Mythical City Location

[ProbStat]

In looking at what kind of starting location would be best for a city, I first scrutinized whether or not there were any types of squares that would provide 4 (Food + Production) without Worker improvement: there are none.

Then I started looking at whether or not the center square of a city might get a terrain-based bonus. Usually the city center produces 2 Food, 1 Production, and 1 Commerce. A couple quick checks verified that Flood Plains still just give 2/1/1, in spite that they normally get 3 food, and also that there is no river commerce bonus for the center square. What was very useful to discover, however, is that a (Plains + Hills) square gives 2/2/1 for the center square, and this seems to be the only "normal" terrain type that gives any benefit (Grassland + Hills gives no bonus). Hill squares also apparently give a defense bonus for the city: shining cities on hills are strongly advised.

The special resources can (but don't always) give a benefit: anything on a Grassland square that produces a bonus Food will end up with 3/1/1 (not sure about on Plains square), and Marble and Stone give a Production bonus. This is always at a significant cost: you never (as far as I can tell) get to build a Farm/Camp/Plantation/Quarry in order to get any of the extra improvement-based bonuses.

Putting all of this information together, however, suggested a super city site: Plains + Hills + Stone or Marble. Some playing with the World Builder verified that such a site gives the center square 2/3/1, which is huge.

However, on the rare occasions when I have actually started near Stone or Marble, I think they have always been on flat land rather than on Hills, though I haven't been paying a lot of attention to that question.

So does anyone know if the game's standard map generator ever creates Plains + Hills + Stone or Marble squares? Probably any Hills + Marble or Stone square would be a good indication. Has anyone seen such a square that wasn't manufactured through World Builder?

 

[DaviddesJ]

This article describes the results of siting cities on all sorts of terrain:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=144029

And you can use the Map Finder to regenerate maps until you get the combination you want:

http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/mod.php?show=mapfinder

 

[ProbStat]

Thanks! I think I have my answer.

 

[drkodos]

And you can use the Map Finder to regenerate maps until you get the combination you want:

It's easier and faster to just use Worldbuilder.



The results are really the same, n'est pas?

 

[DaviddesJ]

It's easier and faster to just use Worldbuilder.

The results are really the same, n'est pas?

No. Using Worldbuilder reveals map tiles and resources that are not yet visible at start. And, even if you could ignore or forget all of that unwanted information, the presence or absence of one resource affects the likelihood of others. E.g., if you add a resource in worldbuilder, the probabability of finding other resources nearby is different (higher) than if you generated random maps until getting one with the desired resource present.

Anyway, the OP wanted to know if it was possible to get random starts with certain terrains present. Regenerating random maps is a way to discover that---you could also estimate the probabality, if you want. Worldbuilder can't answer those questions.

 

[drkodos]

I'm not so sure that WB gives that much of an advantage if one does not
scroll around looking for things. Either things are there, or there are not. AND, the immediate area around the original settle position is usually uncovered with the first several turns anyway.

How does seeing aluminum in the settling area really help? It would be several thousand years before this info would have any relevance anyway.

Now, all this being said, I am not a fan of using World Builder for any games I play. I have used it to test certain situations that would have taken weeks under normal playing conditions, but I am not into using it to assist (in any way) my game.

But my larger point is that rifling through thousands of maps with a utility program to find the best and most desirable starting positions that contain the resources one wants is not that far removed (PHILOSOPHICALLY) from just putting them there yourself.

It is a matter of perspective, no doubt, and I respect your opinion on the matter (one I think that is shared by most people). However, at the end of the day, both of these behaviors are basically tweaking the parameters of gameplay to enhance results and are not "onsighting" the game and playing as "honest" as possible.

Not that it matters anyway, though.

 

[MrCynical]

I don't think your first settler is ever placed on a square with a resource, so you'll never actually get the starting tile having stone/marble on a plains/hill. Such squares do exist, but they're very rare and you won't starton one. I'm not sure map finder allows for moving your first settler? A plains/hill on a river is the best starting tile you'll get normally.

 

[Shillen]

I don't think your first settler is ever placed on a square with a resource, so you'll never actually get the starting tile having stone/marble on a plains/hill. Such squares do exist, but they're very rare and you won't starton one. I'm not sure map finder allows for moving your first settler? A plains/hill on a river is the best starting tile you'll get normally.

Who says you have to found your city on the starting position?

 

[MrCynical]

No-one, I just wasn't sure mapfinder allowed for moving it. There's also the issue that the map generator ensures a reasonable quality of terrain in the fat cross around your starting tile, whereas there's no guarantee there'll be a better location nearby.

 

[DaviddesJ]

It is a matter of perspective, no doubt, and I respect your opinion on the matter (one I think that is shared by most people).

What opinion? The only thing I said is that you can't achieve the same results using the Worldbuilder that you can with Map Finder.

This is not an opinion, it's a simple fact.

Whether using Worldbuilder is "not that far removed" from using Map Finder is a question of opinion. I have no opinion about that. But it's definitely not the same.

 

[DaveMcW]

1. Your settler can never spawn on a resource tile. So a plain + hill + stone tile is possible, but you have to waste 1 turn to move on top of it.

2. 4-food without worker improvements is possible on Great Plains.

 

[drkodos]

What opinion? The only thing I said is that you can't achieve the same results using the Worldbuilder that you can with Map Finder.

This is not an opinion, it's a simple fact.

Whether using Worldbuilder is "not that far removed" from using Map Finder is a question of opinion. I have no opinion about that. But it's definitely not the same.

They are both using artifical methods to increase winning chances. In that SENSE they are the same. One is more drastic and dramatic than the other.

If you do not THINK so, then your OPINION is different than mine.

And you CAN acheive the same result with WorldBuilder, which is to have the resources you want to have in your starting position. That is a fact as well, sir.

Both are a form of cheat, In my opinion. And that OPINION, I think is what I refer to as our point of difference opinion.

You feel map trolling is not a form of cheating. I do.

Comprende?

 

[DaviddesJ]

They are both using artifical methods to increase winning chances. In that SENSE they are the same.

Pigs and pigeons both breathe air. In that SENSE they are the same. However, pigs are not the same as pigeons.

The application of the Map Finder that is being discussed here is simply to generate maps with certain properties. One might not even play those games. So there's no reason that generating maps need have any connection to "winning chances".

You feel map trolling is not a form of cheating.

Please don't falsely attribute statements to me. I said no such thing. All I did was tell another poster how he can use the Map Finder to explore the space of possible maps that can be generated by the Civ4 map generator, or to generate maps with certain specific characteristics. This has nothing to do with whether the Map Finder is "cheating", or not.

 

[ProbStat]

I'm pretty sure I had one instance where my settler started on a resource -- dyes, maybe? I didn't even notice it until my city was built on it.

I think I read in another thread that putting a city on a resource is a good way to protect it from spy sabotage, but I question that: from what I've seen, if your city is on a resource, you don't and can't get the resource. I've only checked this with an early food resource, so it might be different with oil, which is what was mentioned in the other thread. Really, it could be an absolute pain to find out that the only oil you have near you has a city on it, and you can't access it, so maybe I don't have the whole picture.

 

[DaviddesJ]

If you build on a resource, and you have the technology to access the resource, then you do get the resource. I'm not sure why you thought you weren't getting the food resource. Maybe it was Sugar (or Bananas, etc.), and you didn't have Calendar?

 

[ProbStat]

I think it was something that needed a Pasture, and I built a Worker (to see if I could build a Pasture on the city square: no) and researched Animal Husbandry, and did not get the health bonus I would have gotten were it being fed into my trade network. I just started a game in order to quickly test this: maybe there is a turn delay between getting the necessary tech and getting the resource? I doubt that I checked for that ...

 

[ProbStat]

A recheck verifies that you are correct, DaviddesJ, and a resource comes into your trade network once you have the necessary tech to exploit it. Don't know what I did wrong when I checked that matter earlier.

 

[malekithe]

I've always been a fan of a city on a commerce resource on a plains hill next to a river for a financial civ. 2F2H3C from the get-go.

 

[Shillen]

I've always been a fan of a city on a commerce resource on a plains hill next to a river for a financial civ. 2F2H3C from the get-go.

After some investigating it appears the only commerce resources that can appear on a plains hill are wine and gold. Wine would probably be worth settling on, but definitely not gold.

edit: You actually need the tile to be on a river too.