Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Where would you found this city?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Where would you found this city?

    First the background. It's mid-game and this city will be of little real consequence. Deciding where to place it is simply optimization rather than game-making strategy.

    The horses don't matter.
    The cultural borders will take just one turn to expand.



    I believe the desert tile occupied by the explorer is the best spot, it redeems an otherwise useless tile and avoids overlap while allowing all the river tiles to be worked. But does mean no fresh water.

  • #2
    I would agree with the tile that is occupied by the explorer.


    As for fresh water? You got plenty at the river.

    What i'd do is put farms along the river on every square (means to cut down forests along the northern shore of the river). This will give them maximum food production once you have the required techs.

    I'd mine all the hills, and put 2 cottages on the 2 grasslands south of the explorer.

    This approach optimizes production and then specialists. If you want to optimize commerce, build cottages on all grasslands + floodplains. It really depends on what you want this city to accomplish.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't quite get why it suggests some spots. There is a clear advantage to starting a city on an otherwise useless tile. I agree the explorer tile is best.

      Comment


      • #4
        because early game the +2 health from being next to that river would have been significant. Also it would have allowed the settler to use the fish tile that is just out of range where the explorer is atm. (they were the reasons the AI recommended what it did)

        Also horses DO matter if just for their bonus'. If the sheep werent there I would say 3 tiles east of the blue circle on the hill. Since they are then yes, where the explorer is would be the optimal location.

        Comment


        • #5
          Damn, I thought you couldn't found cities on desert squares That makes some of my city locations rather stupid.

          Comment


          • #6
            Next to the river.
            -- What history has taught us is that people do not learn from history.
            -- Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree, founding on the desert means that you save a better square for later and building on.
              However I can see why the computer suggested that spot, it does still allow you to use the sheep (i think from the screen shot). But I wouldnt found there though because of the over lap between cities.

              Comment


              • #8
                I did the maths and in terms of raw food, 1 health = 1 food (I needed maths to figure that out? Next up: 2 = 2)

                A desert city + worked farmed floodplains gives a total of 7 food.
                A city on floodplains + dead desert gives a total of 2 food, the 2 health can be considered 2 food, so it's 4 food.

                Even if the city will never grow big, the 5 food from floodplains is still much more impressive than the 2 food the city would get. (and 5 food > 2 food + 2 health)

                I've found the most compelling reason to found cities on rivers is that they can be used as trade routes (great fun on great plains), but this becomes very moot for coastal cities (and for short nowhere rivers).

                I havn't quite worked out the logic of the blue circles, they do tend to favor next to rivers (mostly correctely, for the trade routes), and they account for resources in the radius, but don't account for overlap. I actually often find myself founding cities next to a blue circle, the logic seems to work pretty well, it just doesn't get it quite right.

                PS. Naturally I founded the city long before responses from this thread, I thought it might be educational to get other peoples perspectives.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I probably would have founded it where the ai suggested.

                  I dont think that either of your cities will grow big enough that the overlap will matter. Founding next to the river gives you the +2 health, but there are other flood plains for you to work until you can build a lighthouse to get the food from the ocean.

                  Since the culture will expand in one turn, you will be able to get the sheep.

                  Also, founding one tile to the north, gives you the ability to place another city to the south, maximizing the tiles that you can work in your area.
                  Early to rise, Early to bed.
                  Makes you healthy and socially dead.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'd have probably founded on the tile north of the horses that the AI sugested, even with plenty of horses in my empire already.
                    1st C3DG Term 7 Science Advisor 1st C3DG Term 8 Domestic Minister
                    Templar Science Minister
                    AI: I sure wish Jon would hurry up and complete his turn, he's been at it for over 1,200,000 milliseconds now.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I agree with the explorer, and to add alittle, the city on the desert tile will allow you to chop the tree NE of the bend in the river unless you plan on it being in another city radius. Most likely it wont be so no worries chopping it down.

                      You also get two grassland/forest tiles. And two additional Coastal tiles to work.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X