Russia's tundra bias

[mnf]

When you tend to start worse than the city states:

Spoiler :

Is Russia's tundra bias being over-emphasized? I did several Russia starts in the past few days (play for about 100-150 turns on standard speed) and more often than not, Russia will start with mostly tundra in the capital and rarely any food resource. In the example above, I could have moved to the coast, but then my capital would be sitting at 2 + 2 (Granary) + 4 (Improvements) = 8 housing plus the housing from districts, all the way until I get Neighborhoods.

Or I could have ventured off to the south and found the Natural Wonder, but that was pure luck. Without the natural wonder, I would have had to move at least 6 turns before I can find the next river, and I'd be right smack up against Scythia.

But that's besides the point.

Is Russia's tundra bias over-exaggerated? I know it's best to let Russia start near tundra, but with tundra effectively being garbage tiles until modern era (Conservation), should the bias be adjusted to contain no more than half tundra tiles within 3 tiles of the starting position?

What am I missing about these Russia tundra starts?

 

[Promethian]

I agree the bias seems to place you a bit too far into the tundra. The bias should place the starting point as on a non-tundra tile but near the tundra "border" as it were.

 

[Jabulani]

You have to move your settler to place it in a better place, you will lose 3-4 turns but the benefits will be huge later on.

 

[Nefelia]

In the few games I've played as Russia, I've usually started at the edge of the tundra. There were some exceptions, where I started too deeply into the tundra, or the game in which I had to move four tiles down to find tundra.

The start bias could probably use a bit of fine tuning. But damn, you got a bad roll. ^^

 

[Frank327]

When you see ice but no food resource, it's time to move the settler. But this start was difficult to salvage. There's a bigger variety in start location quality in Civ 6 than earlier civs. I've seen some horrible starts.

Generally as Russia if you start on the edge of tundra with at least one wheat or rice resource nearby, you can make it work. Especially once you get the triangle farms going.

 

[mnf]

Generally as Russia if you start on the edge of tundra with at least one wheat or rice resource nearby, you can make it work. Especially once you get the triangle farms going.

I was under the impression that tundra can't be farmed no matter what. Tundra hills are salvageable with mines, but tundra plains will stay 1f1p1f until the modern era (Conservation) when you can plant forests. The only use for them before that time would be for districts, but that completely defeats the purpose of adding to its yield, doesn't it? It seems like there's no reason for Russia to start even on the edge of tundra, because tundra tiles are still not comparable to regular tiles for Russia.

I can understand things like wanting Japan, England, and Norway to start on the coast, or Kongo to start near lots of rain forests, they're all beneficial as starting locations; but tundra doesn't actually benefit Russia, does it? You can make it useful in the late game, but not "powerful". By modern era, those faith and production feels minimal. If your city had lots of that tundra, it would have been a cripple for most of the game; if your city had only a few of those tundra tiles, the few points of production and faith won't matter either. And in the early game it just gimps your cities.

 

[Mustakrakish]

It is a known fact that St. Petersburg and Moscow are in tundra... Not.

 

[Frank327]

I was under the impression that tundra can't be farmed no matter what. Tundra hills are salvageable with mines, but tundra plains will stay 1f1p1f until the modern era (Conservation) when you can plant forests. The only use for them before that time would be for districts, but that completely defeats the purpose of adding to its yield, doesn't it? It seems like there's no reason for Russia to start even on the edge of tundra, because tundra tiles are still not comparable to regular tiles for Russia.

That's why I said starting on the edge of tundra. Which means at least 1/3rd of your tiles should be plains/grass. A pure tundra city won't work. Then you can drop a lavra in the middle of the tundra (with dance of the aurora) and drop farms in the south.

Actually you can even get some pure tundra cities to work if you get the "feed the world" belief which should be possible as Russia.

 

[Victoria]

Trying to find realism to the detriment of a Civ is not clever unless you appreciate that because Russia have a lot of tundra they can utilize it better.

I also wonder about England's start Bias. Often it starts near a coast but not always.

I suspect we are all missing that restart button, its not like we have to use it but when you are investing many hours of time you do not always want a loosing battle like Russia often seems to get. (last game they were spawned on a tundra island by themselves)

 

[rpgalon]

Starting bias is like another mechanic of the Civ, you gotta take the good with the bad, like Kongo not being able to found a religion.

If Russia had a good bias it would probably be another powerhouse like Germany, Scythia and Sumeria (that I think need some tuning down) and that is even with the bad leader UA, imagine if they add another leader for Russia?

Currently Russia is in the best spot you could ask, it is amazing, but not broken enough to be baned from MP and nerfed in the future.

 

[Ryika]

What's wrong with that start? There's a juicy city already pre-built for you in the east, and another target for a later campaign ready in the south.
But true, for people who want to have a good shot at getting a big capital Russia is probably not the best Civ.

On lower difficulties you'd also have 3 guaranteed cities with 7-faith Lavras.

 

[Nefelia]

I was under the impression that tundra can't be farmed no matter what. Tundra hills are salvageable with mines, but tundra plains will stay 1f1p1f until the modern era (Conservation) when you can plant forests. The only use for them before that time would be for districts, but that completely defeats the purpose of adding to its yield, doesn't it? It seems like there's no reason for Russia to start even on the edge of tundra, because tundra tiles are still not comparable to regular tiles for Russia.

I can understand things like wanting Japan, England, and Norway to start on the coast, or Kongo to start near lots of rain forests, they're all beneficial as starting locations; but tundra doesn't actually benefit Russia, does it? You can make it useful in the late game, but not "powerful". By modern era, those faith and production feels minimal. If your city had lots of that tundra, it would have been a cripple for most of the game; if your city had only a few of those tundra tiles, the few points of production and faith won't matter either. And in the early game it just gimps your cities.

You might be interested in the Tundra Farms mod then: http://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/tundra-farms.603531/

I don't particularly mind the half-tundra starts. Tundra tiles with forests and hills are fairly strong. If you can get a few wheat or rice, you can focus your first builder on farming those and relying on your tundra/hill/forest tiles for 3 cogs each.

 

[Jarms48]

I think in that case I would have either moved one tile south from that river and built an aqueduct up. Bit the bullet and move to the nearby coast. Or lastly, settled there, built a builder, researched mining, and chopped a forest to rush a settler.

Haven't seen a start that bad as Russia before.

 

[GT_OKEZ]

I'd love that start as Russia. Super strong Lavras with Dance of the Aurora. Pick 'feed the world' as a religious belief if you're really having food problems since you should have a Lavra in every Russian city.

 

[Kwami]

Just to clarify, the start bias is "tundra". Not "lots of tundra" or "edge of tundra" or anything like that. Just "tundra". As far as I know, it's treated like any other start bias.

 

[MadDjinn]

That starts seems like camp food pantheon and feed the world will make things alright.

 

[Francis Xavier]

Well, it did say "Embrace the Chill Winds." You -were- warned.

 

[Raider]

This start bias is what happens when people who don't know Geography make decisions about game design. Write this off as another casualty of the US educational system.

 

[Francis Xavier]

Well, St. Petersburg does average ~118 snow days a year and historically, the port was famously frozen over most of the year (famous as it was only one of a few available ports in Russia), but it still has more mild weather than Moscow. I would say it's more the limits of the game having a tundra tile and then ice-cap snow, where ideally it'd be something in between plains and tundra tiles. Which actually, to make things more dynamic it'd be very interesting if they actually incorporated seasonal weather into the game one turn of each season affecting tile production would be fascinating.

 

[mnf]

Hmmm. Thanks for all the suggestions. I'll definitely try out a few games with Dance of the Aurora and then Feed the World when food is scarce. I guess I'm still in the Civ V mentality where we're basically supposed to settle in the first two turns. Let me try and get accustomed to the idea that Russia may play just that bit more differently to the rest of the civilizations right from the start. (*Shock* civs play differently...it's actually the point of having civs isn't it...stupid me, haha.) I feel like I was behaving like a spoilt child making a scene just because things didn't go my way.

Thanks all!

----

EDIT: Okay I wasn't expecting this!

Spoiler :

No I wasn't expecting this...haha. Does the Civ 6 game engine read CivFanatics and then decided to troll me or something?

 

[esoba]

That is simply awesome.