Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Silv Something]

Rather outdated article: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/reference/acronyms.php

One that isn't on there:
WHEOOHRN = We have enough on our hands right now

That means a civ is preparing for war. You can tell they are going into WHEOOHRN by going to the trade screen and when you hover over "Will declare war on civ x" It will be red and say WHEOOHRN.

Also:
WFYABTA = We fear you are becoming too advanced

Means a civ won't trade techs (techs = technologies) with you because you have too many techs yourself!

 

[ori]

re tag list - I assume you mean bbcode: look here.

 

[classebruun]

Hello,

you've probably heard this question 34789 times before, and its almost certainly in the wrong place. but please answer nicely or point me in the right direction. : ) been looking around but cant find precis what im looking for. also watched a few walktroughs and lets play by themeinteam but they often asume u have full control of the following questions.

Ive played a few games on monarch and had almost only wins. But i dont really give much thought in were i settle my cities, i dont actually know what makes a good city. i just try to grab as many resorces as possible.

sometimes i get absolutly thrilled about my new overpowerd-kick-as-superman city only to through 200 turns se that it produces absolutly No Nothing of worth.

1. any ground rules or things to look for that makes a good city?
2. if i specialize a city what do it need for basics ? (like 2 farms 1 hill or something else?)
3. what indicators and statistics should i look at to actually know that it makes a difference? when people are angry i just smak a temple or theatre or something with a happy face, dont actually feel that i have 100% control of what im doing.

 

[Silu]

1. any ground rules or things to look for that makes a good city?

Food, food and food. Far overcomes any other property. Food meaning surplus food, the sum of a city's food tiles in excess of 2 per tile. The more this is, the better the city is.

2. if i specialize a city what do it need for basics ? (like 2 farms 1 hill or something else?)

+2 to +6 of surplus food (see above), depending on how crappy the spot is and how hasty you are to or .

3. what indicators and statistics should i look at to actually know that it makes a difference? when people are angry i just smak a temple or theatre or something with a happy face, dont actually feel that i have 100% control of what im doing.

The happy cap (and slightly to a lesser extent, the health cap) is something you should always be mindful of. You should always (rule of thumb, anyhow) be striving to grow cities to their happy caps, and be on lookout for a source of happiness if the city is about to grow over the cap. This and the avoiding of working unimproved tiles are the 2 main ways to get good cities by default. The F1 view is a fast way to check how close the cities are to their caps, or simply mousing over the cities if you have a new BUG/BUFFY mod.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

1. any ground rules or things to look for that makes a good city?

Food for growth, tile working. Then whatever the city is specialized for (GP city or draft city needs more farm terrain, production city needs hills, commerce city needs grasslands or plains with enough food). This is a personal choice, but I like having a hill or two at least in each city for some production for infra, etc.

2. if i specialize a city what do it need for basics ? (like 2 farms 1 hill or something else?)

Depends on the city.

3. what indicators and statistics should i look at to actually know that it makes a difference? when people are angry i just smak a temple or theatre or something with a happy face, dont actually feel that i have 100% control of what im doing.

I do not understand the first question. For the second, there are many ways to happiness.

WFYABTA = We fear you are becoming too advanced

Means a civ won't trade techs (techs = technologies) with you because you have too many techs yourself!

I thought that was for trading too many techs, not the techs you have at the moment.

 

[classebruun]

Thanks for the replies, know a little bit what to look for.

Earlier ive been satisfied when ive hade at least 2 farms or a food resource throughout the game. Sometimes ive had citys with 6-7 hills and almost no food resources.

1. Just to make sure, a city with very much food doesent share to citys with less food? and there is no building or tech that makes this possible?

2. Okey, bad formulated by me, I dont understand borderpops works, thought it had to do with population growth, the orange bar. but when i watched lets play on youtube it seemed like he had another indicator that lets him know he is near a border pop.

3. is it good to (when you have the time) build everything possible in a city? thats what i do at the time, like building cultural buildings in the back of my empire when its a production city. if not, what should i do in thoose citys instead?

ill have a good look at that specialization link u gave me! good stuff.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

No, you can't share tile outputs with other cities. Border pops are done through culture. Generally, it's better to build wealth if there's nothing else good to build.

 

[classebruun]

Here's an example of what i mean, i went in to the world builder and put lions on were i normally would settle four cities. ( the left lion i would place 2 steps to the left to get the cow and the gold aswell, missclick) and dont mind the lion in the upper left corner, he is not a city, he is just chilli'n

1. Which of theese cities would be good to what?

2. Where would be better to place 4 cities?

3. Is there any resources that are easy to fall in love with but isnt that usefull?

4. does a city have full cap when its working as many tiles as it possible can? and is it very bad to have 2 cities to cloose to each other? and what is the minium distant of tiles that should be between them?

and to se i i got silu right, i should always want the city to have 2 food on each tile in avarege for it to be stagnant? (2 food per worked tile?)


also, theres a horse resource 2 tiles to the left of the lion in the bottom (didnt show when i closed world builder.)

 

[jUmpSt0p]

what's up with the resource bonuses during trading? or, perhaps in general?

for example, the description for Copper says it provides +1
and the description for Banana says it provides +1

yet, I never notice any change in or in any of my cities once I acquire these resources...

of course, I am not talking about the production of the actual Tile, nor am I speaking of or bonuses. I am talking about how it says (when you mouse over these resources, whether in the trade screen or city screen or elsewhere) either +1 or +1 along with the other bonuses.

yet, I never seem to see these effects.. so what is going on here?

 

[Roland Johansen]

what's up with the resource bonuses during trading? or, perhaps in general?

for example, the description for Copper says it provides +1
and the description for Banana says it provides +1

yet, I never notice any change in or in any of my cities once I acquire these resources...

of course, I am not talking about the production of the actual Tile, nor am I speaking of or bonuses. I am talking about how it says (when you mouse over these resources, whether in the trade screen or city screen or elsewhere) either +1 or +1 along with the other bonuses.

yet, I never seem to see these effects.. so what is going on here?

It's a confusing maybe even incorrect interface feature. The +1 or +1 shouldn't be shown in the city view as it doesn't apply to the trade resource. It only applies to the raw output of the tile on which such a resource is located.

Somehow the designers forgot to restrict this popup information to the tile on which the resource is located and the popup information is incorrectly also applied to the city view.

 

[Silu]

You're not talking about the production of the actual tile, but the game is. "Copper (+1 )" means that the Copper resource gives a +1 bonus on the tile it is on, regardless of whether it's improved or not. You don't get this when trading (obviously, since you don't get the TILE), but it's still displayed which is somewhat confusing.

 

[henrebotha]

Here's an example of what i mean, i went in to the world builder and put lions on were i normally would settle four cities. ( the left lion i would place 2 steps to the left to get the cow and the gold aswell, missclick) and dont mind the lion in the upper left corner, he is not a city, he is just chilli'n

1. Which of theese cities would be good to what?

2. Where would be better to place 4 cities?

3. Is there any resources that are easy to fall in love with but isnt that usefull?

4. does a city have full cap when its working as many tiles as it possible can? and is it very bad to have 2 cities to cloose to each other? and what is the minium distant of tiles that should be between them?

and to se i i got silu right, i should always want the city to have 2 food on each tile in avarege for it to be stagnant? (2 food per worked tile?)


also, theres a horse resource 2 tiles to the left of the lion in the bottom (didnt show when i closed world builder.)

Just to answer some small questions: a city can work at most 20 tiles plus the city tile itself. However, it is very possible to grow a city beyond pop 20 while keeping it happy and healthy. When this happens, the citizens who don't get to work tiles can simply be made specialists.

It's fine to put cities close together. I personally tend to place my cities far enough from one another that they get close to 20 tiles each, but that's simply a question of preference. If you want to settle all your cities within 3 tiles of one another, that's up to you, and if the land is good for it, you'll do well. So just keep in mind that cities can't both work a tile simultaneously, so you'll have to decide which city gets which tile.

 

[jUmpSt0p]

thanks RJ and Silu.

seems obvious now.. of course, I've been playing a while and just discounted it as "something like that", since it didn't seem to be having an effect.

still, it's nice to know for certain.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Here's an example of what i mean, i went in to the world builder and put lions on were i normally would settle four cities. ( the left lion i would place 2 steps to the left to get the cow and the gold aswell, missclick) and dont mind the lion in the upper left corner, he is not a city, he is just chilli'n

The left city should be 2-3 tiles further left from where you've marked it for the optimal location grabbing the Gold and Cows, as you mentioned. This would be a good research city, especially once you've researched Calendar.

The top city is a bad placement - you should always avoid placing cities on flood plains, because you lose the extra food bonus as soon as you settle. You should either place a city 1 tile right of this (for the extra hammer from the plains hill), or 1 tile left of this (to acquire all the flood plains to the south). This could be a good hybrid city, with plenty of flood plains cottages possible, and several hills for hammers. Alternatively you could split this spot into two cities, with one 2 tiles left of where you've marked, and the other 1-3 tiles to the right of where you've marked.

The right city is a very bad placement, because there are no good food resources here (unless some are hidden in the fog), so you would be unable to work the Gold and grow easily. I would relocate this city either 3 tiles left (to grab 2 flood plains + Banana) or 3 tiles left and 1 tile up (to grab 3 flood plains). Gold is such a good resource that it's critical to found cities with enough food to be able to work it. This city would be a decent research city, although you may still need to farm a few tiles to enable it to grow fast enough.

I cannot see enough of the tiles around the bottom city to determine whether it is a good spot or not. As for cities further right, you'd have to explore the fog before making decisions there.

3. Is there any resources that are easy to fall in love with but isnt that usefull?

All resources are useful, but some are less useful than others, especially early on. For instance, Calendar resources are all but useless until you actually research Calendar, so early cities founded next to lots of these will be very weak for many turns.

and is it very bad to have 2 cities to cloose to each other? and what is the minium distant of tiles that should be between them?

You are limited by the game mechanics to 3 tiles between cities. Aside from this, it depends on the circumstances as to whether or not it's good to have 2 cities close to each other. Generally, if there a lot of good early-game resources concentrated in one area, it's fine to have two cities nearby sharing the tiles for optimal research/production. If there are few resources around, it's often better to try to avoid overlap (or have minimal overlap) so that each city gets as many decent tiles as possible. But it really depends.

and to se i i got silu right, i should always want the city to have 2 food on each tile in avarege for it to be stagnant? (2 food per worked tile?)

Sort of... although you shouldn't be looking so much at average food, but accounting for initial food surplus as well. For example, a city with 2 irrigated Corn is far better than a city with 5 Sugar resources for a large portion of the game. The 5 Sugar city only edges out slightly in the endgame when both cities are working all tiles available to them. But for most of the early-mid game, having a large food surplus by working only a few (1-3) tiles is very important. It makes Slavery more powerful for one thing, and also allows you to build Workers/Settlers faster, not to mention being able to work mines at a good food surplus earlier.

 

[s.bernbaum]

I've always assumed that when a building gives health or happiness benefits when you have certain resources (for example 1+ health with corn,wheat,fish) that you get a total of 1+ if you have one or more of the resources. However, I recently read an article in the War Academy that seemed to indicate that you get 1+ for each resource. Which is correct?

 

[Lord Parkin]

I've always assumed that when a building gives health or happiness benefits when you have certain resources (for example 1+ health with corn,wheat,fish) that you get a total of 1+ if you have one or more of the resources. However, I recently read an article in the War Academy that seemed to indicate that you get 1+ for each resource. Which is correct?

In this situation, you only get the benefit of each resource once, no matter how many sources you have. Perhaps you might be confusing this effect with Corporations, which do give different benefits depending on the number of sources of the same resource you have.

 

[henrebotha]

I've always assumed that when a building gives health or happiness benefits when you have certain resources (for example 1+ health with corn,wheat,fish) that you get a total of 1+ if you have one or more of the resources. However, I recently read an article in the War Academy that seemed to indicate that you get 1+ for each resource. Which is correct?

Lord Parkin is correct, but I suspect you might have meant different. For instance, a Granary offers +1 health if you have wheat, corn, or rice (I think?). In this case, you'll get +1 for wheat AND corn AND rice, but you'll only get +1 for each even if you have 5 wheat and 3 corn and 7 rice.

 

[beest]

Quick question about defensive pacts. In my last game I made a deal for a defensive pact and as soon as I pressed enter to continue to the next turn, I was attacked by someone else. I was expecting to be lucky and have a war ally, instead the deal got immediately canceled. Very weird. So what's up here? Should the deal be active for more than one turn?

 

[Sisiutil]

Quick question about defensive pacts. In my last game I made a deal for a defensive pact and as soon as I pressed enter to continue to the next turn, I was attacked by someone else. I was expecting to be lucky and have a war ally, instead the deal got immediately canceled. Very weird. So what's up here? Should the deal be active for more than one turn?

A defensive pact is immediately cancelled as soon as either member declares war or as soon as war is declared upon one of them. If you check the diplomacy advisor, you should see that your former DP partner is at war with whoever declared war on you, and a statement to that effect should also be in the event log.

 

[Yxklyx]

Quick question about defensive pacts. In my last game I made a deal for a defensive pact and as soon as I pressed enter to continue to the next turn, I was attacked by someone else. I was expecting to be lucky and have a war ally, instead the deal got immediately canceled. Very weird. So what's up here? Should the deal be active for more than one turn?

Well, the defensive pact is always cancelled when you are attacked - however, the other civ should have declared war on your attacker (because of the defensive pact).