[BNW] Settling

reason

Chieftain
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
28
Hey guys, I'm a fairly experienced player who's coming back to civ after almost two years. I still remember most of the stuff and I'd say I sit somewhere between Emperor and Immortal level, but if there's one thing I never dominated is settling.

For example, I just started this game as Arabia and I don't know how to proceed in my very first turn. This start looks very promising with three wheats next to rivers and a fair amount of hills. The problem is my starting point is not on a river. I'm not sure if this matter THAT much, but I felt very inclined to moving to the spot where my warrior is so I could settle next to a river while also grabbing that salt. However, that would mean giving up the furs and one of the wheats.

Can you guys give me some guidelines and/or rule of thumbs on how to evaluate situations like this one?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    3.7 MB · Views: 1,053
I would move SE, settling on T0 on river next to mountain with (at least) 2 wheat, 3 sheep, and 2 unique luxuries within 3 tiles.Mountain (Observatory) is a significant advantage. Founding T0 instead of T1 or T2 is a small advantage. You can still grab the Salt with an expo.
 
The spot SE seems like the best candidate, I would definitely move my settler there, at least to see what is across the river (more flood plains means you can go for desert folklore). The only disadvantage would be if you have stone or marble in range, since you are not allowed to build the stoneworks.
 
The spot SE does seem to be good. You would have three good growth tiles with two of them providing production in the first ring. That right there makes it much better than the spot where your warrior is located. Not to mention that you could build Petra. Sure the flood plains don't get benefit, but you do get an additional caravan and there could be other desert tiles beyond that Petra will benefit. Combine all those together and you should overcome anything lost by having unworkable mountains taking up at least 3 if not 4 tiles of your city.
 
founding on furs could be also an option. You lose the forest but gain some production tiles for quick settlers.
 
Funny that the general consensus is settling in the SE spot, I didn't even consider that one an option because it seems like it generally lacks hammers, but perhaps I'm underestimating the value of all the food in the first ring.

Also, my friends and I play with no quitters mod, which means I don't need to be next to a mountain in order to build observatory. Still, I agree the SE spot does seem like a great option.
 
You have hammers, a hill in the first ring and two sheep in the second ring. Later on you can add another sheep and the gold hill. The main advantage of that spot is that you get to work two 3 yield tiles right from the start meaning early hammers. The spot where the warrior is has the wheat in the first ring, but at population 2 you will probably be working the sheep, waiting for the salt to be added to the borders, meaning slower growth. That marshy grassland will also be in the way for a long time, and it will take precious worker time to improve.
 
Last edited:
I would go where warrior is. You are almost certain to get gold to buy that salt tile from scouting and because there is salt there is quite likely more salt tiles for your capital. This is because you have that mod. Without that i would go where other said for observatory. Please share map after you have scouted a bit so we see if my risky resommendation would have played out. If it is immortal getting petra might be tricky too
 
We can already see all tiles within the 2nd ring of a potential city founded where the warrior is; if there's additional Salt tiles, they'd be in the 3rd ring.
The desert to the SE is similarly indicative of more desert, potentially a 3-food Oasis and desert/hill/sheep, which could be in the more accessible 2nd ring.
Even with this mod, with the information available I'd still settle to the SE on T0, where there are immediately two 2 food/1 hammer tiles. An expo could possibly make better use of the forthcoming Salt, potentially getting 2 within the 1st and 2nd ring.
 
Nice map! The tile 1 hex SE for T0 mountain/river also gets my vote. Two wheat, two lux, three sheep, next to dessert (and a floodplain no less). It is great! The game picked the spot, so there is probably horse or iron in range too.

Scrying the fog, I think I see coast to the E though. So my second choice would be to gamble due E for river/coast. But giving up the tile SE just for a chance at a coastal cap is too much of risk when the starting location is so good.

A single visible salt is almost enough to temp me into settling on T2 on the marsh, putting salt, wheat, and a sheep in first ring (plus, it is on a river). As @claudiupb notes, otherwise the terrible marsh tile is blocking, and takes too long to improve. But the marsh spot is my third choice.

It is pretty rare to have a three good options on T0, so I think you are in for a fun game!

My rule-of-thumb is that every city must be on a hill, river, coast, or mountain. Two of those if I can manage it. Each city needs a lux (need not be unique) and food (any combination of lake or river, fish, cattle, sheep, deer, wheat).

Adding a bit more, it is nice for expos to founded on a hill, but the cap gets extra production, so the hill is less important. I want at least one city to be within 2 hexes of a mountain (for Disney) and at least one to be coastal. Cities should have 4 or 5 hexes between them, and the most distance between any two is ten hexes (so I can keep my religion).

Settling on gems/gold/silver/copper or incense (because it is dessert) is okay. Settling on other lux (like the furs in this screen shot) gives up too much. Also, there are too many good river spots in this screen shot to excuse passing on watermill and garden.
 
Last edited:
The tile 1NW is just screaming to be settled on.
But then the city will be in flat land and completely surrounded by hills. A ranged unit inside the city will only be able to hit the tiles in the 1st ring. I see that in the West there are also hills so enemy ranged units placed there will have a big advantage.
 
But then the city will be in flat land and completely surrounded by hills.
I agree that is a terrible spot to settle. But I would argue that the defense handicap is less of a problem than giving up a river, hill, and the mountain. And passing on river/hill/mountain is less of a problem than not having a single two-food tile in the first ring!
 
settle SE of starting position then crank out a settler and settle on the tile east of Salt
 
Top Bottom