What if I start with a worker?

[cabert]

I go worker first quite often, but i also like this variant (normal speed, mining as a starting tech)
- warrior first (working 1 commerce + food tiles, like an oasis), while researching BW.
- worker after that (working highest fodd + hammer tiles).
- whip the worker asap.

Why do I do this?
- Because I want a warrior to go worker stealing.
- Because you cannot whip before you're size 2
- Because whipping the worker is more food efficient than building it
- Because you can grow to size 3, while building the warrior with high food tiles or you can switch to hammer tiles (forest hill) to make the warrior build faster after you hit BW and size 2 = flexibility

So in the end you have :
- the worker after 15 turns for warrior + 6 turns (5 turns working tiles+ 1 whip) = 21 turns. Not too bad.
- you're still size 2 after 21 turns.
- you have worked far more commerce tiles than direct worker = much more beakers in.
- you have a warrior on hunt.

option 2, if switching to hammer tiles when you hit size 2:
- you can have the warrior in 10 turns, then the worker in 7 turns (6 turns working tiles then whip) = 17 turns.
- you have a warrior on hunt soon
- you have worked more commerce tiles than direct worker = more beakers in.

 

[eric_]

Hehehe...my pleasure, Rutters

So to contribute to the discussion, I was recently convinced that a worker-first approach might be better than waiting until the city grows to build a worker. I gave it a shot and it's now become my approach not just at the start of a game, but for every new city that I build myself (as opposed to capture; those usually are set to build a culture-boosting building first).

The build order for my first city is typically:

worker>barracks>warrior/axeman or archer>warrior/axeman or archer>settler

From there it depends on what my research path has been and will be, as well as my military needs (lots of barbs? other civs encroaching?). Monument (in non-capital cities if I'm not creative) or Stonehenge (usually in the capital) and granaries get built early on as well.

 

[drkodos]

I go worker first quite often, but i also like this variant (normal speed, mining as a starting tech)
- warrior first (working 1 commerce + food tiles, like an oasis), while researching BW.
- worker after that (working highest fodd + hammer tiles).
- whip the worker asap.

Why do I do this?
- Because I want a warrior to go worker stealing.
- Because you cannot whip before you're size 2
- Because whipping the worker is more food efficient than building it
- Because you can grow to size 3, while building the warrior with high food tiles or you can switch to hammer tiles (forest hill) to make the warrior build faster after you hit BW and size 2 = flexibility

So in the end you have :
- the worker after 15 turns for warrior + 6 turns (5 turns working tiles+ 1 whip) = 21 turns. Not too bad.
- you're still size 2 after 21 turns.
- you have worked far more commerce tiles than direct worker = much more beakers in.
- you have a warrior on hunt.

option 2, if switching to hammer tiles when you hit size 2:
- you can have the warrior in 10 turns, then the worker in 7 turns (6 turns working tiles then whip) = 17 turns.
- you have a warrior on hunt soon
- you have worked more commerce tiles than direct worker = more beakers in.

If, instead, you build a Warrior until the city becomes size 2, then immediately switch to Worker and then whip the Worker as soon as BW comes online the whip overflow kicks back to the Warrior. So, on turn 15 (Spiritual Civ) you have a Worker, the original 8 Warrior Hammers plus 4 Overflow hammers, so Warrior is just 3 turns away. By turn 21, you can have a second Warrior out, the Worker will have 6 turns of improvements completed (or chopped hammers for a Settler), and the city will be turning size 2 on turn 23.

One way gets the Warrior out faster for exploration, the other way gets the worker online a bit quicker and then delivers two Warriors at the cost of a bit less commerce (commerce adjusted for traits and tiles--In the former example , a Spriritual/Financial Civ wroking an Oasis during the extra 5 turns as a Pop 2 could generate 15+ beakers--max difference).


Worker first, just with a tactical twist, is still my modus operandi.

 

[cabert]

drkodos, you're right, speaking in numbers
but it's boring to have turns with nothing to do but press enter
+ i like to have a unit out before switching to slavery, be it a worker or a warrior (something to do during anarchy )

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

So to contribute to the discussion, I was recently convinced that a worker-first approach might be better than waiting until the city grows to build a worker. I gave it a shot and it's now become my approach not just at the start of a game, but for every new city that I build myself...

Hmm, I wonder if this is a good play.

Normally, I want my established cities creating the portable hammers for my new cities. So as a rule, new cities start with infrastructure (obelisk/granary/library/barracks) while the established city takes care of garrisons, workers, missionaries, workboats.... After all, you can't transfer a granary to another city.

But my first city usually starts with a worker. I tend not to prioritize Bronze Working, so this micro optimization doesn't fit my usual style of play, but maybe I need to reconsider my approach.

 

[cabert]

I tend not to prioritize Bronze Working, so this micro optimization doesn't fit my usual style of play, but maybe I need to reconsider my approach.

It's worth trying one time at least.
After you master the BW rush to full extent, you will probably go back to more exotic moves, to keep some fun in the game.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

It's worth trying one time at least.
After you master the BW rush to full extent...

Perhaps; I never got terribly enamored of axe rushing the AI, so put it away as a tool.

ps: is anybody else experiencing whip lash switching between these two threads?

 

[cabert]

ps: is anybody else experiencing whip lash switching between these two threads?

yes i do

 

[eric_]

Voice, I am typically building valuable infrastructure or military units in my previous city(ies) whenever a new city is built. I also used to end up with a shortage of workers by the time my third or fourth city was up.

Of course, I'm far from an expert, so I can't really defend my practice other than to say that so far it works on noble and prince and that my city and civ development don't seem stunted as a result. I should do some comparisons, though. I think I have my current game saved at 4000BC; maybe I'll start from scratch and limit "portable hammer" production to already-developed cities.

 

[cabert]

Voice, I am typically building valuable infrastructure or military units in my previous city(ies) whenever a new city is built. I also used to end up with a shortage of workers by the time my third or fourth city was up.

Of course, I'm far from an expert, so I can't really defend my practice other than to say that so far it works on noble and prince and that my city and civ development don't seem stunted as a result. I should do some comparisons, though. I think I have my current game saved at 4000BC; maybe I'll start from scratch and limit "portable hammer" production to already-developed cities.

if you go for 2 workers before settlers, you can improve your second city with those 2 then bring them back home for further improvements while building another worker/settler in the capital.

It really depends on your pace of expansion. I'm a slow expander, so i can make it with those 2 workers for a long time (=until I capture some others )

 

[eric_]

Yeah, I'm typically a slow expander myself, as I often play on continents maps, which are just large enough to hold off some of the land-grab pressure.

My recent games have been on Terra and Pangaea maps, and the expansion pressure can really come to bear on you quickly on those. Obviously you'll ultimately finish your expansion militarily, but you don't wanna start off with a two-city empire.

 

[cabert]

Obviously you'll ultimately finish your expansion militarily, but you don't wanna start off with a two-city empire.

No ? why not?
2 cities is a lot : 2 axes per turn during 2 turns, and then you've got 3 cities

 

[eric_]

Hehehe...true enough...I guess I like to hold off on war until I'm really ready to run down an entire civ, strategic cities notwithstanding, of course. I also like to piss people off via border expansion so they attack me, thus avoiding the "you declared war on our friend" demerit from other civs.

 

[cabert]

well, i don't mind being attacked by one neighbour, but usually if you get attacked, it's dogpiling time

 

[eric_]

Not if you got some serious

 

[cabert]

Not if you got some serious

If you're strong, you won't get attacked

 

[eric_]

Well, I mean strong enough to deter people with no reason to hate you, but not so strong that someone who's pissed at your border pressure won't attack.

 

[Carl v.]

VoiceOfUnreason has a point; the "First worker/settler" initial post is about early building of a worker, but it also adresses a wider array of possibilities. I think it is important do differ betveen an experiment with a rigid framework of conditions, and a study like one conducted by Xin Yu.

 

[mike p]

Just about the only times I won't build a worker first is if I start with Fishing and there's seafood or I start with no useful worker techs. The only time it really makes sense to me to specifically wait for size 2 to start building a worker is either in a second city that's already being improved or if I pop Bronze working very quickly and can whip it at size 2, which has probably happened once or twice maximum.