YossarianLives
Deity
I personally hate making a worker a first build in a new city. This is because population growth is, in many cases, relative. The difference between population 1 and population 2 is much greater than the difference between population 4 and 5. Thus, I always like to allow my new cities to grow to at least size 2 before a worker or a settler.
If we can get two resources improved in time to have both Pop working them, then I agree that it's better to let the city grow to size 2. If we settle next to Wheat and can work the Cap's Corn, then this might very well be the case. If that's what we do, then I'd rather build a warrior (or maybe Granary) while we grow.
However, on that note, I'm pretty sure bcool and I placed our second cities in different locations. Where I settled Delhi (3SE), the wheat was not in the first ring, thus it was necessary to get a border pop ASAP. However despite the sacrifice of the initial border pop, settling 3SE may be worth it. There are at least 8 chops in the BFC, and much less tundra then by settling north of the wheat. I guess the decision for city placement comes later.![]()
Whoops, I thought you meant 3S, 1E. I think bcool's point of settling near the Wheat in the south was to share the Cap's Corn, and 3SE misses the Corn. I myself argued against settling near the tundra, but 3S or 3S, 1E would be very quick to get started, and I trust bcool if he says that will make up for making this City 2 (since it will let us build more workers/settlers faster). I also see that bcool suggested starting a Settler with City 2, not a worker. At any rate, we should send the first warrior we build south to get a better idea of what's in the fog down there.