Returning player needs advice

[That Retro Guy]

Since I (like almost everybody else) am stuck at home for the time being, I figured that this would be a good time to start a new game. I'm playing as the Persians with 4 random AIs out there lurking in the darkness on a Standard size map. I'm on Regent level. I've checked the 4000BC save with the Hall of Fame and it passed.

I've been trying to figure out how to post an image here for about 30 minutes with no luck, so I'll describe my situation.

My Settler is standing on a Grassland that has a Wheat on it. Of course, I could just settle and get on with it, but if I move the Settler 1 sq SE, it might be a coastline. If I move the Settler 1 sq S then there will also be a Sugar in the initial City Radius.

If I figure out to post pics, I'll post a pic. Until then, which is the smartest move:

1. Move 1 sq SE for the possible coastline
2. Move 1 sq S for the additional Food Bonus
3. Settle where he stands now

Any and all help is greatly appreciated.

 

[jarred!]

There's a button to upload a file next to the Post Reply button. Upload your png or jpeg there.

Settling in place, on the wheat, would be a weak move. You'd lose loads of potential food over the course of the game. Also having coastal tiles in your bfc but having your city not on the coast, thus unable to build a harbor, will slow early exploration (via curraghs) and lose potential food. The move to the probable coast seems best. If it turns out to be freshwater, even better. Another option would be to move farther from the coast, allowing for a second town to be placed on that coast and giving you more land tiles and higher production in your capital.

 

[tjs282]

I agree with @jarred! Definitely don't choose Door No. 3, and Settle in place! And @jarred! is also right that it's almost always better to have a town directly on a coast, or at least 2 tiles away from it: i.e. you should move the Settler either directly towards the suspected coastline, or as directly away from it as possible.

If you accept that, you're already committed to moving your Settler at least 1 tile, the only question is, which way?

I always prefer to have my capital on freshwater, if possible (no Aqueduct needed, allows irrigation). So assuming I'm not Expansionist, if I'm committed to moving my Settler, and/or I suspect (/hope!) that there's water nearby, and/or especially if I have a Hill/Mountain adjacent to my start that will give me a wider view, I'll often use my Worker as a scout on that first turn, then move my Settler accordingly.

Spoiler Moving the Settler... :

If my scouting Worker spots a river (where the food-bonus can still be captured), the decision's easy: that's where my Settler's going, no question, even if it takes several turns to get there! If I spot coast, right-clicking on that tile and then clicking Terrain tells me whether it's freshwater (gives 2 food) or saltwater (only 1 food). If it's freshwater, that's almost as good as a river. But if it turns out to be saltwater, then unless my Civ is Seafaring, it's probably not my first choice for my capital, since I then may not be able to make a full first-ring. Although I'll probably want a town there later, I'll move my Settler inland instead.

Your Worker is currently on the Wheat, which is likely (one of) your future capital's strongest tile(s), so you'd lose 2 Worker-turns moving it off (to scout) and then back (to improve it); but since your Settler is already committed to moving anyway, this loss of Worker-turns may be a worthwhile sacrifice.

If moving 1SE puts you on the coast, then presumably 1S would still leave you close to, but not on the coast(?), which doesn't seem like much of an advantage. Although a site with 2 adjacent food-bonuses is tempting, it should not be distracting. After all, you'll only be able to work both of those tiles after your capital has grown to Pop2 (in 7T if you work the Wheat, or 10T if you work the Sugar).

Sugar only gives +1 FPT, so while it's helpful on Plains, it will be despot-penalised away on Grass, until you irrigate it (or switch govs). So I would happily sacrifice immediate adjacency to the Sugar, in favour of adjacency to the Wheat, to give me more options: if you can still found your capital such that you'll get the Sugar into the BFC after the first border-expansion (10T after founding), then you don't need to ignore the possibility of moving 1SW, or even 1W, just for the sake of getting both food-bonuses right next to the capital right from the start.

 

[Puppeteer]

Agree with tjs282. Wheat and cows are too valuable early-game to settle on top of. Use the worker to scout (1 move). It may find another bonus that will influence your decision. If there's a hill or mountain directly adjacent, that would give the worker a good view of the area. Otherwise I'd probably move to expose the coast and see if it's fresh or...

Actually maybe not. Fresh or salt water might be worth settling on if there are no rivers around. Salt water gives you sea access from the capitol while fresh water lets you grow past size 6 early in the game. So with that in mind I might move the worker a different direction to see if there's a river or other bonuses worth moving towards, else move the settler to the coastline.

Using that one move (or even a scout's 2 moves) is a bit of a min-max art and actually worth a lot of consideration. I mean for which direction to make that 1 step. (Unless you're the type that doesn't mind reloading, but I've never been a reloader.)

Also note that delaying the settler even one turn makes the AIs view you as (relatively) weaker for a long time, but that shouldn't be a factor on regent difficulty, and with wheat or cow especially it's absolutely worth it to move off that food bonus before settling.

 

[That Retro Guy]

Let's try to get this pic posted . . .

Hey, it worked! As you can see, there are several tiles with rivers, and the Sugar is sitting on a hill. To the NW, you see Tundra. I'm near the top of the map. Now that I think about it, since I'm near the top of the map, the Tundra is to the NE as well.

Also having coastal tiles in your bfc

Umm . . . bfc?

The reason that I couldn't post a pic last night was that I was trying to post the savegame file, and I couldn't figure out why the pic wasn't showing . . . I can be such an idiot sometime.

Now that you see the pic, is the advice still the same or has it changed?

 

[Spoonwood]

Move SE so that your capital will have fewer tundra squares, while still grabbing the wheat for it. When you settle your next cities, send your settlers south. That way you'll end up grabbing the most useful territory south instead of the less useful tundra area.

My conjecture is that water you see there is a lake, not a coastline.

 

[jarred!]

I second what @Spoonwood said. Move away from the tundra and then send settlers to the south before claiming any tundra spots to the north. The north will be uncontested since no one will have spawned above you. I also think that's a small lake, maybe only 1 tile in size.

BFC= big fat cross. It's the name used for the 20 tiles around a city that citizens can work after a cultural expansion.

 

[That Retro Guy]

BFC= big fat cross.

Gotcha! I saw bfc and thought of DOOM's ultimate weapon, the big flippin' gun. I know the f doesn't stand for flippin' but I won't swear on these forums.

I moved the Worker SE to see if indeed it is a coastline. Look at what it is.

Right-clicking on the lake says that it is a Coast. Huh?!!

 

[Puppeteer]

SE? My first thought was S. I generally hate settling on bonus grassland, and S is on a river. Also, sugar on a hill is yet another 2f, 1s tile that can be improved to 2/2 in despotism, albeit more slowly than a BG. And 2/3 once out of despotism.

In fact, I would have made the move without moving the worker as I had enough info that the 5 hills 2-tiles away revealed.

Also, there are three types of water tiles: coast, sea, and ocean. Fresh water is bodies of water that are all "coast".

Edit: I'm really curious to know why SE seems like a popular or at least informed option. I'm missing something here.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

Edit: I'm really curious to know why SE seems like a popular or at least informed option. I'm missing something here.

Agreed. I was thinking southwest, since this sets up for future settlers to exploit the sugar and the fresh water, while still leaving plenty of room on that river.

 

[jarred!]

Right-clicking on the lake says that it is a Coast. Huh?!!

Water tiles adjacent to land are called coast and are light blue; if there's no sea tile in the body of water, just coasts, the tiles give 2 food without a harbor (actually you can't even build a harbor or boats on them) and they allow irrigation on adjacent tiles and growth past size 6 just like rivers.

Edit: I'm really curious to know why SE seems like a popular or at least informed option. I'm missing something here.

It's 3 turn growth in a despotism either way and you have a 6 turn combo factory without that second bg.

 

[justanick]

I moved the Worker SE to see if indeed it is a coastline.

I would have not moved the worker and had it irrigate the wheat instead. Food is of essense.

The settler should settle south of the wheat.

 

[tjs282]

Fresh water is bodies of water that are all "coast".

No, freshwater is bodies of water that are less than 21(?) tiles in size.

That means that any lake that's 3-4 tiles wide at one point, may also include 'Sea' tiles. If anyone fancies trawling back through the 'Interesting screenshots' thread, someone once posted a pic of a lonely lakebound Whale.

 

[jarred!]

That seems correct, @tjs282. I just checked using the editor. 21 tiles with all coast is 1 food but a 20 tile lake with ocean still has coast with 2 food.

 

[That Retro Guy]

I would have not moved the worker and had it irrigate the wheat instead. Food is of essense.

The settler should settle south of the wheat.

Yeah, I know that now. You all tell me that under no circumstances should I settle on the Wheat so you would think that I would take the hint and leave the Worker where he is and move the Settler instead but no, I screwed up. So I will move the Worker back to the Wheat for Irrigation and Roads, and have the Settler build the city 1 sq S of the Wheat. Hopefully, it shouldn't set me too far back.

What I really to do is to start listening to your advice.

 

[Puppeteer]

You all tell me that under no circumstances should I settle on the Wheat so you would think that I would take the hint and leave the Worker where he is and move the Settler instead but no, I screwed up.

You didn't necessarily screw up. Before we saw the opening screenshot it made sense to move the worker to scout, but after seeing the screenshot you have 5 (!) hills 2 tiles away which gives a LOT more visibility than I imagined. It's not just the 5 hills being shown, but up to a dozen other tiles' edges peeking through enough to help inform a decision. And knowing the whole picture I probably would have left the worker in place, but I think everyone advised moving the worker before seeing the screenshot.

 

[That Retro Guy]

I've got everything organized now (I hope).

I've got Science going for the Republic Slingshot as always. The strange thing is that the city has the citizen working the Hill with Sugar instead of the Grassland with Wheat. I guess it's because the Hill generates a Shield and the Grassland doesn't.

 

[vmxa]

You can change the gov to prefer production or growth iirc. I forget what the default setting uses.

 

[CKS]

And regardless of what the city picks, you should make your own choices for where the citizens work. The computer isn't really very good at the game.

 

[That Retro Guy]

When the pop is working the Wheat: 1 Shield, 3 Food, Growth in 6, Warrior complete in 6.

When the pop is working the Sugar: 2 Shields, 2 Food, Growth in 8, Warrior complete in 3.

I think that I'll let the pop work the Sugar until the Warrior is complete in 3 so he can start scouting for a new city site.