I move my capital 1E to the coast, and usually wait for Egypt to collapse or be taken by Rome/Greece so I can settle Gallabat in the desert tile that's almost entirely encircled by the Nile. Hits the gold, the cotton, the ivory, and two incense if you can pop the culture hard enough which obviously really helps for the 2nd UHV. A coastal capital means you can culture-flip Sana'a too, so you don't need to bother with a Galley to ferry troops over the Red Sea. Then spread South as usual, although I usually go straight to Mombasa.
Optimal City Placement
- Thread starter mykeedee
- Start date
I move my capital 1E to the coast, and usually wait for Egypt to collapse or be taken by Rome/Greece so I can settle Gallabat in the desert tile that's almost entirely encircled by the Nile. Hits the gold, the cotton, the ivory, and two incense if you can pop the culture hard enough which obviously really helps for the 2nd UHV. A coastal capital means you can culture-flip Sana'a too, so you don't need to bother with a Galley to ferry troops over the Red Sea. Then spread South as usual, although I usually go straight to Mombasa.
ETHIOPIA
Even better (though EXTREMELY rare) is founding aksum 1N. You lose the southern cow, but you don't waste the eastern cow's food, you get the gold on the nile and a coastal city. The problem is how often this tile is occupied by egypt.
Gallabat is good, the problem is that it's too cramped and it's way too oftenly targeted by pesky barbs. More often than not gallabat ends up as a fort city with small pop. Mogadishu on horse is a better option for 2nd city, and it keeps trade routes with the far east open even after the arabs spawn. Zanzibar is also a pretty good option later, 3 fresh water lakes with harbor means it will grow well compared to food-poor ethiopia.
HRE
Hamburg as capital is REALLY good, though only doable if no vikings are present in denmark. Freiburg on stone is also excellent to secure a land route to italy and to eventually steal france's iron.
SPAIN
Madrid should be built 1S (where rhye originally placed it). Much better resources and more pressure on the moors. If historicity is not important, you might want to settle santiago as capital, it becomes quite the city if you raze portugal and it's coastal.
INCA
Huamanga on stone is a favorite of mine (only way to get that whale later), though machu pichu on gold is also decent. Arica on stone it's a given.
This is the difference a 600 CE start makes.
Yes, yes I should raze those cities. I hate doing that though.
Attachments
jammerculture
Prince
Meh, too mechanical. No surprises in 600 ad, no unknowns.
Locutus_Morti
Prince
Saskatoon grows faster. Also has access to more forests and a plains hill. It's also much easier to locate, having 4 tiles between it and Denver.
DonQuigleone
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2010
- Messages
- 102
What's the best city placement for Russia?
mykeedee
Warlord
I edited the OP with a few good ones.
DonQuigleone
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2010
- Messages
- 102
Where would each of those be on the map? Also I presume it's best to keep Kiev when it spawns.
blizzrd
Micromanager
I prefer this configuration:
Spoiler :
Note: Moskva only settled right at the end of the game to complete UHV condition for the railroad.
Bair_the_Normal
転輪聖王
Babylon: Khafajah, if you're not going for the UHV, of course.
EDIT:
Phoenicia: Cyprus! How has that not been said.
Korea: Kaesong. 'Nuf said. Much better city.
EDIT:
Phoenicia: Cyprus! How has that not been said.
Korea: Kaesong. 'Nuf said. Much better city.
What do you like about Cyprus exactly, Bair? It only has fish and copper. I always go for Gebal on the hill as Pheonicia, but then I'm not sure bout the Maghreb, since seafood there is so hard to share amongst too many cities. Gadir one to the west is good for Portugal's fish in the BFC and less food competition with Rusadir, but what about the desert area with iron, ivory and crab? If Rusadir is there, that Marrakesh area will not be so good, but founding Iol/Hippo instead will cramp Qart-Hadasht.
Bair_the_Normal
転輪聖王
When the later civs spawn. That's why Cyprus is great. Plus you got the thing about cities have the same effect as tile improvements.
EDIT: Plus, if there's the Great Cothon in Cyprus, it becomes a production behemoth.
EDIT: Plus, if there's the Great Cothon in Cyprus, it becomes a production behemoth.
Hippo8085
Shaken, not stirred
Cyprus: Depends on if you are going for the UHV or not. Going for UHV you finish before later civs, so you need to get at the dye. Hill may or may not be better for it.
Bair_the_Normal
転輪聖王
I never go for the UHV, so none of my suggestions are probably valid for UHV. 
Hippo8085
Shaken, not stirred
Who does anymore? 
From now on when anyone posts cities they say whether for UHV, making your civ as successful as possible, or both.
From now on when anyone posts cities they say whether for UHV, making your civ as successful as possible, or both.
How about Iran? That's a particularly tricky one, especially when the 600 ad start forces you to choke on Isfahan. I always go for Sirajis and Artacoana south of the grassland hills, so it can encompass the gems and cotton and sheep and horses. Some city that starts with a B two tiles east of Babylon is also nice, in the event I feel like deleting Shush with world builder. It'll get the river tiles, the copper and good production overall without choking Sirajis, and it won't flip to the Arabs.
Hamir
Chieftain
Personally for England I prefer Southampton (on the Cow); Newcastle; Inverness; & Dublin (by river).
Southampton allows better access to the Atlantic, and you can reach the crab off the SW.
Though obviously less historically accurate.
Southampton allows better access to the Atlantic, and you can reach the crab off the SW.
Though obviously less historically accurate.
