My bad habit..

[el_griffador]

..Is wanting to biuld EVERY improvement in a city. I'm gradually reading and learning on here, that this is a bad strategy. I'd love advice on what the expert players build/don't build, and maybe some examples of build lists? Is there any improvement/wonder/unit you NEVER should build?

At the moment, pretty much every game my list is like this: (1st city I build)

1- Warrior to explore
2- Warrior to explore
3- Warrior to explore
4- Warrior/Spearman to defend (and get a happy face)
5- Warrior/Spearman to accompany..
6- Settler
7- Worker
8- Start working down the improvement list, usually library first if I have literature, if not temple for culture

In my other cities it's more or less the same except no warriors to explore. After some tiles have been worked and production and population boosted, I'll maybe biuld a wonder..

btw, just moved up to monarch level, and *just about* hold my own most games..

Thanks in advance!

 

[Aabraxan]

I'm not an expert, but I'll offer this. It's helpful to learn to assess each building for each city. Buildings are all about return on investment. If I'm going for conquest, I rarely need temples. I might build one in the capital and one or two others in particularly fast-growing cities. I don't really worry about culture, because I just kill off anyone who is a threat. Other than the exceptions that I mentioned, I generally cure population unhappiness by peeling off settlers and workers and using the lux slider. (Look for a post by Bede about temples and priests. A search for "prevaricating parasites" ought to turn it up.)

In my first city, I usually build a couple of warriors to explore, 1 for MP or escort duty, then start looking to get my first settler out. After that, most cities start with a warrior (assuming I am or will soon be at war), then start looking to peel off a worker.

Other buildings . . . Here's what I usually do. Keep in mind that I'm usually playing domination/conquest.
Granaries: Settler & worker factories.
Temples: See above.
Libraries: The whole core gets these, and any cities in the semi-core which can be classified as "high commerce, low or moderate corruption."
Courthouses: Assessed in CA2, usually built in cities ranging from ~30-70% coorruption. Lower than that, they're not needed. Higher than that, they're not worth the shields.
Raxes: Any city that can build units in reasonable time gets one of these.
University: Same assessment as library, but harder to justify.
Cathedral: see temple, but harder to justify.

Make sense?

 

[el_griffador]

Thankyou! Got to say I've never built courthouses- I usually use forbidden palace to sort corruption at the edges of the empire, but I've never closely studied corruption and waste, I'll have to start looking.

I usually play huge maps, and don't usually go for conquest- I'll usually try to dominate what ever continent I'm on through expansion with settlers, culture and aggression, then once I've consolidated my empire play peaceful builder and try to get a tech lead, fight purely defensive wars on my borders.

Are there any buildings you should have in pretty much every city? I read somewhere that having a library and a bank in the same city is counterproductive?

 

[Aabraxan]

No, there's no building that every city must have. A city needs nothing to survive. The question is: What does the empire need for the city to have?

Libraries and banks do work at odds to each other, because of the way the slider works. See the article linked in my sig on multiplier buildings.

 

[GamezRule]

I used to have the same habit.

EDIT: Another example is why build a Barracks in a corrupt city. It won't bring any return. Does anybody have a link to a Specialist Farm's article.

 

[Aabraxan]

Yes. Bede's "The Role of the Specialist Citizen" can be found in the War Academy under Empire Management: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/specialists.php

 

[vmxa]

The example is partially valid. One reason you may build a barrack in a corrupt town is that it is going to come under attack. It has to be on the front, not safely tucked away and the attack needs to be a certain, not a maybe.

 

[GamezRule]

Aabra, do you build markets? If in Rep and at Monarch or above, it may be wise to use banks and markets to hog cash and buy tech's, seem's to me to give a better return.

 

[Aabraxan]

Yes, I build markets. Markets are useful, regardless of whether I'm running a high-cash or high-research game, because of their happiness effect. Buying techs is a perfectly valid strategy, but one that leaves you at the mercy of buying what the AI chooses to research.

 

[GamezRule]

If you get a large empire, then you can actually research with farms, getting techs to trade with the AI for their tech's and gold. Then you can use the markets to make ton's of cash on top of what you get in trades. The cash can be used to build a large Republic army which with you can use to conquer your opponents.

 

[Aabraxan]

True, and I've done this from time to time. However, if your empire is large enough to do that, it's probably already large enough to support an army capable of conquering your enemies. Besides, the more you beat on your neighbors, the harder it is for them to come up with cash to pay you. Dig around in Succession Games for one called Demigod Luddites. IIRC, those guys launched their SS without ever doing any of their own research.

 

[GamezRule]

Cool, a zero science SS game.

 

[Aabraxan]

Yeah, turns out I was thinking about the wrong game. DG Luddites was the right idea, but Phaedo 02: Rage Against the Machine was the one I was actually thinking of: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=205564

 

[Bucephalus]

IIRC, those guys launched their SS without ever doing any of their own research.

Phaedo 02: Rage Against the Machine was the one I was actually thinking of: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=205564

You remember correctly, Aabra; we also overcame an early busted rep and a savage nuking from a runaway AI.

You know, I've been thinking for a while that there is a need for a training game now we have a new crop of newbies coming through, and a zero science SS game ticks a lot of boxes.

 

[Aabraxan]

Yeah, I remembered the busted rep. I just thought I'd leave a surprise or two for GamezRule.

I think you're right on the TDG.

 

[NickyH]

I used to build almost everything everywhere, even though I knew it wasn't the most efficient way to manage my empire. To try something completely different, I once played a game with the self-imposed rule that I could only build units, and no city improvements at all. I aimed for domination, and it was one of the easiest victories I've ever had. It definitely was the earliest victory.

It was kind of tedious though, and I would recommend anyone who would like to try a similar variant to at least allow a few barracks. Not being able to upgrade my units made it very difficult. If I remember correctly, I abandoned lots of obsolete troops in my cities, just to recover some of the shields for new units.

Feudalism as government actually made sense in that game. Without any aqueducts, it still gave me a nice troop support. (In feudalism your support is 5 per town, 2 per city, and 1 per metropolis.) The low war weariness in feudalism also turned out to be important, since I used quite many obsolete troops when attacking my enemies. I didn't have to worry too much about loosing lots of units.

This is not the kind of game that would be interesting to play more than once, but I would definitely recommend it as an experience to anyone who has problems with too many buildings.

(And yes, it was very annoying to get a scientific leader on one of my first techs, since I wasn't allowed to build anything. I used him as a very fast scout, taking three steps every turn. )

 

[Opies]

I build granary/brax/temple/aqduct/harbor/libs/university in all my core cities (capital + first ring). In the second ring I build courthouses, temple, aqduct/granary and maybe a brax if it can produce units in > 10 turns. Anything beyond the second ring I basically use as some kind of farm whether commerce, science, or worker.

 

[GamezRule]

I just finished a tiny conquest game building nothing but 1 granary, 3 raxes, and 1 harbor. The harbor wasn't even necessary.

 

[Raliuven]

Just an observation because I am a habitual builder myself. I think your building plan depends on your desired outcome. If you plan to blitz the board for a quick conquest, then it really isn't worth it to build infrastructure - that library may not do too much if you only need to research to Chivalry or Military Tradition. If you are mass producing settlers and military unit then happiness may not demand marketplaces and there are other ways to increase your cash flow (What's it gonna be? 500gp or your capital?). If you are planning a space launch, those libraries and universities suddenly become more attractive and your military is only need to intimidate those that might think of invading while you build a shiny new rocket.

Building is my bad habit because I can't stand to think that the AI might beat me out in an area before I can accomplish my goals. If I set out for a conquest, I still build a few (okay, a lot!) temples and libraries for some culture so no runaway AI can bury me with a 100k victory or out-tech me. But if my goal is conquest/domination, then every time I stop to build something that does not contribute to that goal, I am hampering my advance and actually giving the AI the chance to stop my strategy, bogging me down in a long slugfest. But they say that admitting you have a problem is half the work.

As a side note and maybe others will have additional thoughts on this - I don't start wonder pre-builds until my empire is growing steadily. Wonders are such a shield pit that I carefully consider if the long term benefits outweigh the long term benefits of everything else I could have built for the same amount. Eventually I start a pre-build when things are well in hand and a wonder I want is close at hand - timing the pre-build is another topic. I am way too conservative and I usually have 5-10 rounds between my pre-build completion and gaining the tech. And because I am a builder, it kills me when I get the message that someone else got the great pyramids . . . shed a tear . . .

 

[Hellfiredoom]

"Hi, my name is HFD, and I'm an over-builderaholic".

In my productive cities I build all multiplier buildings, because when I move my slider to focus on science or gold I like to get the max output I can. On most turns I max out tech as much as I can afford, but say I learn MT and want to upgrade my knights to cav and need cash fast. When I move the slider from science to gold, I want it in as few turns as possible. I've been thinking of trying a strat where every other city I build only tech (ie libraries, unies) or commerce (markets, banks) buildings to reduce my upkeep, but haven't moved from theory to practice yet.

As for Wonders, the past several games I've played I've only built the Great Library and haven't missed not having the other Wonders. I simply put the AIs that build key Wonders (Sun Tzu's mostly) on my "shopping list" and target those cities for conquest.