Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by Platinum Onyx, Feb 26, 2008.
If you know a city does have enough food to achieve its max pop, why bother?
Maybe I just don't understand the question, but why would you work an unimproved 2F 1C riverside grassland when it could be a 2F 8C 2H riverside grassland town (improved with necessary civics/techs)?
I'm a bit like Trv in that I'm not sure I've 'got' the question, but ...
In some respects you're right Platinum ... there will come a time where whatever you want done to a city, that some tiles will simply not compete with others in any optimal combination that suits your strategy or predicament at that time.
Of course, as the game continues to develop, so too do your opportunities to increase your happy or healthy caps and/or make better use of improvements (e.g. through civics or technologies), and that 'useless' plains tile that you were unable to employ all of a sudden has real possibilities.
There's little point in using up valuable Worker turns in developing some tiles around a city that simply cannot use those tiles well in any combination, if other cities in your empire are working undeveloped tiles or require some other Worker activity. On the other hand, you should be mindful of growth opportunities (e.g. about to get Calendar for Plantations) and prepare your Workers for these changes so you can capitalise on them when the time's right.
Likewise, what might have been a good combination of tiles in the Medieval Era might be reviewed in the Modern Era as the dynamics of the game have changed, so you should review the roles of your cities and see how tile improvements can be maximised in value in light of the new bonuses and how these all contribute towards your victory objective.
Do you mean "doesn't," not "does"?
Yeah, I meant doesn't, my bad.
The only tile that cannot be self-sustaining is a plains hill since a windmill will only produce 1 food instead of two. EVERY OTHER IMPROVABLE TILE can be farmed/windmilled (although maybe not until biology if a chain cannot be created) to become food neutral or better. If you have a flat plains that cannot be irrigated then you may want to just consider putting down a workshop and treating the tile like a mined-plains-hill (or better), that you can work for extra hammers if necessary. Plains-hill should either be windmilled anyway but get the 2nd food from elsewhere or mined and used for extra production when necessary.
So, when lacking food, farms and windmills should always be built (especially if the alternative is no improvement). Now, based upon worker availability those improvements may not be done for a while but they should be built eventually.
Keep in mind that starving the city may be reasonable in some circumstances. Also, with corporations you can get food much later and thus make those tiles productive mines/workshops.
OK, then, let me try to answer your question now that I understand it.
First of all, the question isn't whether you're going to get to max pop but whether you're going to be able to work the tile in question. Usually, if you can't, ever, it's because there are tiles that you plain can't improve at all.
BTW I disagree with the person who said every tile except a plains hill can be improved to be food-neutral. You can't do that with a desert, ice or peak (obviously), nor with a tundra that has no fresh water. Also, there are times when you CAN get to max pop and don't really want to, e.g. if the only way you could do it would be to sacrifice towns or production and it's not a GP farm.
But if it's a question of valuable but food-shy tiles that you can't normally work, there are still two ways to get more food than your tiles can generate. One is to settle Great Merchants in the town, each of which generates 1 food. (But I would never do that; for a marginal town it's a waste of a GM.) The other, much better, way is to introduce Sid's Sushi or General Mills. If you're playing BtS, of course. It's all a question of whether it's worth it to work those tiles or generate that extra specialist.
In my games there are generally lulls in the development of my civ, and generally I spend my worker turns improving tiles that may be useful later. I like to heavily mine cities at the edge of my empire so I can do a quick job of Versailles, or what have you.
But every single tile? Naw. Not until corps, that is.
My comment was "every other Improvable tile", which desert/ice/peak are not. I did forget tundra however, so my bad there.
I agree that you may not want to maximize population but any tiles improvable but unused at your desired population level should be farmed/windmilled so if you want to grow at some point in the future (or you get poisoned water) you have some tiles available with additional food that you can work as needed.
If I understand the question, the poster is asking if there is any reason to improve tiles the city is not - or will not soon be - working.
My answer would be no if there are other priorities for your workers like hooking up important resources and improving tiles in growing cities.
However, it can be useful for some of your core cities to have "options." For example, I will sometimes build some workshops in cities that are focused on farms and running specialists because, at some point, I may want to switch on those hammers to construct some crucial building/national wonder. My capital usually has many options and can switch between growth, commerce, and hammers for wonder building.
I tend to try and improve all the tiles i can. If i have a population 6 city then i can improve 10 tiles, they can't be all worked on at once but you can chop and change the combinations to suit your immediate tactics. I like to have lots of farms and workshops. Build up the population working the farms, then swap them all to workshops and starve whilst building the buildings that i want. If you've got a grannary you can do this for a while before you population goes down
Find it very usefull for an SE to get buildings up
If you have a tile that is not being worked next to a forest then you definitely should leave it unimproved so a forest might grow there. Also don't lay a road or railroad unless strategically necessary as this halves the probability of a forest appearing.
On the other hand you should improve and road all the tiles along your borders even those outside your cities fat cross that are likely approach routes for the AI.
At first improve the tiles without defensive bonuses such as plains and grassland, then move on to hills. This will slow up the AI when you are at war as their units love to pillage giving you time to react and deploy counter forces before they are even close to your cities.
Its sort of one of those min-max questions, but I agree with the idea that its best to have options in each city. The ability to switch which tiles each city works can really help in the mid-game. Running mostly food or mostly production can be very efficient, especially for those civics with nice bonuses for specific improvements.
I prefer to improve all the tiles in a city radius. First, because I try to plan each city so eventually it'll be able to work all the tiles in the BFC, and second because for those cities which cannot (desert/tundra, almost exclusively), by the time I get around to improving the non-essential tiles (non-resource) my workers have nothing better to do, so I don't lose anything in the process.
the answer is much simpler. Unless we are talking about cities near poles where there is tundra and ice, you simply need to settle your cities in order to be able to use every tile.
If ONE city wont be able to use every tile in its radius, then you should plan (have planned) to build other cities around it, with city radius tiles being shared.
I usually plan city placement in order to use every possible tile.
You want to improve tiles if it is possible at all to work them, however if you can't work them in the near future the worker actions are better spent elsewhere.
Separate names with a comma.