I usually go Scout until my capital gets to Pop. 2, then get a worker, then another warrior, and then a settler. Is that a good idea? If not, what should I do? I know, play the map and all, but there must be some strategy that's good for the first 20 turns almost all the time.
What to build first?
- Thread starter JoeyB98
- Start date
vandermerwe
Butt of many jokes
No! I can't think I've ever built a scout except to create a super-medic later in the game. All they have over warriors is 1 extra move (which you can effectively give your warriors by having them kill a few animals and promoting them to Woodsman 2) and minor advantages in popping huts, if you have them turned on. In return you get a unit which can't attack, can't be upgraded into anything useful (Explorers? Please...), and which dies as soon as human barbs turn up.
Worker first, unless you have Fishing and seafood nearby, in which case a workboat is often better. Then warriors to size 3-4, then a settler. It's as close to a universal strategy as I think you can get, at least up to about Monarch (can't speak for higher levels, when all sorts of wacky things seem to be necessary from time to time).
Worker first, unless you have Fishing and seafood nearby, in which case a workboat is often better. Then warriors to size 3-4, then a settler. It's as close to a universal strategy as I think you can get, at least up to about Monarch (can't speak for higher levels, when all sorts of wacky things seem to be necessary from time to time).
Chase_2_Rabbits
Warlord
Opening with a scout is ok if you play with huts on; but nobody cool does that 
Otherwise get that first worker out ASAP. Improved tiles (and sometimes chopping) are the key to a good a start.
Otherwise get that first worker out ASAP. Improved tiles (and sometimes chopping) are the key to a good a start.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 27,135
U can also open with a warrior, especially if your worker would have almost nothing to do( for example when u must hook up pigs or cows to get food, but you don't start with Hunting/AG.
You might make a play then and steal a worker from your neightbour, works like a charm
Just don't open with a scout, Civ is not an RTS game
You might make a play then and steal a worker from your neightbour, works like a charm
Just don't open with a scout, Civ is not an RTS game
Zx Zero Zx
Deity
Worker.
ben-jammin
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,436
Worker, work boat in very specific circumstances (sometimes even two in a row), warrior only in the most horrible start imaginable with all the wrong starting techs. In which case I'd probably just regenerate the map.
Kaosprophet
Warlord
- Joined
- May 7, 2009
- Messages
- 244
Warrior first is not a bad plan if the settings (mapscript, size & speed) and start location are likely to put someone close enough to steal workers off of.
But for most cases, worker first is the most consistently successful move. Even with huts on, I'd leave 'scout first' to Civ5 instead.
I'm actually quite shocked at all the scout-hating. I like to plan out where I'll put my next few cities long before I make them. The advantage of knowing the terrain first really helps.
Perhaps it's because my first Civ IV games were way back in 2006, only playing MP with my parents. In MP, knowing the terrain first is a great advantage.
Perhaps it's because my first Civ IV games were way back in 2006, only playing MP with my parents. In MP, knowing the terrain first is a great advantage.
Izuul
Level 86
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2012
- Messages
- 7,017
Warriors can easily scout out the surrounding area while also serving as some basic barb defense. On the right terrain they can easily fend off barb warriors and sometimes barb archers as well. Scouts have absolutely no chance of defending against barbs.
It's not a really big deal if you are playing on lower levels, but a scout won't survive much past turn 25 on Deity. That's just one more reason why Hunting is such a horrible starting tech.
It's not a really big deal if you are playing on lower levels, but a scout won't survive much past turn 25 on Deity. That's just one more reason why Hunting is such a horrible starting tech.
shulgi
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 202
Even without invoking the deity argument, I'd much rather get a warrior out there and promote for woodsman II. Your next cities won't be so far away that you can't scout them with a warrior. I only use a scout later on for scouting AI territory to look for stacks or weaknesses.
I don't think scouts are that terrible Immortal and below (can't remember on Deity). There is something to be said for scouting your surrounding territory and neighbours very quickly, and they can spawn bust and run when something comes. I almost never build them because I need defense and garrisons, but sometimes I appreciate a starting scout. Anyway, worker first almost always.
ben-jammin
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,436
I think a scout on immortal is a bad idea. Yes it's valuable to know where all the resources are around you, but you can accomplish this with warriors. It's not like you normally get so much room to expand on immortal that you'd need a scout reveal all th eland you can realistically settle. I certainly have never had a problem with this. At best, a scout might reveal a slightly better first city spot before a warrior gets to it. Then your scout almost inevitably dies, meaning it can't fogbust, and it also can't be garrisoned for happiness later on.
Seems to me that the scout, and the whole starting with a scout if you have hunting thing, was designed around huts being turned on.
Seems to me that the scout, and the whole starting with a scout if you have hunting thing, was designed around huts being turned on.
Building a scout on any level is bad (unless you don't have horses maybe). But starting with a scout may occasionally be better than a warrior, and a lot of the time only slightly worse. Sometimes a warrior can't quite scout quick enough (goes for starting location too). It is annoying that Firaxis seems to have considered starting with a scout compensation for hunting. Stupid huts.
On a related note, I've never quite managed to figure out how significant meeting other civs is for the passive tech advantage. Maybe that's another small situational argument for scouts.
Anyway, I'm arguing a very minor point that the hatred towards scouts should be slightly milder.
On a related note, I've never quite managed to figure out how significant meeting other civs is for the passive tech advantage. Maybe that's another small situational argument for scouts.
Anyway, I'm arguing a very minor point that the hatred towards scouts should be slightly milder.
ben-jammin
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,436
I certainly don't hate starting with a scout, I'm just saying don't build one. Unless you have a great general
Didn't think of this either: how much earlier would you get the "years of peace have strengthened our relations" and how significant is that?
