Tweet
Founding a city on Turn 1 - Mandatory?
I have been following vel's strat thread, and am very interested in the discussion of the dynamics of the start of the game. One thing I didn't see specifically discussed there was a discussion of how important the selection of your starting city site is and if it is ever worth it to delay the founding of your city past turn 1 in order to find a more strategic position.
I have been experimenting with this concept with mixed results and wanted to engage the more experienced civvers here in a discussion on the subject.
My thoughts (and assumptions) so far:
1. The game starts out by giving you limited information on turn 1 about potential city sites due to the fog of war.
2. The map seeder seems to generally place you in a position where you can access 2 or more resources with a city founded in turn 1. This results in a city which can produce a settler in 25 turns or a worker in 15 (one resource with 3 yield and an average starting square 3 yied for a net of 4ty at a pop 1)
3. The user interface recommends city locations for settlers (blue circle) and appears to include awareness of resources covered by the fog of war when recommending these locations, which is something a player can use to their advantage when choosing which direction to scout with their warrior/scout.
4. The recommendations by the ui as to city placement do not appear to take into consideration other resources in the area outside the potential city's borders that may be marginalized by a city placed on the recommended tile (ie making three other resources essentially unusable due to lack of usable tile/overlap with the initial city - this seems to happen alot along coastlines and tundra areas).
5. Founding your capitol on a hills/plains square is a major advantage in the early game. A hills/plains start with one 3ty square (always avail for practical purposes) produces a settler in 20 turns rather than 25 or a worker in 12 turns vs 15. I will glady select a hills/plains square at the cost of a luxury resource in my workable borders early on, as I can still get the
from the tile if its in my borders and luxuries generally aren't necessary or helpful until after the "opening" (first 50-75 turns).
6. The opportunity costs of delaying founding your city are as follows - 1 turn of lost production and 1 turn of lost research
Thesis/Question to fellow addicts: Can it beneficial to delay founding your capitol on turn 1 in order to better scout the surrounding area so that you can have more information to base your capitol placement decision and find a better starting spot?
My personal belief and what I am testing (on Prince btw) is using my settler and warrior/scout to scout on turns 1-3 looking for a hills/plains location with at least 1 food resource and 3 or fewer unproductive tiles (tundra, desert, mountains) or a spot with 4 or more total resources and access to either fresh water and/or a coastline. If I don't find a hills/plains square after exploring on turn 1, I found my capitol in the best location I can on turn 2, if I do find a hill/plains square I will take another turn to try and clear the fow around it or just found it if the needed resources are avial.
Cost/benefit: Essentially you are giving up 1-3 turns of research in hopes of starting on a hill/plain square (which gains you a 5 turn advantage over the average starting position in producing a settler or a 3 turn advantage for a worker) or gathering information that will allow you to more efficiently place your early cities and better utilize the available land. The advantage of prodicing 2 shields in your capitol is even bigger for building military meaning you can build a warrior in 8 turns out of the box as opposed to 15 while still maintaingin growth by using a 3 food square. The research losss will mean you wont get buddhism and will be behind the ai from the get go. The problem I'm having is quantifying the impact of 1-3 turns of research early on in the game. Research gains and losses early on don't appear to be magnified exponentially as time goes on, which a delay in expanding your productive capacity is.
ps - I primarily am interested in this from the sp perspective but also think it is relevant for MP strategy as well. Look for my Death From Above(TM) hilltop rush strat coming soon
pps - Hi Vel, you probably won't remember me but Im the lawyer who you had discussions with on and off right when civ III came out regarding both strategy and the issue of infogames granting "exclusive" rights to Brady Games (I think it was Brady) to publish a strat guide for civ III.
I have been experimenting with this concept with mixed results and wanted to engage the more experienced civvers here in a discussion on the subject.
My thoughts (and assumptions) so far:
1. The game starts out by giving you limited information on turn 1 about potential city sites due to the fog of war.
2. The map seeder seems to generally place you in a position where you can access 2 or more resources with a city founded in turn 1. This results in a city which can produce a settler in 25 turns or a worker in 15 (one resource with 3 yield and an average starting square 3 yied for a net of 4ty at a pop 1)
3. The user interface recommends city locations for settlers (blue circle) and appears to include awareness of resources covered by the fog of war when recommending these locations, which is something a player can use to their advantage when choosing which direction to scout with their warrior/scout.
4. The recommendations by the ui as to city placement do not appear to take into consideration other resources in the area outside the potential city's borders that may be marginalized by a city placed on the recommended tile (ie making three other resources essentially unusable due to lack of usable tile/overlap with the initial city - this seems to happen alot along coastlines and tundra areas).
5. Founding your capitol on a hills/plains square is a major advantage in the early game. A hills/plains start with one 3ty square (always avail for practical purposes) produces a settler in 20 turns rather than 25 or a worker in 12 turns vs 15. I will glady select a hills/plains square at the cost of a luxury resource in my workable borders early on, as I can still get the
from the tile if its in my borders and luxuries generally aren't necessary or helpful until after the "opening" (first 50-75 turns).6. The opportunity costs of delaying founding your city are as follows - 1 turn of lost production and 1 turn of lost research
Thesis/Question to fellow addicts: Can it beneficial to delay founding your capitol on turn 1 in order to better scout the surrounding area so that you can have more information to base your capitol placement decision and find a better starting spot?
My personal belief and what I am testing (on Prince btw) is using my settler and warrior/scout to scout on turns 1-3 looking for a hills/plains location with at least 1 food resource and 3 or fewer unproductive tiles (tundra, desert, mountains) or a spot with 4 or more total resources and access to either fresh water and/or a coastline. If I don't find a hills/plains square after exploring on turn 1, I found my capitol in the best location I can on turn 2, if I do find a hill/plains square I will take another turn to try and clear the fow around it or just found it if the needed resources are avial.
Cost/benefit: Essentially you are giving up 1-3 turns of research in hopes of starting on a hill/plain square (which gains you a 5 turn advantage over the average starting position in producing a settler or a 3 turn advantage for a worker) or gathering information that will allow you to more efficiently place your early cities and better utilize the available land. The advantage of prodicing 2 shields in your capitol is even bigger for building military meaning you can build a warrior in 8 turns out of the box as opposed to 15 while still maintaingin growth by using a 3 food square. The research losss will mean you wont get buddhism and will be behind the ai from the get go. The problem I'm having is quantifying the impact of 1-3 turns of research early on in the game. Research gains and losses early on don't appear to be magnified exponentially as time goes on, which a delay in expanding your productive capacity is.
ps - I primarily am interested in this from the sp perspective but also think it is relevant for MP strategy as well. Look for my Death From Above(TM) hilltop rush strat coming soon
pps - Hi Vel, you probably won't remember me but Im the lawyer who you had discussions with on and off right when civ III came out regarding both strategy and the issue of infogames granting "exclusive" rights to Brady Games (I think it was Brady) to publish a strat guide for civ III.
I remember ya!
No problem!
Comment