how quickly that tech gets put into the game by deciding who to trade it around with, you can make oodles of tech and money off of selling it around, and that's just the basic stuff. And that 20 commerce 50-odd turns into the game? Snowball it enough, and it might very well be the breaking point that turns a small advantage into a big one.

I would recommend looking at some Noble's Club games that many people played, and comparing their situations at the same turns. It really shows just how much of a difference a player's empire, worker and barbarian management in the first 100 tuns can make. I believe NC 208 with De Gaulle would be a good example to look at, since plenty of people played it and it was a map that had very limited randomness to it (by Civ IV standards). Basically as close to pure empire and worker management on display as one could expect.

OK. This point I will remember for the future. And 2 shared food tiles are even better?
May I ask, how you would manage the city in monarchy? With 4 base happiness and silver, which would be connected soon, how many troops would you use until you stop growing and going for mainly production or commerce? Is there any rule? This mid-term-city-management is one of my sticking point...

Again, highly situational, but as a general rule I would not go out of my way to settle a bad city that can share two food tiles if I could instead settle a good city that can only share one good food tile. Being able to share food is an important consideration, but only that.

Grow as many citizens as you've got good tiles to work and/or specialists to run. Keeping a city small for quicker immediate gain might sound like a good idea, but in practice there's ways to get a lot more bang for your buck out of a bit of long term play in this instance, so grow those cities.

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

1.5. After the war: City and research expanding

I started the save from round 88 again and corrected the problem with the mine. Now let's think about the details:

Surys Cap has 6/135 in library. It needs 45 to whip the lib. It actually produces 5 per round. I chose chopping the other wood SW of the mine, cause S is one of just 2 tiles the city has a 2H1F field.

One worker chopping: The city has 36/135 in round 100, chop gives +20, we can whip in round 101. Just one turn before it could get it without chop.
Two worker chopping: The city has 21/135 in round 97, chop gives +20, we can whip in round 98.

This version makes lib 3 rounds earlier available: 6 => 6 => Get's bonus 3x25%, means 4,5
City will expand 3 rounds earlier, for cow and the hut can go to the other city.

Other version: Both citys expand later, means the hut is worked later.

So it's the best to concentrate workers on chopping. Right?

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

And if a Barbarian City spawns on the coast, cutting off your trade route? Unless you're going to fog bust the entire coastline, but that would cost a fortune in unit maintenance. Is that a good solution considering it'd slow down your tech rate (Goody Hut economy aside)? And on the other side, what was the opportunity cost of going Sailing in that instance? Did it justify the full cost, or could you have gone for another, better tech instead if you had a different solution for the trade route problem in place?

I teched sailing for the GLH too. So it gives two advantages.
But let's think about the barb city on the coast. It happened ingame for real.

So in prince that would be no problem, cause there are just warriors, at monarch there are archers, right? So that makes barb management very important. Let me learn more about that aspect.

I would do 2 things in monarch:
(1) Sending some troops
(2) Quickly building my next planned coast city (which would have corn in inner ring and contribute early into commerce by the water)

This is a crucial part in my actual gameplay: I don't know when to expand. For now I have -16/turn with 378 , means I would cut my research first time in 20 rounds (i like to keep 50 to solve spontane problems). With a 5th city the economy could cripple and throw me back.

So is settling a good idea?

You'd get a tech one turn faster, which means you'd get started on the next tech a turn faster, get a worker or infrastructure tech done a turn faster and get started on building that stuff a turn faster, which in turn starts contributing a turn faster, etc., etc.

I know it doesn't sound like much, but early game Civ IV is basically a game of stacking innumerable small advantages like that until it eventually turns into a big, decisive advantage. Tech trading is actually a prime example of that: What's the value of getting a tech one turn earlier? Well, if that means you can trade the tech around before others do you can influence how quickly that tech gets put into the game by deciding who to trade it around with, you can make oodles of tech and money off of selling it around, and that's just the basic stuff. And that 20 commerce 50-odd turns into the game? Snowball it enough, and it might very well be the breaking point that turns a small advantage into a big one.

OK, understanding. I accept this argument for a situation, where there were no opportunity costs. Here the biggest opportunity cost is that without sailing I couldn't work on GLH, which would boost the eco enourmously. This way I still come to the result, that it would be even better to fogbust the coastline with troops and building GLH, cause the additional commerce for 4 bound citys finance the troopcosts easily.

I would recommend looking at some Noble's Club games that many people played, and comparing their situations at the same turns. It really shows just how much of a difference a player's empire, worker and barbarian management in the first 100 tuns can make. I believe NC 208 with De Gaulle would be a good example to look at, since plenty of people played it and it was a map that had very limited randomness to it (by Civ IV standards). Basically as close to pure empire and worker management on display as one could expect.

Thanks for the hint I will use it.

Again, highly situational, but as a general rule I would not go out of my way to settle a bad city that can share two food tiles if I could instead settle a good city that can only share one good food tile. Being able to share food is an important consideration, but only that.
Grow as many citizens as you've got good tiles to work and/or specialists to run. Keeping a city small for quicker immediate gain might sound like a good idea, but in practice there's ways to get a lot more bang for your buck out of a bit of long term play in this instance, so grow those cities.

OK, thank you. So this means to stop whipping at some time to fill the commerce possibilities?

____________________

I see 2 sticking points in my actual game:

(1) Settling too less or too many citys (see question above)
(2) Not building citys optimally, building too many buildings

I would give some more situations the next turns. I would appreciate to have your feedback in these mid-term topics

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

Round 99:

I decide for Pottery to build up eco in my new cities as fast as possible. Granary helps with whipping, and the additinal huts can contribute directly with 3C, after build up in the smaller city west. I don't see any better possibility to grow faster. Alternatives would be alphabet (takes much longer!) or the religion line to try oracle (maybe get failgold), but all these tech lead to no direct growth.

Old area:

GLH starts:

300 needed
- 8 overflow
- 30 by chopping
- 90 by whipping
172 needed
_________

11 per turn now, 14 from next: Finish in 12 turns.

I should hurry to build up troups fogbusting the whole coast to get the full 8 from GLH as soon as possible.

After GLH build up granary, thenafter, if nothing is possible to produce, build wonders for failgold. Not using scientists, cause the capital won't be a useful specialist farm, but a production powerhouse.

Djenne will soon expand and then be a fishing spot. I don't plan to use the wheat soon, without agriculture.


New area:

Lib will be ready in round 100, I will delay growth and build more troops, thenafter maybe a worker and use scientists here. After expanding connecting and working on cow, and two scientists ignoring the corn. This way I will stagnate right before growth until happiness comes back.

I sent the workers with optimization: Send to mine, build one road, send further to the wood. This makes one additional road and connects copper. They chop the forest to get the lib whippable. I plan to grow again, then run scientist and thenafter use the hut and a second hut I will build E of the first. Right before growth using water tiles, not scientists instead of the sheep.

Ragnar

Well, and there is Ragnar in the east. We have open borders, so I should soon inspect the coastline to get the extra commerce by foreign trade. It's time to get full use of the GLH now

 

[Gumbolt]

Lots of pictures but very hard to follow what is actually happening.

You will want to settle the 3-4 obvious coastal cities here. Corn. Rice/cows. Corn/clams. Fish city North of Sury. You want at least 10 cities by 1ad. More pending on islands and how many Ai you meet.

GLH very useful now you have met another AI. If you can get an island city that will also help. So galley long term too.

Once you have writing and have explored coastline to Ragnar you should have foreign trade routes.

You are worried about economy with financial AI and 3c sea tiles? Better off going for MC and TC wonder? 4c coastal tiles really help with coastal cities. GLH first is okay your capital is great production site.

Once Sury cities have border pops start whipping settlers asap. That or chop into them. If you stay on 4 cities here you won't win the game. You can chop out a settler near your capital too. Keep expanding as the ai won't wait for you.

 

[AcaMetis]

I teched sailing for the GLH too. So it gives two advantages.
But let's think about the barb city on the coast. It happened ingame for real.

So in prince that would be no problem, cause there are just warriors, at monarch there are archers, right? So that makes barb management very important. Let me learn more about that aspect.

I would do 2 things in monarch:
(1) Sending some troops
(2) Quickly building my next planned coast city (which would have corn in inner ring and contribute early into commerce by the water)

This is a crucial part in my actual gameplay: I don't know when to expand. For now I have -16/turn with 378 , means I would cut my research first time in 20 rounds (i like to keep 50 to solve spontane problems). With a 5th city the economy could cripple and throw me back.

So is settling a good idea?

One caveat with relying on wonders like that is that it gets increasingly sketchy the higher up in difficulty you go. On Prince, no problem, unless Augustus Caesar got off to a good coastal start and is feeling particularly wonder happy there's little risk of losing it. On higher difficulties, though, even non-IND leaders can snipe wonders unless you're really throwing everything you've got and the kitchen sink at one, but if you're rushing someone early you're obviously not doing that. There's also the simple possibility of not starting on the coast. What would you have done in that situation, if GLH wasn't an option? Knowing that you'd likely not have gone for Sailing in that case, of course.

Barbarians are especially problematic on higher difficulties, to the point where for many people they're a serious stumbling block when trying to advance in difficulties. It's not just because they get Archery starting on Monarch, but because they ramp up faster and faster and your combat bonuses against barbarian units get less and less the higher in difficulty you go. One of the reasons I recommend Inland Sea maps is because that's an all but guaranteed chance to make sure your barbarian management skills are on point, whereas on Pangaea there's a far greater chance (relatively, and even then only a chance, mind) of barbarians not being a factor for one reason or another.

In this case I think the early rush simply wasn't a good idea to begin with. Yes, it takes a rival off the board (and a Creative neighbour at that), but what did it get you? Two cities that are so distant from your Palace they're a serious drain on your economy, albeit good cities, and an open invitation to the barbarians to completely ruin your strategy to try and get the economy back into shape. Your starting area was not impressive by any means, but I'm wondering if a Construction attack would have worked better here, to give you a better base to work with before taking over Sury's territory.

OK, understanding. I accept this argument for a situation, where there were no opportunity costs. Here the biggest opportunity cost is that without sailing I couldn't work on GLH, which would boost the eco enourmously. This way I still come to the result, that it would be even better to fogbust the coastline with troops and building GLH, cause the additional commerce for 4 bound citys finance the troopcosts easily.

This is assuming you'll be able to get GLH, which isn't something you can rely on on higher difficulties. And fogbusting the entire coast would cost a lot in terms of hammers to produce those troops, and especially unit upkeep. Keep in mind that higher difficulties also have higher unit upkeep, so on higher difficulties keeping that entire coast fogbusted would end up costing a sizable chunk out of the GLH's boost to your economy.

OK, thank you. So this means to stop whipping at some time to fill the commerce possibilities?

Whip when there's a reason to whip. Whipping stuff just for the sake of using Slavery is how you cripple and/or ruin your economy. If you're completely out of things to whip either flip into Caste System or even back into Tribalism - Mansa is Spiritual, so if you're not going to be whipping for the next five turns you can save on civic maintenance by temporarily swapping back into Tribalism, since that's Low Upkeep compared to Slavery's Medium.

 

[Gumbolt]

It's prince level. GLH should be safer. He can settle toward the captured cities. Costs on Prince level are much lower. Barbs not so bad either. Skirmishers will crush most barbs.

If he fails on GLH least he gets some fail gold.

With double sheep start and a strong hammer start was an early rush that bad? Getting to size 3 and needing AH meant delays. His play has not been perfect but least there is a warmonger in there.

Very hard to learn game basics with huts on too.

 

[Anysense]

May be, I am a bit late but... Gaining more short-term often results in gaining more long-term, particularly when preparing for war. Get your army going sooner, conquer faster, suffer fewer casualties, reap the benefits of conquest sooner.

Second argument for Djenne's location is a bit odd. Good production city? Good for what production? You have to invest hammers into a boat and monument, and wait for the borders to expand before this city is any use at all! This does not sound good in regard with production, especially as there are locations with 2 food resources in first ring, which make good cities right away.

The third argument means that you need to learn how to build efficient economy. Limiting one's expansion to 5 cities (even if they can be really good in some very distant and very hazy future) is usually a very bad decision. It sort of solves the problem, but its like curing headache by decapitation. Yes, the head does not hurt anymore, but it does not do anything else either!

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

Lots of pictures but very hard to follow what is actually happening.

What can I do better? It's my first commented game

You will want to settle the 3-4 obvious coastal cities here. Corn. Rice/cows. Corn/clams. Fish city North of Sury. You want at least 10 cities by 1ad. More pending on islands and how many Ai you meet. [...] Once Sury cities have border pops start whipping settlers asap. That or chop into them. If you stay on 4 cities here you won't win the game. You can chop out a settler near your capital too. Keep expanding as the ai won't wait for you.

OK! That's an argument, I didn't thought of. So you would go for 6 cities and maybe go into a shortterm economic downfall?
I think that could be a game style, I can try. It's more I would do naturally, butr maybe the better way.

You are worried about economy with financial AI and 3c sea tiles? Better off going for MC and TC wonder? 4c coastal tiles really help with coastal cities. GLH first is okay your capital is great production site.

TC = The colossus?
What is MC?

 

[Master_Of_Ideas]

Barbarians are especially problematic on higher difficulties, to the point where for many people they're a serious stumbling block when trying to advance in difficulties. It's not just because they get Archery starting on Monarch, but because they ramp up faster and faster and your combat bonuses against barbarian units get less and less the higher in difficulty you go. One of the reasons I recommend Inland Sea maps is because that's an all but guaranteed chance to make sure your barbarian management skills are on point, whereas on Pangaea there's a far greater chance (relatively, and even then only a chance, mind) of barbarians not being a factor for one reason or another.

In this case I think the early rush simply wasn't a good idea to begin with. Yes, it takes a rival off the board (and a Creative neighbour at that), but what did it get you? Two cities that are so distant from your Palace they're a serious drain on your economy, albeit good cities, and an open invitation to the barbarians to completely ruin your strategy to try and get the economy back into shape. Your starting area was not impressive by any means, but I'm wondering if a Construction attack would have worked better here, to give you a better base to work with before taking over Sury's territory.

Yeah, that would be a question I would asked later. What would worked at monarch here? In Prince I would say I have already won now, even when I am doing relatively idiotic things. I have the biggest research, so I could spam wonders and soon overran the others or go for a solid space victory. But what in monarch?

A Construction attack is an attack with catas, right?

This is assuming you'll be able to get GLH, which isn't something you can rely on on higher difficulties. And fogbusting the entire coast would cost a lot in terms of hammers to produce those troops, and especially unit upkeep. Keep in mind that higher difficulties also have higher unit upkeep, so on higher difficulties keeping that entire coast fogbusted would end up costing a sizable chunk out of the GLH's boost to your economy.

Would you fogbust with cities in monarch too, beginning now? Here I could setup 3 cities and fogbust nearly the whole space. If no, when would you start? After alphabet, after CoL or after currency?

Whip when there's a reason to whip. Whipping stuff just for the sake of using Slavery is how you cripple and/or ruin your economy. If you're completely out of things to whip either flip into Caste System or even back into Tribalism - Mansa is Spiritual, so if you're not going to be whipping for the next five turns you can save on civic maintenance by temporarily swapping back into Tribalism, since that's Low Upkeep compared to Slavery's Medium.

Mhhh... sounds like a good idea! I begin to like Mansas features
Let's analyze it in another game thenafter again.