[NFP] Maya First Look

[PhilBowles]

Can someone explain how Maya works again?
Are you supposed to grow past 10 pop with this Civ??
Is that correct?

Are you supposed not to with other civs?

The reason for the discussion focusing on having only cities within 6 tiles of the capital is that the Maya get a bonus of 10% to all yields for cities whose centre is within 6 tiles - but a malus of 15% to all yields for cities outside. Basically, imagine the capital as being a Factory for every yield type (except that the capital itself doesn't get the benefit).

For this to be useful your cities need to have a high base output (I've checked in the Yields report, and indeed the Maya bonus - while not documented - is added as a flat bonus to the total yield): you're not getting huge amounts of value if you're just getting +3 to a few yields in each city, and that's not worth restricting expansion for. So to make maximum use of the Maya you do want to have a few tall cities - all of mine got between 11 and 16, others are talking about much higher populations.

I ended up with 13 cities in all in my game (6 founded, 7 conquered) and didn't suffer any particular problems - the big issue with larger cities is that there aren't very many food production options other than working tiles, and my cities tended to start starving, or at least growing very slowly, if I got much beyond pop 15 and wanted to focus on production or science. The major reason to go with only about 7 or 8 cities is that this maximises the various things already in Civ VI that play well with going tall: in particular you have at most 8 governors, so if you want Audience Chamber as a government building (and you probably do), any more than that and you can't have a governor in each one. The six-tile radius is presumably chosen because it's the same one Industrial and Entertainment districts, and power generation from city buildings, can reach if placed in the capital - so going beyond it costs you coverage from these districts or requires you to build extra copies of them.

The rest of the Maya design basically exists to accommodate this - there's a lot of discussion about how the Observatory compares with other science districts, but basically it's free from terrain requirements to allow you the maximum freedom to site Maya cities - the elimination of the reliance on freshwater does the same (although in practice you want to be close to freshwater where possible for both commerce districts and aqueducts).

 

[bengalryan9]

FWIW, in my current game everyone is still below 100 beakers/turn... except for AI Maya who has around 290. I haven't seen her lands yet, but AI Maya definitely has the potential to be very strong.

 

[Morningcalm]

AI Maya’s passive 10% yields are really scary on Deity. And did I mention her hul’che archers?

 

[Abaxial]

I haven't tried playing the Maya yet, but it looks like they are very dependent on where they start on the map, and what resources are nearby. Do people have any thoughts about what map type would suit Maya best? Small continents maybe?

 

[Uberfrog]

I haven't tried playing the Maya yet, but it looks like they are very dependent on where they start on the map, and what resources are nearby. Do people have any thoughts about what map type would suit Maya best? Small continents maybe?

The risk with small continents is that your map will have proportionally more coastline, and the sea is the number one thing you don’t want anywhere near your capital as the Maya.

I’d be tempted to say Pangaea with old world age (fewer mountains), but you might need to use your hul’che early on to keep your neighbours from settling your prime territory.

 

[m_mus]

I haven't tried playing the Maya yet, but it looks like they are very dependent on where they start on the map, and what resources are nearby. Do people have any thoughts about what map type would suit Maya best? Small continents maybe?

As water probably ruins your options to max out the 6-tile radius around your capital, I'd say Pangea.
If you still want some "aquatic" gameplay without sacrificing too much land, I'd suggest 7-seas.

 

[Socrates-]

I haven't tried playing the Maya yet, but it looks like they are very dependent on where they start on the map, and what resources are nearby. Do people have any thoughts about what map type would suit Maya best? Small continents maybe?

I'm currently playing the Maya on 7 seas. In my experience this type of map generates more land in comparison to Pangea. Also it seems players are a bit more placed apart on this map. Most suited option might be Great Lakes. But personally I think a total lack of possible naval-play is a bit boring.

Have fun playing them!

 

[tedhebert]

My take on Maya after trying it out; It actually holds up pretty well VS any other civs, at least for my style of playing (science oriented).

I think I tried too hard to play it for it's apparent aim, which is a localized, Tall 9-12 cities focused in the 6 tiles radius. That actually holds up pretty well too, but when you get around Modern Era, there's a real fair chance that
you'll be significantly behind a few civs and have to go aggro to keep them in check. I honestly think I wouldn't have won my game if I hadn't done that and taken around 10 cities from my neighbor Engleanor, which also allowed me
to then keep pace with Kongo and Gran Colombia. I DID keep a save from before I went on the offensive and intend to try out if keeping to my 11 cities and playing peaceful would have allowed me to still win, but I doubt it.
I'm probably not a good enough player to easily win peacefully; I need to take 6-10 cities around modern times usually, targeting the leading civ.

But when I DID go on the offensive, I never felt like I was playing a sub-par civ at all.

Anyways, I do think my initial estimation of Maya was a little too negative. I really enjoyed playing them. Still think 6 tiles limit is too tight and that 8 tiles would be just perfect, but hey, that's just me ;-)

 

[Kmart_Elvis]

Just finished my Maya game. Science victory, 302 turns, standard speed, continents, Emperor. Only founded 5 other cities around my capital, and a sixth out of range which was strictly a pop 4 colony city to get access to oil and aluminum. Played very tall, my capital was pop 33 at the end and all my other cities were 25 plus. It was the first time I had a SV where I completed the launch of the exoplanet expedition but did not immediately have access to Lagrange or any way to speed it up. So I had to research a couple extra tech to unlock it, which ended up being 13 turns of only going 1 light year. Still, my fastest SV ever, with same settings, was Maori at 299, and I had a huge wide empire in that game, so for only a core six city empire, I think I did well comparatively.

10% of all yields was strong, although it took a while to really feel it.

Farms do make you grow tall, and that farm gold is a nice supplement, but that alone won't make you rich. The housing penalty was pretty tough in the beginning. Definitely a rougher start than other civs.

The Hul'che is a beast. They hit +13 better than an Archer on a weakened opponent. Had absolutely no problem fending off the raging barbs and my neighbor Georgia rushing me with horsemen in the classical.

The observatory is a strong district. Half-price alone makes it great. I had no problem getting +4, +5 adjacency for them. Every city was able to use the Rationalism card for max effectiveness.

Now, on to Gran Colombia next.

 

[The Civs 6]

Hello, first post

To me the Maya are a bottom half civ for two reasons. First, they are heavily map dependent. In my first play through as them I got literally the perfect map, with tons of plantations and open space, and that felt good. I tried to start a couple of games as them only to find that the luxury resources were "wrong". Second, and this is slightly more serious (because I can just re-roll to get the map I want), I think they kind of have limited potential. To me the -15% yields is really devastating even if you wanted to grow out your empire. That middle game expansion I am envisioning, I still expect those cities to be self-sufficient for a space. On top of that, if you got the good roll, it means that the outer boundaries of your territory are probably less suitable for Mayan expansion.

So I'm sort of asking for experiences here. I read through this thread and I kind of get the Enlightenment angle - although for me Enlightenment is rarely a factor when I am going SV since my cultural output is mediocre - but do you have the Maya as having more late game power (other than just getting there earlier)? Another issue I see with them is that farms are so important that it kind of forces you to have less productivity, which is obviously bad for SV.

 

[PhilBowles]

Hello, first post

To me the Maya are a bottom half civ for two reasons. First, they are heavily map dependent. In my first play through as them I got literally the perfect map, with tons of plantations and open space, and that felt good. I tried to start a couple of games as them only to find that the luxury resources were "wrong". Second, and this is slightly more serious (because I can just re-roll to get the map I want), I think they kind of have limited potential. To me the -15% yields is really devastating even if you wanted to grow out your empire. That middle game expansion I am envisioning, I still expect those cities to be self-sufficient for a space. On top of that, if you got the good roll, it means that the outer boundaries of your territory are probably less suitable for Mayan expansion.

So I'm sort of asking for experiences here. I read through this thread and I kind of get the Enlightenment angle - although for me Enlightenment is rarely a factor when I am going SV since my cultural output is mediocre - but do you have the Maya as having more late game power (other than just getting there earlier)? Another issue I see with them is that farms are so important that it kind of forces you to have less productivity, which is obviously bad for SV.

A lot of the discussion here is focused on min-maxing - playing to maximise the bonus and minimise the malus from the Maya ability. In practical terms, you have to be producing 9 of any yield to even get a -1 hit from the cities outside the core radius - which for a time will be offset by the bonus from the nearby cities simply because they'll have had longer to develop. The likely optimal gameplan with the Maya is not to huddle up and grow as tall as possible, but to focus on developing 6 or so large core cities - each of which will have output similar to a normal capital - and a bunch of smaller satellite cities that exist to produce trade routes and extra districts. That way the bonus is significant for the large cities, but the malus is minor for the smaller ones.

My experience is not that the Maya are any stronger than other civs in the late game - they aren't, but then there's no reason for them to be in order to be a good civ. Instead, they're able to remain competitive with other civs *from fewer cities* and/or expanding/conquering later.

I also wouldn't call them map dependent - exactly the reverse, in fact, since both the UA and the observatory are freed from terrain considerations (rivers and mountains/jungle respectively). The adjacency advantage from plantations is nice, but of little strategic importance: the 10% bonus you'll be getting to your science output (and faster growth once you have enough housing) will soon be greater than the adjacency bonus. I've mentioned before that my start was not great in that regard: I had a single plantation available across all of my cities.

The key thing is to stop thinking of Maya as a "science civ" just because they have a unique science district: their UA gives a bonus to all yields, and the flexibility in placing the Observatory means that you can boost adjacency for other district types at the same time as boosting observatory adjacency (while a normal campus is often surrounded by mountains or jungle and so can't be used to provide adjacency to more than one or two other districts). Secretly the advantage of the Observatory isn't that it produces good science, but that it contributes more to other yields than a campus does. Think of it more as a Theater Square that produces science rather than culture than as a campus with bad adjacency.

I don't know overall whether they're an especially good or an especially bad civ: my experience is that they're as easy to win with as any other civ, which given Civ VI's difficulty is admittedly not saying a great deal, and for that matter in a game where the AI was performing above average in its science output. At least the way I played them I used a more focused strategy than I usually do, but that may have had as much to do with my expectations of the civ's limitations than anything actually necessary (and indeed, if I played with as much focus with other civs it's possible I'd find them even easier than the Maya).

 

[The Civs 6]

A lot of the discussion here is focused on min-maxing - playing to maximise the bonus and minimise the malus from the Maya ability. In practical terms, you have to be producing 9 of any yield to even get a -1 hit from the cities outside the core radius - which for a time will be offset by the bonus from the nearby cities simply because they'll have had longer to develop. The likely optimal gameplan with the Maya is not to huddle up and grow as tall as possible, but to focus on developing 6 or so large core cities - each of which will have output similar to a normal capital - and a bunch of smaller satellite cities that exist to produce trade routes and extra districts. That way the bonus is significant for the large cities, but the malus is minor for the smaller ones.

My experience is not that the Maya are any stronger than other civs in the late game - they aren't, but then there's no reason for them to be in order to be a good civ. Instead, they're able to remain competitive with other civs *from fewer cities* and/or expanding/conquering later.

I also wouldn't call them map dependent - exactly the reverse, in fact, since both the UA and the observatory are freed from terrain considerations (rivers and mountains/jungle respectively). The adjacency advantage from plantations is nice, but of little strategic importance: the 10% bonus you'll be getting to your science output (and faster growth once you have enough housing) will soon be greater than the adjacency bonus. I've mentioned before that my start was not great in that regard: I had a single plantation available across all of my cities.

The key thing is to stop thinking of Maya as a "science civ" just because they have a unique science district: their UA gives a bonus to all yields, and the flexibility in placing the Observatory means that you can boost adjacency for other district types at the same time as boosting observatory adjacency (while a normal campus is often surrounded by mountains or jungle and so can't be used to provide adjacency to more than one or two other districts). Secretly the advantage of the Observatory isn't that it produces good science, but that it contributes more to other yields than a campus does. Think of it more as a Theater Square that produces science rather than culture than as a campus with bad adjacency.

I don't know overall whether they're an especially good or an especially bad civ: my experience is that they're as easy to win with as any other civ, which given Civ VI's difficulty is admittedly not saying a great deal, and for that matter in a game where the AI was performing above average in its science output. At least the way I played them I used a more focused strategy than I usually do, but that may have had as much to do with my expectations of the civ's limitations than anything actually necessary (and indeed, if I played with as much focus with other civs it's possible I'd find them even easier than the Maya).

Yeah I don't think they are a really bad Civ. My central issue is that they seem to learn really heavy on farms, but as someone else said earlier in this thread, farms do not feel like a great tile improvement. so yeah that's a good point about getting a good observatory, but that is dependent on getting the farms up and running.

 

[KayAU]

@The Civs 6
Welcome to the forum. Your points are valid, although I would rate the Maya higher, due to their great UI and UU. It is certainly true that they are not optimal for expansion beyond the 6 tile radius, but that is clearly very intentional. The Maya are designed to cater to those of us who like a limited number of highly developed cities. Based on my experience so far, it seems they can be very effective staying within their core hex, although I think it is possible that they might suffer a bit on higher map sizes, as wide is just inherently stronger in Civ 6. When I play, though, I make a point of embracing the tall playstyle: I avoid conquering outside of my core lands, limit expansion outside it to things like resource or ocean access (shouldn't amount to more than 0-2 cities),and go for options which are geared towards tall, such as Audience Chamber and Communism. In warfare, I limit myself to pillaging and liberation (although I can raze cities which encroach on my lands).

In terms of being map dependent, I am a bit conflicted. On one hand, yes, they clearly are: you need plantation luxuries, preferably some farmables near your capital, some high production tiles to get out a Builder early, and a decent amount of land. When these things fall into place, the Maya are an absolute beast. On the other hand, you could argue that the Maya are less map dependent than others in some watys: they don't need fresh water, and they can make more of their own adjacencies for their Observatories. I did play a game where I had a rougher start: lots of mountains, few plantation luxuries, aggressive neighbors nearby. What happened is that it took me a lot longer to really get things going, I didn't overtake the AI on science until nearly the Medieval age, and I had to focus on defence much more. It was kind of neat, though: the Mayans are really good at turtling up, until they can take the lead in technology.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Hello, first post

To me the Maya are a bottom half civ for two reasons. First, they are heavily map dependent. In my first play through as them I got literally the perfect map, with tons of plantations and open space, and that felt good. I tried to start a couple of games as them only to find that the luxury resources were "wrong". Second, and this is slightly more serious (because I can just re-roll to get the map I want), I think they kind of have limited potential. To me the -15% yields is really devastating even if you wanted to grow out your empire. That middle game expansion I am envisioning, I still expect those cities to be self-sufficient for a space. On top of that, if you got the good roll, it means that the outer boundaries of your territory are probably less suitable for Mayan expansion.

So I'm sort of asking for experiences here. I read through this thread and I kind of get the Enlightenment angle - although for me Enlightenment is rarely a factor when I am going SV since my cultural output is mediocre - but do you have the Maya as having more late game power (other than just getting there earlier)? Another issue I see with them is that farms are so important that it kind of forces you to have less productivity, which is obviously bad for SV.

Hello and welcome to the forums!

I agree with almost everything you said (though not from experience, I don't have the money for games currently). I think Maya will be incredibly map-dependant. Not having a Plantation in your first 3 cities (which is possible, even with the start bias) will likely cripple you very hard. Yes, -15% yields on satellite cities is pretty bad, but it only really matters later in the game when your satellite cities are actually producing massive hammers/science/culture/gold/faith/food. Before that it is pretty negligible, same with the boost for your core cities. It's really not that great of an ability altogether, I wish they would have devised something cool like they did for Maya in Civ 5!

Also, just as a general tip, Culture is almost as important as Science for a Space Victory, and getting Globalization and your Tier-4 Government should always be a priority, no matter what Civ.

@The Civs 6
On one hand, yes, they clearly are: you need plantation luxuries, preferably some farmables near your capital, some high production tiles to get out a Builder early, and a decent amount of land. When these things fall into place, the Maya are an absolute beast.

But then again what Civ isn't "an absolute beast" when all things fall into place and the stars align? That's why most people agree that the stronger Civs are the ones that have bonuses that always matter, not just under specific circumstances. Like the Mayan cheaper Campus, +15% bonus in the cap and better Archers. These are the things the Maya have going for themselves. Everything else is highly situational.

But sadly the downsides of the Maya are not situational. You will always start with less housing, no matter the map. You can't always make good use of your UU. You will always be forced to farm, but you can't always use Observatory adjacency. Some cities simply do not allow for good farm placement.

That is what I dislike about Maya. Their bonuses are (mostly) conditional, their maluses are not conditional. You will always have the downsides, but not always profit from the upsides, aside from extra yields and Campus being cheaper (it might be worse than a regular Campus, though).

I also wouldn't call them map dependent - exactly the reverse, in fact, since both the UA and the observatory are freed from terrain considerations (rivers and mountains/jungle respectively).

There are few maps without mountains, and pretty much no maps without fresh water. Out of 100 maps you roll you will likely have Coast/River for your capital and first 2 expansions in more than 90 of them. So this argument does not really work imho. Generally speaking fresh water and mountains are super abundant.

the 10% bonus you'll be getting to your science output (and faster growth once you have enough housing) will soon be greater than the adjacency bonus.

I really do not think so. Adjacency bonus doubles with Natural Philosophy which is almost a must-run policy card. If, like you say, you do not have plantations, and do not get mountain bonus, then your Campus will likely be at +1 science, either from city center + 1 district or from 2 farms. That's pretty bad. +2 with NP. Meanwhile someone who gets a +2 Campus from 2 mountains will go up to +4 with NP. Your +10% bonus to yields is super meaningless until you get into the mid- to lategame. Probably your cities having a University is the flipping point.

However I do agree with you that lategame the +10% yields probably surpasses the adjacency. But then you're already pretty much through the tech tree anyway...

I also agree with you that they are rather easy to win with, seems like they are one of the prime Civs for newer player to try Immortal/Deity.

 

[PhilBowles]

There are few maps without mountains, and pretty much no maps without fresh water. Out of 100 maps you roll you will likely have Coast/River for your capital and first 2 expansions in more than 90 of them. So this argument does not really work imho.

So, indeed, you might have three good early cities. The Maya can make every one of their early cities as effective. Also, plains and grassland are "super abundant" - it seems hard to argue that farms make a civ more map dependent than mountains or rivers, and you don't need any specific features for observatories: districts offer adjacency bonuses as well as farms. Once again, think of them as closer to Theater Squares than Campuses. The Theater Square is not a bad district.

i really do not think so. Adjacency bonus doubles with Natural Philosophy which is almost a must-run policy card. If, like you say, you do not have plantations, and do not get mountain bonus, then your Campus will likely be at +1 science, either from city center + 1 district or from 2 farms.

Every one of my plantation-less cities had at least +2 adjacency, doubled to +4 with Natural Philosophy. Not immediately on founding, necessarily, but people are getting far too hung up on adjacency boniuses. They simply aren't that important, especially if - like the Maya - you probably want an Observatory in every city while you only want campuses in a few.

Yes, it means they start more slowly as they do with housing, but it doesn't mean they produce any less science overall.

However I do agree with you that lategame the +10% yields probably surpasses the adjacency. But then you're already pretty much through the tech tree anyway...

I wouldn't call Education being "pretty much through the tech tree".

 

[yung.carl.jung]

So, indeed, you might have three good early cities. The Maya can make every one of their early cities as effective. Also, plains and grassland are "super abundant" - it seems hard to argue that farms make a civ more map dependent than mountains or rivers, and you don't need any specific features for observatories: districts offer adjacency bonuses as well as farms. Once again, think of them as closer to Theater Squares than Campuses. The Theater Square is not a bad district.

Grassland and Plains are abundant, yes, but do not give the Maya any bonus. For that bonus to kick in, you have to invest additional ressources. The comparison is not fair. You do not have to improve a mountain tile for the adjacency, it is instant. Also, farms are +0.5, while Mountains are +1, so farms are already much worse in two ways. Yes, Theatre Squares are amazing, I agree.

Every one of my plantation-less cities had at least +2 adjacency, doubled to +4 with Natural Philosophy. Not immediately on founding, necessarily, but people are getting far too hung up on adjacency boniuses. They simply aren't that important, especially if - like the Maya - you probably want an Observatory in every city while you only want campuses in a few.

That is what I was arguing, Observatories are worse in the early game, but scale up into the lategame and possibly even eclipse Seowon/Campus in the very late game. Also, your reasoning makes little sense imho. You want an Observatory in every city, but not a Campus? If I am going for a science victory, I do want a Campus in nearly every city, Maya or not. I don't think anyone gets "hung up" on adjacency bonus, the fact that Observatories often have worse adjacency than the Campus until mid- to lategame is a big problem for the Maya, "supposedly" (I agree with you here!) a science Civ.

I wouldn't call Education being "pretty much through the tech tree".

You likely get Universities around 15-30 turns after Education, depending on the city. You do not get them instantly. I usually get Edu around T110-120, Universities anywhere between T125-T150. Games finish usually before T200. So in that specific case it really isn't all that.

Also, early science matters much more than late science, same with culture. Late game has a myriad of ways to push your science through the roof.

Of course that is just my personal situation, other players will get much more out of the Maya lategame bonuses, because their lategame lasts longer. Insofar I agree with you that Universities aren't all that late.

Maybe it just boils down to Maya not being a great min-maxing Civ, or not a great "fast victory" Civ, but being much more dependable and consistent than others, which itself is a very good thing. How you rate the Maya ultimately depends on what you use them for. If your goal is to settle a few cities and turtle, they might be the best Civ in the game, the Civ 6 equivalent of Ethiopia. Me personally I always played Ethiopia as an ICS Civ instead

 

[SammyKhalifa]

There are few maps without mountains, and pretty much no maps without fresh water. Out of 100 maps you roll you will likely have Coast/River for your capital and first 2 expansions in more than 90 of them. So this argument does not really work imho. Generally speaking fresh water and mountains are super abundant.



I really do not think so. Adjacency bonus doubles with Natural Philosophy which is almost a must-run policy card. If, like you say, you do not have plantations, and do not get mountain bonus, then your Campus will likely be at +1 science, either from city center + 1 district or from 2 farms. That's pretty bad. +2 with NP. Meanwhile someone who gets a +2 Campus from 2 mountains will go up to +4 with NP. Your +10% bonus to yields is super meaningless until you get into the mid- to lategame. Probably your cities having a University is the flipping point.

But how many spots have three or four adjacent mountains for those great mountain campus spots? Those are special, exciting places on most of my maps. At the meantime you can put a decent observatory anywhere. Maybe I was just planning better than I normally do but in the game I'm playing I have better adjacencies for my observatories than I ever do with the campus. I mean, yeah now in the late game they're great, but even from the time I built them they were just fine.

And while you're talking about early game, don't discount the fact that they're half the cost of a campus, and don't discount that +10% quite as quickly as you did. The observatory will be making science when the Campus is still a construction zone. Say my observatory at that bad +2.2 you mention comes online ten turns faster than your +4 campus. How long until the campus catches up? By that point my observatory will not be +2.2 anymore, but +3.3 (or better if I'm doing my job at cramming districts together in closely placed cities).

Like I said I've only done one game so maybe I either got lucky or am just leaning into the adjacency bonus more than I normally do but it seems pretty fine to me.

 

[kb27787]

You likely get Universities around 15-30 turns after Education, depending on the city.

IMO if something takes that many turns to build (barring wonders) then you probably shouldn't be building it (consider chopping as an alternative) or there has to be something that has gone terribly wrong! 8-10 turns or so for hard-building universities is more realistic... and your capital/well-developed cities should do it in 6 turns (unless you've really been neglecting your mines, or your pop is too low to work many mines!)

But yes, with Mayan cities and their flat farms and lack of mines (due to wasted builder charges), it's understandable. Personally I cringe when I see my Mayan cities take 28 turns for a single university.

 

[DWilson]

I would also say that the bonus combat ability within range is really useful, and made handling surprise wars from bigger and stronger empires much easier to handle.

 

[lotrmith]

@The Civs 6
On the other hand, you could argue that the Maya are less map dependent than others in some ways: they don't need fresh water, and they can make more of their own adjacencies for their Observatories.

Looking at this from the other side of the coin:

You could easily rephrase that, rather than not *needing* fresh water, they simply don't *get* fresh water. Yes that frees up your city placement but only because every city you settle is going to start out equally *awful* in terms of housing/growth. Your capital has growth penalty at pop 2 and all expansions start with a growth penalty at pop 1. This is a seriously terrible malus as it sets your snowball back significantly that in many ways is not made up for by the science output or proximity bonus.

Also you have significantly less freedom with district/tile placement. Where everyone else just plops a campus down by mountains/jungle/reef/vent for 3+ and then forgets about it, Maya has to plan around initial bad adjacency for every campus and strategize how to get to 3+. A single plantation, alone requiring a particular resource subset, Irrigation, and a builder charge, only gets you to +2. You need a second, adjacent plantation along with a second builder charge. Else, you need two *adjacent* farms, for an entire builder's worth of charges (presuming the land is already clear). If you can't do that, then you need to combine your city center and other districts to help get to 3+.