Vel's Strategy Thread

[Velociryx]

We can both vary, but the worker seems to benefit all non-expansionitst strategy

I would absolutely agree!

This, in fact, is central to my opening statement....my stated goal being to found that second city ASAP (to take advantage of the fact that as soon as the city is founded, I gain tile production from two additional tiles).

Thus, it's extremely true that this IS an expansive move (and risky!), and as such, not something that a non-expansive-minded player would gravitate toward (which would quite rightly be a worker first).

But IF your goal is to jump out the gate quickly, and you don't want to be burdened with researching worker techs (in preference for something that will pay big dividends down the line...like founding one or more religions), then settler first IS faster at accomplishing its goal. About a dozen turns faster (no chop)

-=Vel=-

[Jcg316]

Start a hundred games and see how many times you don't have a resource in your cities workable tiles. Your location isn't random the map either is built based on city location or built before and your startting location being in a good spot. Since you aren't getting bronze working you ALWAYS have the tech you need, if you want an early religion (which you should decide after seeing the land and then choosing your first tech). You'll find rivers and a similar number of resources consistently. I've never had all calendar resources or monarchy and all animals only on the great plans map or whatever its called.

Some maps have added things like starting on a coast.

Starting locations are given resources, rivers they aren't just random. If it builds the map AFTER basing it on your civ, there might be a higher chance of resources for techs you have or there may not if your civ is placed after the map is built, or vice versa. It seems to me like fishing civs start near water more but you'd have to do a lot of tests to be sure.

Thus an average start has resources, there may be mineables and calendar or monarchy resources but I haven't had just those in any game. Unless I only have water resources which I don't think I've had only those without a fishing civ. Uncommon starts are floodplains, though if you start with a river it has a fair chance, multiple cows and more resources and mass water resource starts. The opposite of that is also very uncommon and it may not be possible based on random map and starting location scripts.

[Jcg316]

If you start with a worker your second city can get up and running quicker with the worker going with the settler, since it has had many turns of working on the capitol. That is IF it has a resource next to it, if you go for more resources but they are two tiles away you would need borders expanded before doing anything.

I think there are more ideal ways to expand than immediately building a settler. The math shows that you will accomplish more quicker, the general idea, extra city in the same amount of time. As with what you had mentioned the second city actually grows more at 8 turns which is enough to grow. The capitol in the other grows three, and needs 5 more even with a resource built quick. The other could do better with 8 if the first worker goes with it.

Starting with a worker will yield more infrastructure and catch up with the other method so a settler first certainly isn't going to let you expand more or quicker.

Plus it doesn't have to change gears if you find unexpected things around you.

[papasmurf]

In all these discussions of worker/settler rushing and city expansion, I've seen very little mention of the incredible vulnerability of poorly defended cities during this phase. At least on higher difficulty levels, the risk of barbarians is very real and often immediate...

just my 2c

[Dog of Justice]

I'm pretty sure worker first is just better unless you are following a tech path that will leave your worker nothing useful to do (i.e. religion(s)).

[Velociryx]

Start a hundred games and see how many times you don't have a resource in your cities workable tiles.

It's been...eh...fifty fifty in my experience so far...yep, special resources in the region, nope, not always in my immediate workable area (or withing my near term borders).

In any case, I always take what I'm handed, never restart, and cannot design a strat that needs a special as an ingredient to make it pay, so...I tend to think about the lowest common denominator, figuring that what works on a purely average start will work even better if I've got something to take advantage of (and yes, the presence of a juicy special *might* make me change my starting build/tech!)

In all these discussions of worker/settler rushing and city expansion, I've seen very little mention of the incredible vulnerability of poorly defended cities during this phase. At least on higher difficulty levels, the risk of barbarians is very real and often immediate...

Yep. No bones about it. Right up front you've got to acknowledge that this IS a risky move (either way...worker or settler first). Something nasty finds you, you are toast.

Risk v. Reward....


I'm pretty sure worker first is just better unless you are following a tech path that will leave your worker nothing useful to do (i.e. religion(s)).

Exactly my point. There are a number of attractive techs that don't give workers anything to do. If you want 'em first and early, then there's precious little point in delaying building that settler, since said worker is going to be sitting fortified on a hill for a BUNCH of turns (which makes building him almost worse than useless, as at least unbuilt, he also can't be killed). So if you're pursing a tech strategy that pulls you AWAY FROM the worker-oriented techs, and you don't start with much in the way of stuff for a worker to do, then no....I can't see any validity whatsoever in building the worker first. All it's doing is slowing you down from being able to work twice as many tiles at once, which is where the real paydirt is.

-=Vel=-

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Velociryx
... If you want 'em first and early, then there's precious little point in delaying building that settler, since said worker is going to be sitting fortified on a hill for a BUNCH of turns...

I did think Jcg's idea about pre-chopping forests was pretty slick... finish whatever building tech you want, and then BANG there's the building.

[papasmurf]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Yep. No bones about it. Right up front you've got to acknowledge that this IS a risky move (either way...worker or settler first). Something nasty finds you, you are toast.

Risk v. Reward....

My personal take is that any strategy that I know poses a significant risk of losing is unacceptable. Thus, I always protect my early units and settlements. Definitely a matter of personal preference though...

[Velociryx]

No doubt about it, T! That's slick! And I *definitely* make chop a part of my strategy....when I get the tech, but I don't go out of my way to get it, cos there's an easier, no-tech way of reaching the same point, just as quickly, which frees my research up to do other stuffs. Having played it both ways, I basically ignore the bronze-working side of the tree in the extreme early game, figuring that I can pick them up a bit later when my "chops" will count toward important early game wonders (and in fact, if you are industrious, you get more hammers per chop when building a wonder...at least that's been my experience...I've gotten nearly fifty as India (47)...tho I'm not sure what the formula is. In any case, 30 hammers now to get a worker who has little to do, or 47 later, toward a wonder I'm eyeing....it's an easy choice for me.

My personal take is that any strategy that I know poses a significant risk of losing is unacceptable. Thus, I always protect my early units and settlements. Definitely a matter of personal preference though...

I understand the mindset. So far, I've played ~25 ancient era minigames to test various types of starts.

I've not yet lost a single unescorted settler, which prompted me to write yesterday that it's safer than it looks.

-=Vel=-

[Dactyl]

I've also never had a problem with unescorted settlers when starting by building a settler first and then a worker. In fact, in one test game my unescorted settlers ended up right next to a panther unit, and it didn't even attack the settlers.

However, after getting that second city established and getting your worker, you'd better start protecting those cities, especially at higher levels, and on Monarch level a couple of warriors per city are not sufficient because the barbarians start coming in waves. I've found that the best tactic for handling them is to assemble a team of three warriors or better and meet them away from the city.

[papasmurf]

Originally posted by Dactyl
I've also never had a problem with unescorted settlers when starting by building a settler first and then a worker. In fact, in one test game my unescorted settlers ended up right next to a panther unit, and it didn't even attack the settlers.

Perhaps I was just unlucky, but my first two games on Monarch were both total disasters because my first settler was killed by wild animals (my warrior was scouting a few squares away). Since then I've always escorted ALL settlers, and have even lost a two since then when the escort was killed (which taught me to always have the escort lead by a square).

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Aeson
Don't ignore "big city" in favor of "quicker cities". Each has it's benefits and drawbacks. CIV is not like past Civilization games where expansion was exponential. Playing catch-up in number of cities is viable, and can have greater long term potential. Locusts are fast expansion, but will be very slow early research, miss most the early religions, miss more wonders, and will be extremely poor at choking a neighbor or fending off an early rush.

Getting X cities in Y turns doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Well it could mean getting stone and or marble that you would not have otherwise gotten. It also could mean getting it a lot sooner, if you went worker worker, expand.

I have had several games with just missing one or the other and that is a big loss, not the end, but they are strong.

So far I have been going big city wrongly fearing cost. Wrongly in that cost can be ignored, not that big city is a bad thing.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Theseus


Please explain.

T. you get double production with the wonder and stone. You those trees are now getting 60. If you later get other boost, it can go 50% of 30 for 15 more to get to 75.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Well it could mean getting stone and or marble that you would not have otherwise gotten. It also could mean getting it a lot sooner, if you went worker worker, expand.

I have had several games with just missing one or the other and that is a big loss, not the end, but they are strong.

So far I have been going big city wrongly fearing cost. Wrongly in that cost can be ignored, not that big city is a bad thing.

I'm not sure how this applies to what I said. Are you just focusing on "Locust... will... miss more Wonders"? "Locust" isn't just building one city to claim a resource central to the desired strategy.

There are better approaches to building Wonders than settling extraneous cities early on.

[Velociryx]

Synopsis of the early game tech tree

In studying the various methodologies for attacking the tech tree, I've come up with the following designations. These will be useful/helpful to me in terms of classifying where I am on the tech tree with regards to a particular civ, and what aims I hope to accomplish.

Locust & Variants
Bronzeworking beeline, takes you down the mining/masonry side of the tree. Some terraforming here (mine, chop), and the biggest of the early game wonders (pyramids, with their ability to enable all government civics).

Useful for players who want to utilize hyper-early chopping strats in varying degrees of the extreme (casual to rampant), necessary to at least partly explore this branch if you're gunning for the pyramids.

Gods be With You
Religious branch, stems from the common parent of Mysticism. Ancient era branch has THREE of the seven religions in the game, but absolutely no terraforming or combat stuff.

Religion, the cultural builds and options that being one of the "Founding Fathers" opens up are compelling indeed, and many players will be drawn down this path. It requires a rather different in-game mindset, as many of the things that are truisms for all other research branches are turned on their heads for this one.

Gives access to Org. Religious Civic, and its corresponding infrastructure bonus.

Davy Jones
The first choice for those found to be stuck on a small landmass, or crowded out of the best land on a large continent, and unable to fight it out. Collassus makes it a good choice for the finacially minded as well, but I'd imagine that most folks would give this a secondary priority.

Financier
Pottery beeline for early cottages and big financial windfalls.

Attacker's Toolkit
Archery and Horseback Riding....two dead end techs that warmongers will race to.

Jethro Tull
Covers all the basic terraforming techs before branching into any one area too deeply (agriculture, wheel, mining, hunting, husbandry)


Transitional Beelines (those that take you from the ancient age)

FarSeer
Combines the Locust and Religous goals, to end up with a good, quick shot at the Oracle, and use it to gain Metal Casting as your freebie tech (taking you out of the ancient age and giving you early forges for a big production spike).

Communication's Specialist
Beeline to Alphabet (and out of the ancient age) to enable tech trading and be in the driver's seat where that is concerned.

King and Country
The path to feudalism, and happiness control thru force of arms. Logical next step for early game warmongers.

Bean Counter
Alternate path for "communication's specialist" sees you leaving the ancient age pursuing math, and the financial windfalls it will bring (good choice for those pursuing the financier notions in the early game).

-=Vel=-