Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[AshMan105]

kk thank you that is all i wanted to no i have only attackers on the front line at the moment but i am not at war or anything but i am going to start 1 with the romans but i have disbanded my defenders in areas witch would be no threat for any 1 and yes i am in republic that is y i did it just wondering if that was a good idea because that is the first time i have ever done that that all i just for of the idea because i have erd that it is the rite thing to do just wanted to make it certain that it is thankyou.

 

[Quilty]

Thanks for the help, Scratcher and Lord Emsworth!

 

[psweetman1590]

kk thank you that is all i wanted to no i have only attackers on the front line at the moment but i am not at war or anything but i am going to start 1 with the romans but i have disbanded my defenders in areas witch would be no threat for any 1 and yes i am in republic that is y i did it just wondering if that was a good idea because that is the first time i have ever done that that all i just for of the idea because i have erd that it is the rite thing to do just wanted to make it certain that it is thankyou.

Take it easy, man. Breathe! It's important!

 

[Aabraxan]

He's just in a hurry, psweetman. Obviously, there's a war brewing and he wants to get back to it. Perfectly understandable.

 

[Globex]

I like to place my cities in a neat grid but I notice that the people who post in the stories and tales section seem to have a random city placement. Should I keep my current system of city placement and if not, what factors should I use to determine where I build my cities?

 

[vmxa]

Depend on what you are about. IOW if you are playing a low level game like Regent, you can do as you please on placement. As you move up to Emperor or higher, you may want to do something for defense.

If you play variants, such as AW, you will want to place tighter.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

I like to place my cities in a neat grid but I notice that the people who post in the stories and tales section seem to have a random city placement. Should I keep my current system of city placement and if not, what factors should I use to determine where I build my cities?

Place cities according to factors that could benefit a city, such as high-productivity tiles or well-defended tiles, and try to space cities out enough so that you get the most out of the tiles as possible.

 

[gmaharriet]

I like to place my cities in a neat grid but I notice that the people who post in the stories and tales section seem to have a random city placement. Should I keep my current system of city placement and if not, what factors should I use to determine where I build my cities?

It depends on whether you're playing vanilla Civ3/Play the World, or if you're playing Conquests. When Conquests came out they completely changed the way corruption works.

If you have vanilla or PTW, look in the War Academy for an article on RCP (Ring City Placement), which uses rings of cities around the capitol at roughly equal distances. If you have Conquests, it's more important to place your cities on rivers or near lux and resources, and how close together they should be is a topic that recurs here frequently.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Yeah, I own C3C, PTW, and Vanilla, and I have noticed that in Vanilla corruption is different than in C3C, but even so I always try to place cities according to resources and defensible positions.

 

[EMan]

@Globex: Yes, a neat grid of cities is just impractical for optimizing your victory. IMO, I think the more-experienced players will carefully position their cities and being adjacent to fresh water, preferably rivers, is best for producing cities because:

1. You get a commerce bonus for tiles adjacent to rivers.
2. You don't need to build an Aqueduct to take your city over size 6.

Also city-radius cows and wheats are good for creating settler and worker factories. (That's a whole 'nother story.)

As you gain experience and decide what victory condition you are aiming for, including "simple survival" on the higher levels, this will also influence your city placement.

For example, for Domination & Histographic victories where you are aiming for a fast finish & high score, respectively, it's good to space out (but still connected at their borders) your non-core cities (viz. cities with high waste/corruption) so that you can reach the Domination Limit quicker..........or maximize your score in the case of a Histographic Victory.

P.s. There is no sure-fire way to place your cities. It depends a lot on your playing style. For example, I never consider my defensive position when placing cities and don't ever build defensive units unless the AI is banging on my door AND I don't have (time to build) offensive units.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

@Globex: Yes, a neat grid of cities is just impractical for optimizing your victory. IMO, I think the more-experienced players will carefully position their cities and being adjacent to fresh water, preferably rivers, is best for producing cities because:

1. You get a commerce bonus for tiles adjacent to rivers.
2. You don't need to build an Aqueduct to take your city over size 6.

Also city-radius cows and wheats are good for creating settler and worker factories. (That's a whole 'nother story.)

As you gain experience and decide what victory condition you are aiming for, including "simple survival" on the higher levels, this will also influence your city placement.

P.s. There is no sure-fire way to place your cities. It depends a lot on your playing style. For example, I never consider my defensive position when placing cities and don't ever build defensive units unless the AI is banging on my door AND I don't have (time to build) offensive units.

About the fresh water part, that is amazingly useful compared to most people's view of it. Fresh water can be hyper useful when you don't have the time or money to have aqueducts or hospitals, and rivers even more so because the extra gp you make there is hecka useful. Can trade be conducted along rivers?

But yes, city placement is something that can't really be taught, it just comes naturally after you've played the game awhile.

 

[HellboundHeathcliff]

Rivers are not part of the trade network.

 

[NickyH]

There's an article about opening moves and assessment of the terrain around a city, that contains lots of information. It's useful for placement of cities in general, not only the first city. Check it out here: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/cracker/civ3_starts/index.htm

 

[Globex]

In the beginning of the game should I build any city improvements or should I just focus on building workers, military, and settlers? Also, what are the most important techs in the ancient age? Should I go straight for republic to receive the commerce bonus or should I research horseback riding, iron working, and mathematics so I can start building my army to destroy my neighbors?

 

[Padma]

Certain city improvements are useful, such as a Granary for a Settler Factory, or Barracks for military production. But early on, it's most Settlers, Workers, and Military.

And, FWIW, I usually beeline to Republic.

 

[NickyH]

I don't know if I should start a new discussion about this. I'm sure it has been discussed before, but it's hard to find a good thread about it by searching.

I've recently started to pay attention to how many shields are wasted if I build a military unit in a city. If city X produces 18 non-corrupted shields, it will produce 90 shields in five turns. IIRC infantry costs 90 shields, so there will be no waste. City Y produces 14 shields, and will get 84 for a cavalry in 6 turns, so 4 shields are wasted. Thats not bad.

If I switched the build orders for the cities, X would produce a cavalry in five turns, wasting 10 shields for every unit, and Y would produce infantry every 7 turns (7x14=98) wasting 8 shields for every unit. This seems to be a far worse option, since I waste 18 shields instead of 4 producing the two units.

Now my question: Is this kind of waste something that experienced players pay close attention to? There seems to be much to gain by optimizing production in this way. On the other hand, maybe one could exaggerate the importance of this, and end up with a mix of units that is less desirable, only because you don't want to waste any shields?

Does anyone have any useful input on this? Perhaps someone knows of a thread where this has been discussed earlier?

 

[EMan]

If you need certain kinds of units (i.e. Galleys or Workers or Settlers), you build 'em and don't worry about production "overrun".

If you're at a point in the game where you're simply gonna disband the unit in another city and take the "money", then optimize the production.

 

[sercer88]

I usually don't worry about it, especially early and mid-game. But around the IA and later, after production for your cities has become somewhat settled, then I start building things in cities that give me the least waste.

 

[Jazzmail]

Now my question: Is this kind of waste something that experienced players pay close attention to? There seems to be much to gain by optimizing production in this way. On the other hand, maybe one could exaggerate the importance of this, and end up with a mix of units that is less desirable, only because you don't want to waste any shields?

Instead of switching to a different unit when shields would be wasted, switch worked tiles between neighbouring cities to remove excess shields from town A and add shields to town B.
This is better because it lets you build what you want and gives you alot more control.
I do this in the early ancient age for turn advantages. In later ages I gradually stop micromanaging everything.

 

[gmaharriet]

Now my question: Is this kind of waste something that experienced players pay close attention to? There seems to be much to gain by optimizing production in this way. On the other hand, maybe one could exaggerate the importance of this, and end up with a mix of units that is less desirable, only because you don't want to waste any shields?

Does anyone have any useful input on this? Perhaps someone knows of a thread where this has been discussed earlier?

I'm pretty sure it's something the very top level players do. They not only build what fits the number of shields, they also swap shields among cities and plan tile development to optimize builds. [Edit: x-post with Jazzmail]

Try reading almost any Succession Game TDG (Training Day Game) where Bede is the trainer. The topic comes up one or more times during the game, and he often gives the "magic numbers" of shields for various builds. You could start with "Gma02: First Come, First Severed" where I know he brings it up at least twice.

I keep forgetting to write them down and I'm currently going back to old games to find them. I'd love to find them all in one place.