Settler First Build

[Urederra]

No doubt an early farmed resource is a worthy tactic, but there are many start scenarios in which food resources are not within the initial city site cross,and there are many starts in which a worker would not have suffiecent jobs to do to warrant their immediate construction (i.e.pursuit of religious path)

Usually I go for a worker first which, in default conditions (normal speed), takes 15 tunrs, instead of a settler which takes 25, not 14, unless I am at the coast with a good resource and knowing how to fish it, then I go for a boat. (If you settle in a plains/hills tile. the worker only cost 12 and the settler 20, IIRC)

I have tried the settler first strategy, but I quit playing after I pop it out. The reason is that I had to build a worker afterwards with low production tiles fiveteen turns away. My impression is that it is better to build a worker while researching on mine/bronze working. If you have mining, you finish the worker just in time to use it to chop forests, and thus, the settler only costs you about 15-18 turns instead of 25. If you don't have mine, you'll finish the worker before researching bronze working, but if you lack mining, you usually have farming or the wheel, and if you don't, you can also work a hill while waiting to finish researching BW. A mine also gives you four production for your settler (2 hammers + 2 breads, 3 hammers + 1 bread or 4 hammers, depending on the hill)

If you want one of the three early religions the settler first strategy can be interesting, I haven't tried that route seriously.


BTW, What happened with the ol' good DrKodos avatar?

 

[drkodos]

Usually I go for a worker first which, in default conditions (normal speed), takes 15 tunrs, instead of a settler which takes 25, not 14, unless I am at the coast with a good resource and knowing how to fish it, then I go for a boat. (If you settle in a plains/hills tile. the worker only cost 12 and the settler 20, IIRC)

Yeah, the 14 is a typo that I have not yet edited, but was based on quick speed settings. Laziness, I surmise.

BTW, What happened with the ol' good DrKodos avatar?

He's on vacation and his contract is up for renewal, so we'll see.

 

[Nay]

Settler 1st has another point to it:

2nd City can start pumping out Wonders, while Capital (which usually is built towards groth) slaves/chops more workers (or vice versa).

Single city is either wodners or workers, respectively workers delaying the wonder.

And nothing beats a 2500 B.C. Great Wall.

 

[Perugia]

Because of Palace culture, the capital soon expands its borders to grab territory. However, with most leaders the second city has no culture until you are able to build something cultural such as an obelisk or library.

Therefore if you are persuing religions as advocated by the OP and can time it to found the second city just before founding the first religion then it will become a holy city and will get +5 culture per turn so expanding borders in a few turns and grabing more land/resources quickly.

If you found multiple religions the land grab does even better if you settle one city per religion and remain in No State Religion so each holy city gets +5 culture per turn.

 

[cabert]

Because of Palace culture, the capital soon expands its borders to grab territory. However, with most leaders the second city has no culture until you are able to build something cultural such as an obelisk or library.

Therefore if you are persuing religions as advocated by the OP and can time it to found the second city just before founding the first religion then it will become a holy city and will get +5 culture per turn so expanding borders in a few turns and grabing more land/resources quickly.

If you found multiple religions the land grab does even better if you settle one city per religion and remain in No State Religion so each holy city gets +5 culture per turn.

it certainly depends on speed, tiles worked...
But IMHO, if you need more than 12 turns to found an early religion, well, you just don't found it
One path where this could work :
polytheism, masonry, monotheism.
For this you need to start with India (mining and mysticism!)
This way, city n°2 can benefit from judaism and capital maybe from hinduism.
You can immediately try to work on great wall in the capital (and thus growing) while city n°2 gives you a warrior to explore, a worker to work (a quarry for instance, or a mine).

Big drawback : you will start to lose money soon.
Big advantage : a city fogbusts better than a few warriors. You can even give yourself a (weak) advnatage by settling next to a pike. With the pike in your cultural boundary, you can see really far.

I'm really fond of early exploration. Thus building cities later, but with a really good knowledge of the map.
For this you need to build a warrior (or scout) first.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

What about an imperialistic leader with a high hammer start? Eg plains hill plus a plains forest? You could build a settler before a worker could be built. No reason you couldn't claim three or four cities this way. I don't think I'd try it with a non imperialistic leader, and not unless the city sites you could take were pretty good.

If nothing else it would be a good variation from always building worker first. I'd like to see whether Imperialist could be made to shine with an early settler rush to capture 3-4 good sites. Then once you have slavery and a few workers built you could whip/chop an army really fast. Sounds like the game plan for Ghengis Khan.

 

[Charles 22]

So you don't build a worker until after you have pottery? What about timing it to be build the turn you get pottery? Doesn't that seem more economical?

What I often do is have a building in the queue and then once I hit size 2 or have my borders expand and gain a better food source, then I switch to worker or settler. Doesn't that expediate the settler or worker production?

You're correct, that's exactly what I do, as I switch to a worker once I start on pottery. If I get a really fortuituos start where hanging 3-5 turns more before I build the worker, will result in the barracks being built I will hold back the worker a tad, but otherwise not. Usually I have a cushion anyway, as strictly building the worker at the time of starting pottery also gives worker 2-4 turns on doing nothing or roading. I choose roading but then he's not absolutely ready for building a cottage when pottery is available (to complete the roading - he could stop roading with an interrupt and start cottaging on that same turn could he, and then get back to finishing the road afterwards, right?), so in the case of letting the barracks complete before starting the worker, at least the worker isn't doing something less meaningful to me like roading for the first building.

 

[cabert]

roading can be powerful, to counter barbs...
One good unit to defend 2 cities, for instance.

It's also opening trade routes = more commerce.
Of course a cottage is better, but don't spit on roads.

 

[HardCoder]

I'm not an expert but settler first has never seemed like a strategy worth pursuing in general. I suppose there are some cases when I'd look at the starting position and situation and go, "oh! settler first!" But worker first seems to be the way to go in most cases.

 

[jesusin]

Good thread. This is the part of the game I like the most: the first turn.

Tile count is not all. As important as that is tile output.

If you build worker first, you will have a worker sooner, that's very good! If you build settler first, you will have a settler sooner, that's very good!
With settler first, what do you do with your warrior? I assume you protect the settler with him after a limited scouting, so you are damaging your scouting capabilities and could end up with a not optimally placed second city. Of course, with worker first you could end up without anywhere to place your second city (overcrowed map, deity).

I always do the exercise of comparing different starting strategies till turn 30 or 60, assuming no GH and no AI interference. In my admitedly limited experience, these are the conclusions:
- In seafood coastal starts, it is very difficult to choose between workboat first or worker first.
- In all other circumstances, 95%+ of the time you are much better off with worker first.
- In all other circumstances, 2% of the time you are better off growing to pop2 and then Worker.
- In all other circumstances, 2% of the time you are better off with settler first.

Incidentaly, I think that the usefulness of founding a religion is overestimated. This oppinion of mine might have affected the percentages above in favour of worker first.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

I am keen to try a game as settler first with an Imperialist leader - Ghengis Khan.

My thinking is something along these lines:

- City 1 - build settler, then warrior, warrior then settler (at size 2 prob).
- City 2 - build worker (to enhance city 1), then settler.
- City 3 - build worker (to enhance city 2) then warrior
- City 4 - build axemen probably

The idea is to get four cities close together:
- Reduced maintenance - after 4 it gets bad.
- They can defend each other - which will be important as the gameplan is vulnerable to barbs.
- No need for culture growth immediately for cities 2-4
- All the cities can work cottages in the fat cross of the capital - which means faster towns later.
- I can switch cities to use the same specials - eg if I have a gold mine, then one city can work it while another grows and then they can swap. Similarly when one city whips, another can take over working its cottages.
- Once I hook up copper (I'm hoping it is close, but when I find it I will probably have settler 4 ready to go and should be able to claim it) then I can have four cities whip axemen immediately. I should be able to raise an army of 8 axes/spears well before anyone else.

The tech path is probably Ag->Pottery->Mining->BW. Early cottages will be required to support the maintenance. Hopefully with hunting I can get a few goody huts to keep my early tech rate up. Maintenance costs will be huge, but my number of tiles worked will be a lot higher than I would usually have and once the war machine gets running it can probably pay for itself.

Anyway, I'm thinking of running it for 100 turns or so with this start compared to a worker first start getting my cities more slowly. Really I want to find out whether the bonus on settler production for Imperialistic can be put to strategic use in a different opening. Or will I just get buried in maintenance.

 

[Charles 22]

roading can be powerful, to counter barbs...
One good unit to defend 2 cities, for instance.

It's also opening trade routes = more commerce.
Of course a cottage is better, but don't spit on roads.

Yeah, but in the early going like we're talking it don't matter. As well, if you road so as to link with other civs, you give your empire that much more targets for the barbs and spreading out the targets to make it worse. I do road when it's appropriate, but certainly not beyond the borders of my towns except on occassion to speed to a proposed new site or to link my own together. Cottages are more important for me in especially the early stages of 2-3 towns.

 

[LDeska]

IMO: settler first is not the best strategy. I play many 1 on 1 games on mirror maps with human players, I usually play as Victoria (financial and imperial) so I have cheaper settlers. Few times my opponents chose also Victoria and built first a settler. After some turns they started to loose in demography with me (my strategy was: worker first, then warrior or barracks or pottery - anything that is needed and let's the city grow till it grows to size 2 or 3, depending on terrain, then settler or two). So my point is that after some time they were losing in everything in demo. The fact that second city was founded earlier did not paid off because it was working on unimproved tiles. My capital was working on improved tiles (cottages, mines and improved food resources) so I had more gold and production. The key is to keep your worker busy so research must be in synergy with him. If you have corn next to your capital, research Agriculture first, if you have sheep, go for Animal Husbandry etc. Good strategy is also an early cottage or two plus mines, then settler is build quickly while cottages grow and gold is pouring into the treasury During production of first setller or two I usually cut one forest - it gives 30 extra hammers (for Victoria, before Math).

 

[Wodan]

IMO: settler first is not the best strategy. I play many 1 on 1 games on mirror maps with human players, I usually play as Victoria (financial and imperial) so I have cheaper settlers. Few times my opponents chose also Victoria and built first a settler. After some turns they started to loose in demography with me (my strategy was: worker first, then warrior or barracks or pottery - anything that is needed and let's the city grow till it grows to size 2 or 3, depending on terrain, then settler or two). So my point is that after some time they were losing in everything in demo. The fact that second city was founded earlier did not paid off because it was working on unimproved tiles. My capital was working on improved tiles (cottages, mines and improved food resources) so I had more gold and production. The key is to keep your worker busy so research must be in synergy with him. If you have corn next to your capital, research Agriculture first, if you have sheep, go for Animal Husbandry etc. Good strategy is also an early cottage or two plus mines, then settler is build quickly while cottages grow and gold is pouring into the treasury During production of first setller or two I usually cut one forest - it gives 30 extra hammers (for Victoria, before Math).

I would have thought your advice based on all your experience in duel maps would be to play an Expansive leader (to get faster workers), such as Shaka or Mao.

Wodan

 

[Murky]

It could work in some situations but I think more often than not worker first is better. The 2nd city maintence is going to decrease your science rate unless it has gold or something special. You capital's growth is slowed for a longer time. You settler and new city won't have any protection for a while.

 

[podraza]

One problem I've been having with this strategy is that it requires the appearance of a strategic resource within the first 25 turns. Othwerwise, you've got a settler and don't know where to put him. If no copper appears, then the settler has to sit there while you research animal husbandry in search of horses. I've had to start over quite a few games because of this. Building a worker or warrior first gives you the time to research both bronzeworking and animal husbandry before you settle the second location.

 

[Wodan]

One problem I've been having with this strategy is that it requires the appearance of a strategic resource within the first 25 turns. Othwerwise, you've got a settler and don't know where to put him. If no copper appears, then the settler has to sit there while you research animal husbandry in search of horses. I've had to start over quite a few games because of this. Building a worker or warrior first gives you the time to research both bronzeworking and animal husbandry before you settle the second location.

Somebody already pointed this out. Post #2.

I'll repeat what said then... this "problem" seems irrelevant to me. All you do is build your 3rd city on the resource. You get a free 2nd city out of the deal, which can be used as a production city to churn out units, or a commerce city to accelerate research or get money for a war, etc.

Wodan

 

[aelf]

I'll repeat what said then... this "problem" seems irrelevant to me. All you do is build your 3rd city on the resource. You get a free 2nd city out of the deal, which can be used as a production city to churn out units, or a commerce city to accelerate research or get money for a war, etc.

The problem really happens when you find the resource placed between your 2nd city and your capital, and the best site for the 3rd city to claim it sucks. And maybe you could have had a better production site because of the resource if you had settled the 2nd city one tile away, for example.

 

[Landmonitor]

The problem really happens when you find the resource placed between your 2nd city and your capital, and the best site for the 3rd city to claim it sucks. And maybe you could have had a better production site because of the resource if you had settled the 2nd city one tile away, for example.

Yeah, I can see this being a problem with this strategy. If it turned out that I had horses in that one grasslands tile that is diagonal two from both cities or something, I would probably get depressed and want to restart. Copper or horses can turn a mediocre early city into a power house of production, or a city with a food resource into a no-brainer for HE city... this is painful enough once your empire is partially established and you discover iron in an unworkable square, but if it is horses or copper and your second city missed out... the ripple effects from that would be severe.

Having said all that, I wouldn't dismiss this strategy out of hand... perhaps I'll try it next time (although definetely not until finals are done!... speaking of which...)

 

[podraza]

Somebody already pointed this out. Post #2.

I'll repeat what said then... this "problem" seems irrelevant to me. All you do is build your 3rd city on the resource. You get a free 2nd city out of the deal, which can be used as a production city to churn out units, or a commerce city to accelerate research or get money for a war, etc.

Wodan

Wodan, you know better than to say it is free. Nothing in Civ 4 is free.

I'm interested in getting my half-dozen axmen or chariots produced in the fewest number of turns possible. Having to build 2 settlers prior to connecting the resource will set this back considerably as compared to only 1.

EDIT - although I suppose this might not necessarily be true. Perhaps the ultimate goal (having 6 ax or horse) could be achieved in a comparable number of turns building 3 cities, since I would have 1 more city churning out the units. I have had games where I didn't connect copper until my 3rd city, and I have had games where I didn't connect it until my 2nd, and it always felt like the former took longer. But maybe I need to test this.