Worker vs Settler - best early game investment?

[EscapedGoat]

Obviously, at some point you need a worker - but when should you invest in one? A small decision but small decisions early game can quickly turn into a long term advantage...

In Civ 4 it was pretty obvious - the tile yield from improving just one/two special resource would equate the bonus resources from a new city - and worker chopping was pretty overpowered at some stage (i think they nerfed that to the level in CIV 5 though eventually?). Worker first was often a good move (after some exploration units).

In Civ 5, a general worker improvement usually adds +1 production resource (food or hammer) and on top of that takes 6-7 turns to build. And the worker costs upkeep (but how much?). I mostly use my workers if I have to hook up luxuries because it's more important than getting +1 from a square.

A new city will on the other hand immediately even in a worst case scenario provide 2 hammer, 1 gold and whatever the first citizen can work in surplus. If you settle on a luxury, the argument can even be made that you don't need the worker to hook up resources as long as you keep building settlers and settle on resources.

Settlers are 90 hammers and Workers 70 if i recall. If you have the settling social policy (forget the name) Settlers cost relatively less, about 60 hammers i assume. And on top of that you can use food to build them.

So what are even the arguments for worker before settler? IMO settler first (and maybe second + third too ) must be a superior return on investment (settle on luxuries to avoid the worker - and maybe steal a worker from a city state?)

 

[Frank327]

Settler as the first build would probably take too long, as your city can't grow while it is building. Maybe warior first while the city grows to 2, then settler?

Still, one aspect is that tile yields are very small from the start already. You need production or bonus resources to make the second citizen actually contribute to the settler build. And if you settle your first city too quickly, it's going to take forever to get your first SP.

What I usually do is scout - worker, then pick the liberty SP, then settler. Then you can use the worker to chop for a quicker settler, build one useful improvement in the first city, then go to the second city to improve things there.

 

[Duo]

Worker first while you tech to what's relevant to work nearby tiles. Your city doesn't grow while you build a settler, in that time you would be working ~3 tiles, some of which would be improved, in your capital if you go worker, versus working 2 unimproved tiles once you settle your second city, plus extra unhappiness etc.

 

[Trickster7135]

Build warrior, build worker. Use warriors to pop ancient ruins and barb encampments to get coin, buy settler, never slow down growth in capital.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Settler as the first build would probably take too long, as your city can't grow while it is building. Maybe warior first while the city grows to 2, then settler?

Still, one aspect is that tile yields are very small from the start already. You need production or bonus resources to make the second citizen actually contribute to the settler build. And if you settle your first city too quickly, it's going to take forever to get your first SP.

What I usually do is scout - worker, then pick the liberty SP, then settler. Then you can use the worker to chop for a quicker settler, build one useful improvement in the first city, then go to the second city to improve things there.

I didn't literally mean as the first thing you build, I usually get at least a scout/warrior possibly more I suppose chopping a settler could make sense - it did in Civ 4. I suppose the advantage to having the worker is really luxury hookup or to make a tile satisfactory to work if you are lacking workable squares.

 

[Lord Alderaan]

I usually go Worker -> Monument -> Warrior -> Settler.

You can use the early worker to build some farms/mines/resources before your settler is done. Then you can send it along with your settler and warrior to quickly connect the Horses (or other important resource) that you build your second city next to.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Worker first while you tech to what's relevant to work nearby tiles. Your city doesn't grow while you build a settler, in that time you would be working ~3 tiles, some of which would be improved, in your capital if you go worker, versus working 2 unimproved tiles once you settle your second city, plus extra unhappiness etc.

Happiness is not a problem for the first city settled esp. not if you settle on a luxury.

I don't consider the fact that the city doesn't grow as a problem - the resources are not wasted, they go towards settler production. really, i suppose the question is more about if it's better to use the food for growth in capital to work tiles or towards producing a settler. If you decide to work tiles, you better make sure those tiles yields something other than 2 food, because 2 food is just break even. and that requires tile improvement in most cases, and that again requires an expensive worker AND lots of time.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Build warrior, build worker. Use warriors to pop ancient ruins and barb encampments to get coin, buy settler, never slow down growth in capital.

Isn't a settler allmost as high cost in gold as buying off a maritime city state?

 

[Frank327]

Isn't a settler allmost as high cost in gold as buying off a maritime city state?

Yes, on normal difficulty a settler costs 440, and a CS costs 500 to ally.

Personally, I don't see how you can consistently get 440 gold in a short amount of time. You'll definately have slow expansion if you focus on buying your settlers. Unless you're playing the civ that gets 3x gold from barb encampents.

 

[swordspider]

Unless you have the 50% build bonus on a Settler, you should BUY them. The city growth stopper is deadly until you get to level 5 or so.

 

[Dizzy75]

You can't even build them until size 2, so settler as first build is not an option.

In terms of gold,

Worker 310 gold / 70 Hammers = 4.43 gold/hammer
Settler 440 gold / 89 Hammers = 4.94 gold/hammer

From that perspective, it might be better to build a settler and buy the worker, but you have to factor in the growth stoppage and decide if it's worth the extra gold. Of course, you can't even get that much gold early unless you have luxuries to sell to the AIs...

 

[Duo]

Happiness is not a problem for the first city settled esp. not if you settle on a luxury.

Golden ages. Getting ~8 happiness earlier for a large number of turns is helpful in this respect.

I don't consider the fact that the city doesn't grow as a problem - the resources are not wasted, they go towards settler production. really, i suppose the question is more about if it's better to use the food for growth in capital to work tiles or towards producing a settler. If you decide to work tiles, you better make sure those tiles yields something other than 2 food, because 2 food is just break even. and that requires tile improvement in most cases, and that again requires an expensive worker AND lots of time.

The former is better. You end up working more tiles, improved ones, earlier. Think about it this way: since your first city doesn't grow, it will be in exactly the same situation viz creating a worker as it was before it created a settler. If you let it grow and build a worker first, you will get the same settler quicker once you do decide to build it, and you have the benefit of higher yields of just about everything from the improved tiles. Even if it takes the exact same time to build setter -> worker as it does worker -> settler, the latter is *still* better since you will at some point in the 2 builds have improved tiles!

 

[EscapedGoat]

You can't even build them until size 2, so settler as first build is not an option.

That's not really the discussion though, it's allready assumed you will build at least 1 or 2 units while you grow to size 2. What's the discussion is if it's then better to get a worker or a settler.

 

[Dizzy75]

That's not really the discussion though, it's allready assumed you will build at least 1 or 2 units while you grow to size 2. What's the discussion is if it's then better to get a worker or a settler.

Well, if one of those first 1 or 2 units is a worker, then there ya go. Worker is often what I start with, partly because it's the only (civilian) option.

 

[EscapedGoat]

The former is better. You end up working more tiles, improved ones, earlier. Think about it this way: since your first city doesn't grow, it will be in exactly the same situation viz creating a worker as it was before it created a settler. If you let it grow and build a worker first, you will get the same settler quicker once you do decide to build it, and you have the benefit of higher yields of just about everything from the improved tiles. Even if it takes the exact same time to build setter -> worker as it does worker -> settler, the latter is *still* better since you will at some point in the 2 builds have improved tiles!

A new city tile is at least 2 food 2 hammers 1 gold. If they took the exact same time to build, you would with a settler have 2 food 2 hammers 1 gold extra 2-3 turns after completion.

Or you could have one more pop in that city working unupgraded hexes probably at break even while you wait for your worker to build 4 improvements just to match what you get from your new city. That's (7 time to build +1 move to new square)*4 = 32 turns before you have parity with the new city.

So it's not really that simple. A new city will give you +4 prod resources and gold straight away. Tile improvements take time and are generally just +1 prod resource at a time.

 

[Duo]

Workers are effectively quicker than they appear in a direct comparison with settlers since you don't have to wait until you've got 2 pop, and more total production and so on is alright and everything, but even +1 hammers (although if you build a worker first and improve resources you will definitely have more than this by the time you would have built your second city) in a specific city is more valuable than +2 empire wide in terms of erecting wonders or multiplier buildings.

I guess the only case I'd consider is if I didn't have any special resources in my capitals hexes and just had cows and horses or something, but more often or not there is marble, gold, or something else with nicer yields.

 

[duxup]

I usually go Worker -> Monument -> Warrior -> Settler.

You can use the early worker to build some farms/mines/resources before your settler is done. Then you can send it along with your settler and warrior to quickly connect the Horses (or other important resource) that you build your second city next to.

That is also the route I usually go. I like the idea of buying the settler and I go hunting for barbarians pretty often but I rarely have enough coin to buy a settler before I could easily build one. Perhaps I'm missing something.

 

[alpaca]

It depends on my opening strategy. If I want to go for the Great Library, I usually build a settler because the worker won't improve anything for a while. Otherwise, you have to factor in the somewhat faster tech speed if you let your capital grow a bit before building the settler. I'll usually go worker first and let my capital grow to size three, then build a settler.

Another good reason to wait for the settler is if you want to go for Liberty for the +50% production bonus. Then, building a worker (or two) first is even more interesting.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Workers are effectively quicker than they appear in a direct comparison with settlers since you don't have to wait until you've got 2 pop, and more total production and so on is alright and everything, but even +1 hammers (although if you build a worker first and improve resources you will definitely have more than this by the time you would have built your second city) in a specific city is more valuable than +2 empire wide in terms of erecting wonders or multiplier buildings.

I guess the only case I'd consider is if I didn't have any special resources in my capitals hexes and just had cows and horses or something, but more often or not there is marble, gold, or something else with nicer yields.

Most likely the benefit of going scout or warrior while waiting for size 2 is optimal regardless of wether you are going worker or settler after that.

Even if the worker completes a couple of turns before the settler, he will be able to put up only one improvement before the 2nd city is online. I question the value of gold early game, production is more important. And no improvement i know of gives more than 1 production resource, so effectively you must build 4 improvements over 32!!! turns before you are break even in per turn production, not to mention all those 31 turns of advantage you gained from having +4 prod resources right away in the new city square.

In the timeframe we are talking about here I can't see how wonder or building prodction matters. I'm going for settlers, warriors and workers at this stage, not wonders and improvements.

 

[Dizzy75]

It depends on my opening strategy. If I want to go for the Great Library, I usually build a settler because the worker won't improve anything for a while. Otherwise, you have to factor in the somewhat faster tech speed if you let your capital grow a bit before building the settler. I'll usually go worker first and let my capital grow to size three, then build a settler.

Another good reason to wait for the settler is if you want to go for Liberty for the +50% production bonus. Then, building a worker (or two) first is even more interesting.

A little OT, but I don't think the Great Library is ever worth it early in the game, and if you wait until later in the game, the AI will beat you to it at higher difficulties. Someone posted in another thread that even when beelining straight for Writing and starting the GL right away, the AI gets it first.

Back on-topic, my feeling is that an early luxury is pretty key, to be able to sell of to an AI and buy things. You could even buy a settler with it, if you can build up ~140g on your own first. If things go really well, you can have your settler in 6-7 turns after the worker, with no growth penalty. Usually I find it's longer than that, but still, your city can be building something else in the meantime. Assuming no barb harassment and you have the tech for the right improvement, that is.