Leyrann's Early Game Strategy and Q&A thread

[Leyrann]

Without getting into too much detail, what are some of the common build orders at the start of a game and their advantages? Basically the first 40-50 turns in the capital, if that many. Also, do I ever need to manually set worked tiles at this phase in the game or will the AI pick the right ones?

 

[AcaMetis]

Very broadly speaking your earliest builds are going to be workers, settlers, and a handful of units (likely warriors, possibly archers/axes) to act as barb defence/military police. Coastal starts might end up also building workboat or two if there's seafood resources to improve. Buildings and especially wonders can be build (or have hammers invested into them) in rare cases, but generally it's workers, settlers, and military units.

Do not trust the city governor to pick the best tiles for you. You'll often want to work a "subobtimal" tile in order to squeeze just a little more food/production/commerce out of your tiles while sacrificing something that isn't as important at that time (for example you might work a 12 tile over a 21 tile if that makes your build cue and your growth line up better, or work a 21 tile over a 21 tile to line up discovering an expensive tech with how quickly you'll build a worker so the latter doesn't idle for a turn).

 

[sampsa]

Without getting into too much detail, what are some of the common build orders at the start of a game and their advantages? Basically the first 40-50 turns in the capital, if that many.

worker-warriors until you've grown to the chosen size, which should be the amount of strong tiles-settler-worker/settler, assuming non-seafood start.

Also, do I ever need to manually set worked tiles at this phase in the game or will the AI pick the right ones?

Usually the governor chooses correctly. Click on emphasize for better results.

edit: the most common mistake the governor does is favoring 21 over 22, when the latter is often better.

 

[Leyrann]

worker-warriors until you've grown to the chosen size, which should be the amount of strong tiles-settler-worker/settler, assuming non-seafood start.

Thanks! (AcaMetis too!)

I'll try out this order in my next game(s). I was always a little unsure whether a worker was a good idea before growing to size two...

For strong tiles, I know food resources obviously qualify, other than that, which ones do?

 

[ArchGhost]

Without getting into too much detail, what are some of the common build orders at the start of a game and their advantages? Basically the first 40-50 turns in the capital, if that many. Also, do I ever need to manually set worked tiles at this phase in the game or will the AI pick the right ones?

EDIT: I'm a bit of a windbag so this is what I consider "not too much detail." That said I can easily start number crunching or talking about fishing starts...

Do not rely on the governor to pick tiles unless you want your city doing almost exactly what you DON'T want it to do.

Build orders fall apart rather rapidly outside of the window "what starting techs do I need" as Civ 4 is a fair bit more dynamic due to map generation and civs in play than something like Civ 6, where build orders are more weighty gambits that you can push for in pretty much any game. Only saying so because Civ6 is the only other TBS I've played with any extensiveness (well, and Civ Rev, which is super simple) and the RTS concept of build orders which I am very familiar with are not equivalent to TBS games' version.

But in a general sense, for as many maps/starts as possible:

-Worker first (15T)
-build Warriors while working highest food tiles and improving with your worker
-size 3, slow build a Settler. Continue to improve tiles during this
Advantages are it is consistent and will work for like 90-95% of starts barring extenuating circumstances like Fishing start, gets you a worker ASAP to start improvements, and gives a decent first settler time (anywhere from 32-40ish) regularly. Disadvantages are it's highly dependent on your starting techs and tiles how rapidly you can pick up going forward.

-Worker first (15T)
-grow on warriors while teching Bronze Working ASAP
-size 4 start settler, chop/whip to completion or whip for overflow into next build. My favorite is overflow into a worker each time, though you *can* go settler>settler (would not recommend that without some experience)
Advantages are a very rapid 2nd settler time (40-50) which helps claim land and it can benefit very powerfully from traits like IND/CRE, and EXP to a lesser extent. It also lets you rapidly start gaining materiel (workers and settlers, units for fogbusting, even things like Granaries) in a short amount of overall time with BW's help. Disadvantages are it's even more map dependent and can be delayed even harder by your techs/lack of commerce to reach BW quickly. It also can trigger barbs faster, leaves your cities regrowing more instead of staying higher pop, can deplete forests you may want to save, and can crash your econ faster.

-Warrior first
-grow to 2
-Worker, continue on like the standard size 3 >slow settler example
In fringe cases where you cannot improve tiles right away even with an early worker due to seriously slow techs for the start, you may opt to do this instead while you are waiting on tech. A warrior is the most useful thing you can build immediately as it can fogbust, kill barbs if lucky, and if even luckier, maybe steal a worker from a close AI. Note that you don't build the warrior just to go take a worker (ESPECIALLY if you don't start with one!), you are doing it because you can't really use the worker right away anyway until tech catches up, and you are banking some growth in the meantime on the best build you have. Note that this is not optimal, because you are being forced into either 1) sit on a useless worker for several turns or 2) delay worker but grow a little -- because of a crappy starting tech/start location matchup.

-Worker first (15t)
-grow to 2, improve your 2 best tiles
-Settler slowbuild at size 2
A variation where you need to land-grab or have few good improvable tiles, and your tech sucks for the start -- you have tons of forest but are far from BW with little food/commerce, you have few uncovered hills and only one weak food, your only food is AH resources or several floodplains which takes forever to tech to/improve (I have had ALL of these happen to me before). The idea is to still get at least your first settler out quickly and find greener pastures, so to speak, while you let tech catch up so your worker can actually do more in the capitol. Note that just like the "grow to 2 first" example, this is not an optimal choice.


and one more just for fun
IMP leader
Settle with a 3H forest, or on a PH with a 2H forest
-Settler (17t)
-Worker in capitol (15t, or 12t with a PH settle)
-settler goes to new city location, and starts worker (15t, 12t if you settle on another PH)
-2 cities and 2 workers to improve them by ~35ish
It's very quick and another "I have to wait on my stupid techs" situation. IMP leaders have a 3rd option with the right tiles. Disadvantage is your tile development and growth will be slowed, which delays your 2nd settler/3rd city time (you have to spend turns growing!) but as you are now essentially developing two starting cities roughly in parallel, your 3rd and 4th settler times will be even faster. This can get extreme with strong tiles like PHMarble, or throwing in BW to the mix -- I've had 4 cities by T40 with Augustus before, and something similar with Vicky. It's a good way to get out of the "trapped" feeling of playing a poor start for Charlie too. IMP leaders are good fun.

 

[sampsa]

For strong tiles, I know food resources obviously qualify, other than that, which ones do?

Not much else really, food specials and and stuff you can improve. Since every citizen eats 2, it's not very useful to grow to work 21 tile - much rather start the settler sooner to get it asap than grow to gain 1/turn. You do need to get some warriors out to guard your land though before the settler. Depending on the techs that you have, maybe you should build a mine or two.

 

[Set]

Not much else really, food specials and and stuff you can improve. Since every citizen eats 2, it's not very useful to grow to work 21 tile - much rather start the settler sooner to get it asap than grow to gain 1/turn. You do need to get some warriors out to guard your land though before the settler. Depending on the techs that you have, maybe you should build a mine or two.

How often do you end up building a settler on size 2? I feel like its pretty common to only have 2 strong tiles around the capital (or even just 1). Would you build a settler at size 1 after the worker (if not IMP) if there was only a single good tile?

 

[sampsa]

How often do you end up building a settler on size 2?

Good question. In general you end up often growing to at least 3 to get enough warriors out. I often build settler at size 2 only if extra on city center tile.

Having a situation with only one food tile worth working, no improveable hills, nothing extra is very rare. Then it depends on the techs you have. Maybe you can grow to size 4 and whip (esp with IMP) if you can get BW in time.

 

[Set]

Good question. In general you end up often growing to at least 3 to get enough warriors out. I often build settler at size 2 only if extra on city center tile.

Having a situation with only one food tile worth working, no improveable hills, nothing extra is very rare. Then it depends on the techs you have. Maybe you can grow to size 4 and whip (esp with IMP) if you can get BW in time.

Just ran a quick test and was impressed with speed of size two settler. Starting the settler at size 2 has it out by T32, with second worker due out T36 (with chop completing in 2 turns).

Spoiler :

Compare to starting the settler at size 4 and 2 pop whipping it. Settler is out on T34 with second worker due out on T35 (I did the test as random and rolled Brennus, so because of spiritual this does not take into account slavery switch which would add one turn delay).

Spoiler :

The surprising laggard is size 3 slow build which doesn't get the settler out til T35 with no second worker til T38!

Spoiler :

Don't think that size 2 settler clearly beats size 4 here but definitely in the competition. Also, starting settler at size 2 means we don't get any warrior out so makes sense what you said about not doing it unless we had 2 hammer city tile for a faster warrior or some other reason to think we were barb safe.

This is just a quick test, and every map is differnt (here bad Celt starting techs meant worker had to sit idle for a while, so won't be available to improve second city immediately (chopping worker) if we finish the settler on T32) but I will definitely be considering more size two settlers in the future

@Leyrann As the above show I'm learning things all the time and there are lots of different approaches, but I've managed a consistent winrate on Immortal before now following the general rule (with exceptions) to slow build the settler at size 3 unless there at least two tiles with 5+ food, in which case if tech permits I go for size 4 settler with 2 pop whip

​

 

[sampsa]

The surprising laggard is size 3 slow build which doesn't get the settler out til T35 with no second worker til T38!

Yes, that's because it commits the sin of growing to work an unimproved tile, which in itself is never optimal. It doesn't mean that it's always a mistake though, because maybe you need that extra warrior and have no access to whipping yet...

 

[Lennier]

Without getting into too much detail, what are some of the common build orders at the start of a game and their advantages? Basically the first 40-50 turns in the capital, if that many. Also, do I ever need to manually set worked tiles at this phase in the game or will the AI pick the right ones?

It’s map dependent, but 90% of the time worker first the build warriors until your cap is size 3 then settler. And a large percentage of the time the AI won’t pick the right tiles, especially if you’re trying to micromanage whip overflow.

 

[Leyrann]

Thanks for the many responses!

I'm actually running into quite a few minor questions at the moment so I've decided to not just post every single one, but instead wait until I have a few and then post them at once to limit the spam in this thread.

First: I get the feeling that the Monument is either practically mandatory as first build (if you don't have Creative) or useless (if you do have Creative). Am I just not understanding it's purpose right, or is that the case? I suppose the exception would be if you have Charismatic.

Second: I usually keep my science rate as high as I can get away with, in particular in the early game. As a result, unit upgrades seem incredibly expensive to me - easily 80-125 gold, whereas I can probably build those same upgraded units in only three or so turns, and would only have to input some 50 or 60 production to do so. Is upgrading units worth it, or are you better off building new ones unless they gathered up several promotions?

And third: I feel like I'm just not understanding something about siege weapons. I use them to reduce city defenses, of course, and I know that they can deal collateral damage to soften up an enemy stack, but... are they meant to be single-use units? Because that's what they seem like for the latter purpose (at least in the early game - I'll admit I haven't often used them in the later stages), but it just feels weird. Plus, I'd like having opportunities to actually get one or two Catapults with a few promotions on occasion.

EDIT: Actually, a fourth question, related to the science rate I mentioned in the second question. Assuming I have room to expand, how low should I let the science rate dip in order to pay for maintenance, and when should I pause expanding until I've grown my economy further? I tend to go for at least 60% science rate, but I don't know if that's too much, just right, or too little.

 

[AcaMetis]

Generally speaking I would advise posting a shadow game on the strategy and tips forum if you want in-depth help understanding the game's various mechanics. That said:

First: I get the feeling that the Monument is either practically mandatory as first build (if you don't have Creative) or useless (if you do have Creative). Am I just not understanding it's purpose right, or is that the case? I suppose the exception would be if you have Charismatic.

If at all possible you want to avoid settling cities such that they need a Monument to be functional. It's too much of a short term investment, which hurts long term a lot more than you'd think due to how powerful snowballing early advantages is in this game. Even a CRE leader wants to think twice before planting a city that's useless without it's second ring, because that's five turns your city is going to sit there and not accomplish anything. Sometimes it's necessary, distant seafood being the most common case, but ideally you want at least your strong food tile in your first ring.

Second: I usually keep my science rate as high as I can get away with, in particular in the early game. As a result, unit upgrades seem incredibly expensive to me - easily 80-125 gold, whereas I can probably build those same upgraded units in only three or so turns, and would only have to input some 50 or 60 production to do so. Is upgrading units worth it, or are you better off building new ones unless they gathered up several promotions?

There's specific strategies around upgrading units, which are exceptionally powerful if pulled off well (though these usually involve one or two Great Merchants to generate literal thousands of gold). In general it is inefficient to upgrade units, though. If you have to to defend a city or really want to upgrade that City Raider III Axe to a CR III Maceman, it can be worthwhile, but the usual strategy is to build a few current tech units to crack the top defenders/defend the stack, and use the outdated veterans to clean up the stragglers.

And third: I feel like I'm just not understanding something about siege weapons. I use them to reduce city defenses, of course, and I know that they can deal collateral damage to soften up an enemy stack, but... are they meant to be single-use units? Because that's what they seem like for the latter purpose (at least in the early game - I'll admit I haven't often used them in the later stages), but it just feels weird. Plus, I'd like having opportunities to actually get one or two Catapults with a few promotions on occasion.

Siege units (at least early ones) are certainly the most fragile and likely to die units, but this is as it should be. If siege units could whittle down stacks into dust without consequence or counter they would be incredibly broken. The best way to use siege units is in combination with what I call "can opener" units. Throw one or two Catapults into a city so that the top defenders (and a bunch of other units) are weakened, until something like a City Raider Sword gets high enough odds to take out the top defender. At that point the other units will be weaker, and weakened, and your remaining units/catapults will have a much easier time surviving the following fights. If you really want to promote a group of catapults Great Generals are an option - a half dozen City Raider II catapults can make a significant difference in cracking top city defenders.

EDIT: Actually, a fourth question, related to the science rate I mentioned in the second question. Assuming I have room to expand, how low should I let the science rate dip in order to pay for maintenance, and when should I pause expanding until I've grown my economy further? I tend to go for at least 60% science rate, but I don't know if that's too much, just right, or too little.

Highly variable. Generally so long as you're able to keep teching (and keep pace with your rivals) you want to keep expanding, because if you don't expand into that land the AIs will. That said you definitely do not want to crash your economy before you've got Pottery for cottages, or settle too many cities until you've got Currency for the extra trade routes/ability to build Wealth, or spend dozens of turns developing trash jungle cities when you can have an AI settle/improve them for you while you tech/build towards the army that'll take it from said AI, etc. It's a delicate balance, and one that varies wildly from one difficult to the next because everything is much more expensive on the higher difficulties, but the opportunities to generate a lot of gold are also more plentiful.

 

[Leyrann]

Generally speaking I would advise posting a shadow game on the strategy and tips forum if you want in-depth help understanding the game's various mechanics. That said:

I exist in a strange quantum state where I simultaneously want to play casually and don't want to spend a lot of time min-maxing, yet I also want to know what the right way to play is, and will then usually take that route.

If at all possible you want to avoid settling cities such that they need a Monument to be functional. It's too much of a short term investment, which hurts long term a lot more than you'd think due to how powerful snowballing early advantages is in this game. Even a CRE leader wants to think twice before planting a city that's useless without it's second ring, because that's five turns your city is going to sit there and not accomplish anything. Sometimes it's necessary, distant seafood being the most common case, but ideally you want at least your strong food tile in your first ring.

So would you say it's better to place a city such that you have a few grassland and plains tiles in between your cities that aren't covered, but the food resource is in the first ring, than it would be to place a city such that you end up covering all tiles between your cities, but have the food resource in the second ring?

Siege units (at least early ones) are certainly the most fragile and likely to die units, but this is as it should be. If siege units could whittle down stacks into dust without consequence or counter they would be incredibly broken. The best way to use siege units is in combination with what I call "can opener" units. Throw one or two Catapults into a city so that the top defenders (and a bunch of other units) are weakened, until something like a City Raider Sword gets high enough odds to take out the top defender. At that point the other units will be weaker, and weakened, and your remaining units/catapults will have a much easier time surviving the following fights. If you really want to promote a group of catapults Great Generals are an option - a half dozen City Raider II catapults can make a significant difference in cracking top city defenders.

Thanks for the strategy advice! I'll give it a try.

...when I'm fighting an equal-tech AI, at least. My current game had a god start, with lots of food resources around, quite a bit of flood plains but barely any desert, and a scout unit out of each of the first three goody huts I popped, plus I started with a scout, meaning I had four scouts by turn 9. And then to top it off I got like two or three technologies out of the next few huts. If I remember correctly I had Writing on turn 12, and my first three cities all had flood plains, so I immediately teched Pottery to get my commerce going and now I'm (about to be) fighting Archers with a prebuilt army of Knights and Macemen that were respectively built with 11 and 7 XP (I'm playing Mongolia). Not much need for strategy there.

(oh, and did I mention that two of my first four cities had a gold resource?)

 

[AcaMetis]

So would you say it's better to place a city such that you have a few grassland and plains tiles in between your cities that aren't covered, but the food resource is in the first ring, than it would be to place a city such that you end up covering all tiles between your cities, but have the food resource in the second ring?

Definitely the former situation. Food in second ring (assuming another city hasn't already brought it inside culture, of course) really slows down city development, even when you're CRE.

 

[Leyrann]

Lol, guess I was asking a few too many questions for the Quick Q&A thread anyway. Well, this works too.

Definitely the former situation. Food in second ring (assuming another city hasn't already brought it inside culture, of course) really slows down city development, even when you're CRE.

Huh, interesting. I'd have expected that the long-term benefit of making sure you work every tile available to you would win out.

 

[sampsa]

I get the feeling that the Monument is either practically mandatory as first build (if you don't have Creative) or useless (if you do have Creative).

You need to do everything in your power to make monuments useless. That means that your first cities should have on the 1st ring, not requiring a border pop (assuming non-CRE obv). This game is all about short-term gains and utilizing them efficiently.

unit upgrades seem incredibly expensive

In general, don't upgrade units. HA -> cuir or treb -> cannon can be good though, because at that point you are able to generate a ton of in a quick burst (fail gold or GM mission)

are they meant to be single-use units

Yes, siege units are disposable. First bombard to 0%, then cause collateral, then mop up with other units. A common mistake is not building enough siege. Something like ~50% is good.

how low should I let the science rate dip

In general, avoid having slider at something else than 0% or 100%. There is no clear-cut answer to your actual question, but it doesn't really matter if you spend even tens of turns at 0% slider, as long as you can build cottages and are able to work them.

 

[AcaMetis]

Huh, interesting. I'd have expected that the long-term benefit of making sure you work every tile available to you would win out.

To keep a long story short, in most practical cases by the time that long term benefit plays out it's past the point where it'll make enough of an impact going forward, if the game hasn't already been decided outright. One of the mistakes a fair few newer players make is underestimating the sheer power of sharing tiles, particularly food tiles, because sharing tiles in 1800BC means cities will have less total tiles to work in 1800AD. Same with keeping forests around for later instead of chopping them early on, it's overestimating the long term benefit over the short term benefit.

 

[Gumbolt]

Just play the map. If you see tons of forest chop them but beeline Bronze Working. If you see food resources settle next to them. Don't settle cities more than 4 tiles apart. Learn to do a 3-4 city HA rush.

 

[Leyrann]

Yes, siege units are disposable. First bombard to 0%, then cause collateral, then mop up with other units. A common mistake is not building enough siege. Something like ~50% is good.

Welp, I'm definitely not hitting those numbers. Will keep it in mind.

In general, avoid having slider at something else than 0% or 100%. There is no clear-cut answer to your actual question, but it doesn't really matter if you spend even tens of turns at 0% slider, as long as you can build cottages and are able to work them.

Huh. What's the advantage of keeping it there rather than striking a balance?

Also, I have another question: Is it worth it to build Castles for the sake of trade routes even though you have no reason to worry about the city coming under siege? An extra trade route sounds very appealing but they become obsolete very early with Economics, which is a tech that I find I don't normally want to delay, plus it takes 150 hammers, or 75 with Stone, which seems like quite a steep cost.