The game recommended that I move my opening settler ...

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by bhavv, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. bhavv

    bhavv Glorious World Dictator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,358
    To settle on a riverside rice. I was hesitant, but then this happened:

    Spoiler :


    Oh. My. God. Im. Destroying. Shaka. Easy.
     
  2. Gwynnja

    Gwynnja Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,010
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CA
    What were you thinking with your second city placement lol
     
  3. bhavv

    bhavv Glorious World Dictator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,358
    Resources?
     
  4. LyricalAssassin

    LyricalAssassin Warlord

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    107
    I think what he was saying is that if you had moved your second city one tile to the left, you could have settled on a hill, built the tile improvement for both sugars (thus getting the food and gold bonus) while retaining all the resources available in the area.
     
  5. elohssa

    elohssa Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    292
    Jungle sugar is better to settle on. It takes Calendar + IW to improve, takes ages to actually make the improvement and gives a limited bonus.
     
  6. Windsor

    Windsor Flawless

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,386
    Location:
    Norway
    Settling on sugar is a valid choice. Settling 2nd city in the jungle, especially a city that also requires a borderpop to grab the good tiles is questionable. It just takes to long to get going.

    When playing a non-creative leader 2nd city should usually be settled with food inside first ring or shared food with capital.
     
  7. bhavv

    bhavv Glorious World Dictator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,358
    Settling on sugar is fine. +1 city tile food vs +1 improved food. The second city got fast growth and worked 2 scientists.
     
  8. Gwynnja

    Gwynnja Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,010
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CA
    lol, you had to road 6 tiles to get to your second city, and it's in the middle of the jungle. With only what I can see from the picture, there are two vastly superior spots: NW of the copper next to the cattle, and 2 E of the pigs in the cap.
     
  9. bhavv

    bhavv Glorious World Dictator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,358
    But I prefer to land grab first, then settle inbetween spots later.
     
  10. Gwynnja

    Gwynnja Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,010
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CA
    Grabbing the crappier spots first doesn't make sense.
     
  11. zonic

    zonic Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Arkansas
    OK...here is a "beginner level" question for you that is somewhat related to the OP:

    In what circumstances do you place cities on top of resources?
     
  12. BigBizkit

    BigBizkit Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Messages:
    29
    If you need the resource ASAP and/or it would take too long to improve the resource (this is obviously relative).

    e.g. if getting that jungle sugar instantly (as opposed to first getting IW and Calender and then clearing the jungle and building the improvement) and the beneficial effect on your empire's growth outweighs the "loss" of not "properly" improving the tile.
     
  13. bhavv

    bhavv Glorious World Dictator

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,358
    If it gives extra base tile yield, and you don't lose much bonus compared to improving the tile

    Sugar, Ivory, Wine, dry rice, plains marble / stone (better with hills) etc.

    Or usually a 4 yield tile, rarely a 5 yield, never a 6.
     
  14. elitetroops

    elitetroops Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,686
    Yeah, land grabbing far away jungle spots makes no sense if there is better land to settle. Let the AI spend their worker turns clearing the jungle, then grab the land.

    When settling on top of the resource would gice you a better overall city and the improved resource wouldn't be very strong to work, or the improvement for the resource is far down in the tech tree. Resources that I don't think twice about settling my first cities on (if the BFC benefits from it) include sugar, banana, wine, ivory, stone, marble, silk, dry rice and sometimes even dye. Resources I would pretty much never settle on are corn, pig, gold, gems, wheat, cows, sheep. Strategic resources like copper and iron depends. Prefer not to settle on them, because they are strong tiles to work, but sometimes you have to do it to get them hooked up immediately.
     
  15. DigitalBoy

    DigitalBoy Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,346
    Settling on the rice here also puts the city within working distance of that fish. (Although he could have also settled 2S to reach it.)
     
  16. dutchfire

    dutchfire Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    I think I might have gone for 1S of the cow to the east of the capital: corn,copper and cow and settled on a plains hill.
     
  17. drewisfat

    drewisfat King

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    648
    Jungle city isn't a bad city, but it's far from the cap and isn't a great city, especially when you can't work cows yet.
    The only reason there is even a debate where your second city should go is because you blundered your capital location -- which is ironic because the point of the post was to show how good it was :p

    You've basically got more food than you know what to do with. The fish tile is going unworked, the pig is a mine, and the rice was settled on. And you still have an angry face over the city.
    Settling 1N of the current capital, and then putting your second city 2S of the capital would mean starting off the game with two strong food cities as close as possible.
     
  18. sinimusta

    sinimusta el capitano

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,077
    Location:
    Finland
    If I couldn't have seen the fish, I wouldn't have moved on the rice, too risky. And drews suggestion is good, but could you see all this with your scouting warrior?

    With this many AH resources skipping AH isn't worth it. My 2nd city would probably either to east, on the ph 1W of the cow to share pigs as the cap has so much food or north to the grass cows.
     
  19. GreenofKnight45

    GreenofKnight45 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2015
    Messages:
    27
    Location:
    Secret Base in America
    I almost always move my settler. You can often do better than the original spot
    Quote this if you ever were recomended to settle on flood plains. YAY FREE UNHEALTHYNESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:
     
  20. elitetroops

    elitetroops Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,686
    Floodplains disappear when you settle on them (like forests). No unhealthyness from that.
     

Share This Page