Netherlands bias has barely any marsh or flood plains.

[Sharples]

Has anyone else been experiencing this? I seem to only get two-three marshes in a 10 tile radius, over around 10 games, there were barely any over a 10 tile radius of my capital city, Amsterdam.

Netherlands I don't think starts with a desert bias at all. They have a really confusing bias, sometimes they will start in a coastal region or sometimes they will be far in-land. What is Netherlands true bias set? Marsh seems to lack around for the Netherlands and I don't believe that's actually the true bias start for them...

 

[Tinker]

They have a grassland bias, and grasslands can have marshes. Yeah, it's a bit dumb - no marsh bias exists.

 

[Seabastian Civ]

They also don't have coastal bias and a naval UU.

In a way, you almost always have huge motivation to expand. Unfortunately, their UA doesn't allow fast expansion anymore. Bummer.

 

[Navelgazer]

Anymore? What changed?

 

[adwcta]

The UA never allowed you to expand, it just let you trade happiness for gold more efficiently, especially early game.

Now, with the lump sum DoF requirement, you can't get a lump sum and buy a settler so early anymore. So, you expand slower (like other civs).

Netherlands is balanced for getting an average of 2 workable polders per city average. To achieve this, you'll mostly have to go out and find a good marsh/desert river area. The marsh areas will be unsettled and could be nearby, so you can move in whenever. The floodplains will almost always be not connected to your start, so you'll likely need to use force.

All by design.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Calouste]

They have a grassland bias, and grasslands can have marshes. Yeah, it's a bit dumb - no marsh bias exists.

Grassland bias is very good though. You tend to get a fair amount of Cows and Stone in addition to your luxuries and strategic resources.

Often with the Dutch you can build a nice big capital and start expanding in the Middle Ages because no one else is going to settle near Marsh.

 

[budweiser]

The UA never allowed you to expand, it just let you trade happiness for gold more efficiently, especially early game.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

If I have 1 crab, I have 4 happiness. If I trade my crab for wine, I have 6 happiness, no?

 

[adwcta]

No, you lost 2 happiness and gained 9gpt.

You could have had 8 happiness, but instead, you traded 2 happiness to save 9gpt.

 

[budweiser]

No, you lost 2 happiness and gained 9gpt.

You could have had 8 happiness, but instead, you traded 2 happiness to save 9gpt.

I didnt have 9gpt, all I had was the crab.

 

[Barathor]

I didnt have 9gpt, all I had was the crab.

I believe what he's trying to say is that you could've of just paid for that wine (assuming you have 9 gpt) and had 8 happiness. Hence, trading the crab only, and retaining 2 happiness, is like saving 9 gpt.

 

[joncnunn]

AI won't pay cash gold anymore without DOF so as Dutch I wouldn't sell my last copy of a luxury just for 7 GPT.
But what I would do is watch for an AI that does have a surplus and trade my last copy of a luxury for there's which nets 2 happiness.

 

[adwcta]

So, you're still trading 2 happy for 9gpt saved. Normally, you can get surplus happy for 2.25 gpt, and sell for 1.75gpt. The UA let's you sell happy at 3.5 gpt per happy two times per unique lux your land gives you, at the cost of being forced to keep the last 2 happy.

It is an economic savings bonus, not a happiness bonus. Speaking in terms of gaining happy is highly misleading (and this is partly the game description's fault)

It does not help you acquire any more happy than you were able to before. It saves you gold upon you voluntarily trading away happy.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[direblade99]

So, you're still trading 2 happy for 9gpt saved. Normally, you can get surplus happy for 2.25 gpt, and sell for 1.75gpt. The UA let's you sell happy at 3.5 gpt per happy two times per unique lux your land gives you, at the cost of being forced to keep the last 2 happy.

It is an economic savings bonus, not a happiness bonus. Speaking in terms of gaining happy is highly misleading (and this is partly the game description's fault)

It does not help you acquire any more happy than you were able to before. It saves you gold upon you voluntarily trading away happy.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

But if you wouldn't have payed gold for it anyway you weren't "saving" 9 gpt, you simply were gaining 2 happiness..

 

[joncnunn]

But if you wouldn't have payed gold for it anyway you weren't "saving" 9 gpt, you simply were gaining 2 happiness..

Agreed; I'd never buy AI luxuries; if I want a luxury I trade for it on a 1 : 1 basis.

 

[MadHaxxor]

there bonus is horsehockey online, people dont pay online like the ai does

Moderator Action: This sort of language is inappropriate. Just because a word isn’t caught by the autocensor, doesn’t give you permission to use it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[direblade99]

there bonus is horsehockey online, people dont pay online like the ai does

Lucky that the game's designed for single player then and that the vast majority of players play on single player.

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

Doesn't setting rainfall to wet cause more marsh to appear?

 

[GoStu]

Doesn't setting rainfall to wet cause more marsh to appear?

Correct. Also, more rivers.

If I'm the Netherlands, I generally go storm some desert to get Flood Plains. Marshes are a nice bonus, and Sea Beggars are for murdering abroad. (Those things are SCARY!)

 

[General Tso]

The next version of my mod will have the option of placing marsh land (among other things) around the starting location of any player. I'm hoping to have the next version available in 2 or 3 weeks if anybody is interested.