starting..

[bryanwallace]

so people dont like the curragh idea

 

[TheOverseer714]

A curragh is nice if you are isolated and a seafaring civ. The extra move is nice. I would put a curragh in the queue somewhere between settlers as a way to let your capitol grow.

 

[PaperBeetle]

If it is a choice between curragh and axe, I would go with curragh, seafaring or not. It moves twice as fast.
But in my early game, the important builds are workers, settlers and a granary; my basic goal is to have the capital grow as often as possible. Any axes, scouts or curraghs just have to fit themselves in as best they can.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

But warriors explore the earth, and that's what matters. You find any strategic points of interest, instead of a bunch of water.

 

[bryanwallace]

well i like the worker early doors,but people here have argued against it as it costs you one pop..
also,surely the point of the curragh is to make contact with as many civs as poss

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

In the end, though, knowing those in the immediate area of you who have all the resources is better than knowing the distant people.

 

[TheOverseer714]

At higher levels, a curragh becomes much more valuable, as tech trading becomes essential. Until you get horses, a curragh is the fastest unit and can make contact much faster than walking. Snce most capitols are near the ocean, even on a Pangaea curraghs are useful. Seafaring civs can build them immediately and have an extra movement point. And curraghs are cheap.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Of course you should ALWAYS have a curragh as well as a warrior, but if you have to choose between the two, I'd take a warrior.

 

[Nergal]

It varies, depends much on the Civ. If its expansionist I generally build about 4 scouts before anything else. If I can then I will scout with archers, they seem to get better result from goody huts and are more effective at taking out barbarain cash points than warriors at the higher levels. If I have a coastal town, or suspect I am on an island then its a curragh as soon as possible. The cost to research techs decreases the more people that you know with that tech. Bamspeedys 'Babylons Diety Settlers' is a good read. It shows the benefits of building granaries. I pick a start point with a couple of cattle or wheat, then build some scouting teams, then a granary then go for settlers. I can usually manage to get the settler pump bouncing nicely at settler followed by spearman followed by settler for a few cycles.

 

[ZzarkLinux]

im sure this question has been asked before..but what is the best early
production order with your first city..
should it be worker warrior worker..
or warrior first??
where do you fit the first granary or settler in??

I assume this is a standard game, not ALWAYS WAR and not SID difficulty lol. I'm pretty sure this isn't high difficulty, and I'm pretty sure this is no variant.

The goal of most games is REX = rapid expansion. First get lots of cities, then get workers to make those cities productive. There are many articles in the forum about this.

For regular games, a good start is warrior-warrior-Settler. Your city is size 1, then it grows to size 3. Once you are at size 3, you build a settler, and your city goes down to size 1 again.

Building a worker first is almost never good. Your capitol already starts with a worker. And your capitol will probably be size 1-4, so it doesn't need "lots" of worked tiles.

I repeat, worker first is bad.

 

[bryanwallace]

it was for deity on huge map and usually enables me to win,but I will take the
advice and give it a go- i am int in improving my game which is why i asked..
i like the curragh idea particularly..

 

[AznWarlord]

I usually go with warrior-settler-worker.

My problem with Settler second is if my city doesn't grow fast enough and I waste shields.

 

[PaperBeetle]

Building a worker first is almost never good. Your capitol already starts with a worker. And your capitol will probably be size 1-4, so it doesn't need "lots" of worked tiles.

I repeat, worker first is bad.

If you have some bonus food resources available, then your capital will be able to grow faster than that one worker can keep up with tile improvement. If your plan is to have your capital operate as a settler pump, then the number of settlers you can produce is dependant on how fast you (a) get your granary built, (b) get all the necessary tiles improved, and (c) get to the required starting size. In most cases, (a) and (c) tend to happen at a similar time (and can be micro'd to fit), but (b) can lag behind. In this case, you can keep the pump ticking over by building workers (which have a lower shield-to-food cost ratio than settlers) who then get on with helping the first worker catch up on his improvements. But those workers would have been more productive if you built them earlier - move one before the granary in the build order, and his extra improvements (including perhaps a chop) will often get the granary done sooner, and thus enable the town to start the settler pumping earlier.
In short, after making a lot of spreadsheet models for the starts of many games, I find that I usually start with one worker, then the granary, then settlers (with military units sprinkled in wherever they can fit without delaying the important builds). But I play only GOTM, and we are often given quite generous food situations to start. If I was stuck on +2fpt, I might consider skipping the worker and prioritising exlporation to find better land.

 

[marceagleye]

Warrior+warrior+warrior+granary+settler. (Generally). Then repeat spearman+spearman+settler. Hopefully you can get five settlers out before needing to build archers to fight marauding barbarians or enemy civs.

 

[marceagleye]

Warrior+warrior+warrior+granary+settler. (Generally). Then repeat spearman+spearman+settler. Hopefully you can get five settlers out before needing to build archers to fight marauding barbarians or enemy civs.

 

[MAS]

spearman? More warriors! And if unit upkeep becomes a problem, build archers! Offense>defense!

 

[AutomatedTeller]

I usually go warrior/warrior (scouts), then see. If I am extremely food rich on a large map, I may pop out a settler or two before making a granary, so I can found towns that will be able to create granaries quickly themselves.

 

[Headbanger]

warrior+warrior+warrior+settler+warrior...

And by then I usually have an opponents city under my belt.

 

[Empiremaker]

Warrior rushes only work on Chieftain, Warlord, and Regent. I read somewhere that 2 warriors v 1 fortified warrior have a 67% of winning.

On topic, I like farmer gambits and more expansion than warriors. Probably not a good idea, but oh well.

 

[Skibatized]

I go with Warrior...then something that takes a while like temple or barrack and research pottery ASAP then switch it to granary then settler. use your luxury slider to keep citizens happy

So... warrior.granary.settler.settler.settler.settler and so on with the capitol
and warrior and workers with other cities.

but then again I play on deity so I need to do this in order to keep up with AI settling ><