Need Help With City Locations!

Ænigma

Chieftain
Joined
Mar 18, 2003
Messages
8
Hi, all. First post here.

I've played a few games of Civ 2 before, and a couple of Civ 3 games, but I never got around to finishing them.

Anyway, I'm starting a new one, on Monarch, low water archipelago, default everything else.

I'm having troubles deciding on city locations. I usually place cities in "ideal" locations, but whenever I do that, I tend to think way too much, and end up wasting space...

I've also read someone mentioning building cities in a ring around the capital, with very few overlap (ends up with a ring of 6, + centre city). I generally don't build cities with overlap, but I always see the computer do that.

I've included some screenshots. The "Old Babylon" is my last game. That's the type of locations that I usually build on.

The other screenshots is my latest game. As you can see, there are quite a few very, very good spots, but I don't know where's good.

I guess, if you can give me either general pointers in early city locations and specific city locations for my current game, that would be much appreciated.

Thanks!


Ænigma
 

Attachments

  • 1 old babylon.jpg
    1 old babylon.jpg
    75.7 KB · Views: 672
Welcome Ænigma,
general pointers (city location):
visit the war academy, also read articles on the stategy forum, spy on succession game's board to get an overview about city placement. (Generally: If you prevent overlap, you have less cities -> lower production capacity, lower commerce... early turns are important in a game, can you actually use all tiles of a city? can you use all tiles of a tundra city?...) In the end, you decide how to place them for your pleasure, if you think overlap is really disgusting, you should prevent it.
specific advice for current game:
If you want to go through a game with public discussion on certain issues, you should open a thread on "Stories&Tales" or "Stragegy&Tips" (or wherever the right place is - maybe Chieftess or Padma will move you there if you want to; actually, I can see Chieftess leaving Babylon, heading to the NE-coast and maybe she's not just moving herself, but the whole thread... :lol: ). You post save game files/screenies, describe situation and hopefully get replies by viewers, then draw your consequences about pros/cons and play next couple of turns.
 
Welcome to CFC! :)

I wouldn't mind making a dot map for you, but the way you have the screen shots posted makes it difficult to get the 'big picture'.
Do us a favor and hit the 'z' key to zoom out and take a screen shot of the whole thing and post that.
I will have time to make a dot map of what I would do tomorrow, seeing as I'm not going to work. We are in the middle of a helluva blizzard here in Colorado. (USA)
Have almost 2 feet of snow here now and will be over 3 feet by tomorrow. For those of you not in the US, by this time tomorrow there should be a meter of snow here. :eek:

Maybe my dot map will help you, if you want it that is. I am not a Civ expert but I'm not a slouch either.

Another suggestion is go read this thread

It's a training day game by Sirp, who is a very good player.
I'm participating in that game and am learning a lot. I also posted a dotmap for that game there, so you can get an idea of what I would do with your map. The thread is a good read and I bet it would help you out. :)
 
This is the zoomed out map:

(Also, what are all the keyboard short cuts for stuff? I know that there are a lot of commands that I can't find in the game's GUI. I guess on Ctrl+G for the grid (from Civ 2)
 

Attachments

  • 1zoomed out 1.jpg
    1zoomed out 1.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 558
And this is what I've done so far. Notice the year, and how it's pretty late already. I took a while before getting my 2nd city... And some of the wonders have been gotten by other civ's already... (Oracle and Colossus)
 

Attachments

  • 1zoomed out 2.jpg
    1zoomed out 2.jpg
    150.3 KB · Views: 560
Personally, I believe that your cities are way too spread apart. If you prefer this type of build then go for it or try OCP. I believe you can find info on that in the war academy called 'A Builder's Dream'. After seeing a few screenshots of over players, I normally stick to keeping denser cities with enough space to allow it to grow to size 12-13.

Looking at your screenshots, you have a lot of good land that seems to be wasted by the overly spread cities. You should try and fit some cities in between your current ones w/o getting too crowded.
 
I do so love drawing dots. Here's your map of the world zoomed out but prior to founding cities, and here's where I would have put my first 10 cities (assuming I could grab all the sites, and from how yours turned out I probably would). Comments and founding order below the pic.

cc-aenigma-dotamp.jpg


Red Dot: Where your Ur ended up being. I drew this map as though I had no foreknowledge of where iron would be, and claiming a bunch of potential iron sites and silks from Zulu clutches is a good start.

Yellow Dot: Founded right on top of the silks. That's just the best spot for the city, it looks like it's on the river, is on the coast, and neither overlaps Babylon nor wastes tiles near Babylon.

Normal Blue Dot: Lot of fudge factor up here, there' s no compelling features that would suggest a good city site except for a lot of bonus grassland, the normal blue dot is a coastal city that includes some of the mountains, a lot of coast squares, and three bonus grasslands. With time this could be a real powerhouse city, though it will start off weak without an aqueduct.

Gray dot: Four bonus grasslands, furs and a plains wheat, first ring to capital. Has potential to be a very strong city at all stages of the game, though it will be stuck at size 6 until an aqueduct. High priority site, definitely.

Orange dot: A slow starter, not much going for it besides the three bonus grasslands. Fills the space, but not a high priority.

Light Green Dot: This is probably where I would put my Forbidden Palace. On a river, lots of cows, surrounded by good terrain. This might be close for a FP if this is a large map, but it's better to have a relatively close site done sooner than agonizing over getting the perfect site and delaying it by 20-30 turns.

Light Blue Dot: That river is in an awkward position, you can't put a city on it without preventing placing more coastal cities, and this layout is already a little light on coastal cities. So I put this city as far from the river as I could so I could place another half-city site on it later to fill the space

Pink dot: Another fixer-upper site.

Lavendar Dot. Depending on where iron turned out being and what the Zulus did for their settlements, this could either be a high-priority site or a low one. It uses that whale tile, grabs more of those mountains, only overlaps the red dot on mountain tiles (which won't be highly contested until your cities start getting to be size 16-20). While it is kind of wedged in on the coast, it has enough grassland tiles to supply enough food to eventually work just about every tile in its radius.

Dark purple dots: Tentative city sites after all the other sites are founded.

This is a map for having as few wasted tiles around the capital as possible with as little overlap as possible. A slightly denser build might bring some more benefit to start off, though. Move the orange dot one tile to the NE, then the light green one square due east, and that would create a stronger green dot site and open up enough tiles there to get another city founded northwest of the light blue dot.

I'd found them in this order: Red, Gray, Blue, Yellow, Lavender, Orange, Green, Pink, Light Blue.

As for how you actually laid out your cities...your cities in general are too far apart to use the land well, especially there are too many wasted tiles around the capital. Akkad and Eridu need to be closer. Ashur should be on the coast, placing it one tile away from the sea means it can never build a harbor and those tiles will only ever produce 1 food for it, plus you'll have one fewer city able to produce naval units. Given where iron turned out to be on your map, Nineveh is probably a better choice than my blue dot for that site to get it online quicker, but Uruk is too far away, I'd probably still put it where the lavender dot was on my map and live with the extra overlap. As far as wasted tiles go, Ellipi is an okay site, but placing it right in the middle of so many forest tiles was probably not the wisest move unless you had enough workers to clear it out quickly. With Akkad and Eridu closer, all the other cities you founded probably would have been moved in as well, with another ring of cities beyond them.

You also need to change your worker orders, you have bonus grassland tiles irrigated at Nineveh but normal grassland tiles unimproved, the plains wheat does not look like it has been irrigated, and you are under a dire shortage of workers in general. This is a map that calls for more workers than usual due to the heavy amount of jungle, mountains, and forests around your starting location. I'd have either Babylon or Ashur (or maybe even both on a map with such poor terrain) build granaries and set them to push out workers every couple of turns pretty much until the end of time.
 
I'll use CC's dot map to explain where I'd put my cities. I don't agree with CC's order of city founding. The red dot is pretty worthless early on because of all that jungle. The gray dot isn't great either because I don't see a fresh water supply nearby to irrigate those plains. I would put my second city on the river to the west, near CC's green dot but I'd make sure to get two cows and preferably fresh water. Get a worker there ASAP and turn it into a second settler factory which is even better than Babylon. With two cows and a granary you can produce a settler every 4 turns while still keeping the city over size 4. Of course it depends on how much room you have to expand but it looks like you have quite a bit. When you run out of room to expand this will be a highly productive city without need of an aqueduct. Good site for Forbidden Palace as well.

My second city would be on the coast to get the great lighthouse as soon as possible. You mentioned it's an archipelago map so you'll need to get contacts. I would put it two tiles NW of CC's blue dot to get 3 initial BG's and 7 after cultural expansion.

Third city would probably be 2 SW of CC's gray dot. I would use the forest to get a barracks done quicker and use it as a military producer, escorts at first and later horsemen or whatever to kick the other civ's off your island. Would also get those furs hooked up. I would move CC's orange dot down onto the river two tiles SE and one SW of where it is. The light blue dot is in a good spot. The red and yellow are in good spots. I would found the red before yellow because of the silks, but it would still take a long time to get a road through that jungle so neither city gets much priority.

I disagree with founding cities based on the 'potential' of iron or other resources. You just never know where those resources pop up and it's not worth gambling on them. I've had a starting island before that was a good 1/2 mountains and it only had one iron source all the way on a far tip of it which was surrounded by tundra. Then this source disappeared before I even got it hooked up.
 
First and foremost, irrigating grassland while in despotism is a total waste of time -- you get absolutely no benefit from it. This is due to the despotism penalty that any tile producing 3 or more food, shield, or commerce will produce one less. You should be mining those bonus grasslands.

Second, you should have your first settler out of your capital by 3000 BC for most start positions. From this position, you can two warriors followed by a settler leaving Babylon in 3250 BC. If there wasn't a river nearby, I'd advise you to build a mine on the cattle. But there is a river, so your worker's first task should be to mine the bonus grassland directly south of Babylon, followed by a road. Then move east to bring irrigation to the cattle.

Now for the city placement.
dm_babylon-dot.jpg


The red arrow shows the path my first warrior would most likely follow. First heading southeast to scout around the river. Jungle is not good for a city this early, so head north to the mountains, then northwest along the coast.

The blue arrow shows the path of my second warrior. Heading west, opposite for the first warrior, then hopping from mountain to mountain as he circles the grassland SW of Babylon.

(1) is top priority as it can produce a warrior/settler in about 15 turns. It's not too close to Babylon either, as both will easily be size 12 throughout the middle ages.

(2) is most definitely the best spot within 10 tiles of Babylon. It will produce at least 10 shields at size 6, and over 20 at size 12. I'd build the Pyramids here.

After 2 settlers, Babylon should build another worker, then a granary.

(3) and (4) will come from settlers built in (1)

(5) and (6) could come from (2)

(7), (8), and (9) finish out the 'core' of the empire

I don't think I'd build the Forbidden Palace in (3), rather in another city south of (3) near the freshwater lake.

I have also indicated a path of irrigation from the river, through Babylon, to the plains around (2) and (6), and further emphasized the importance of mining those bonus grassland.

If AEnigma can provide the 4000 BC save, I'd like to play this postion, at least through the first 40 or 50 turns.

Shillen: Low water archipelago, the lighthouse might not be necessary here.
 
I would have put Ashur one square farther east or northeast to get it on a coast, since this is an archipelago map. I suppose its current position gives it access to the wheat, which is nice, but I'd rather have the additional coastal city and let another new city deal with the wheat bonus.
 
I have some general comments and a screen shot with squares. In general, I like to have cities one turn apart, three tiles with a road. This makes for higher production, more gold, and easier defense. Ideally each city has at least one "buddy" city that reinforcements can arrive from in one turn.

The biggest complaint about dense builds is that they do not look as pretty. For players into role playing or building a pretty empire, a sparse build is fine. For most others a dense build is more efficient.
+ Bill
 

Attachments

  • babylon.jpg
    babylon.jpg
    39.4 KB · Views: 480
BillChin, I'm curious about the motivation behind the placement of 2 of your cities -- the two most southwestern cities in particular. I'm talking about the one just northeast of the cow on the edge of the jungle and the one a few squares northwest of it.

Those two cities straddle the river. Wouldn't it be better to move the pair one square (any direction) and get one or both of them on the river? I think my personal preference would be to move them south and get one on the coast and the other on the river.
 
Originally posted by Dr Elmer Jiggle
BillChin, I'm curious about the motivation behind the placement of 2 of your cities -- the two most southwestern cities in particular. I'm talking about the one just northeast of the cow on the edge of the jungle and the one a few squares northwest of it.

Those two cities straddle the river. Wouldn't it be better to move the pair one square (any direction) and get one or both of them on the river? I think my personal preference would be to move them south and get one on the coast and the other on the river.

Yes, with a second look I agree with you. The river tile and the coast look much better for the two southwestern cities. In my haste to get cities one turn from each other on the mini map, I neglected the river tiles. Thanks for pointing that out.

In general, river tiles, food bonuses, resources, luxuries are more important than spacing. Dense spacing will be more productive than sparse spacing on 90% of standard size maps and have the added bonus of easier defense.
+ Bill
 
As suggested by Dr Elmer Jiggle, the green tiles are better than the yellow:
 

Attachments

  • babylon2.jpg
    babylon2.jpg
    25 KB · Views: 459
Back
Top Bottom