While I usually agree with the popular consensus that building a settler straight out of the gate is a BAD idea, I'm currently playing a game (on Monarch, a challenge for me) that proves that the situation can dictate otherwise.
My strategy, from the get go, was to try for a cultural victory, or, failing that, space race. To pull this off, I play as Louis XIV, with industrious to build wonders and creative to boost culture (2 per city * about 600 turns is only 1200, not much, but there aren't any philosophical and industrious civs.) My strategy is to rush for masonry, to start building pyramids while waiting for my first city to hit size 3 to build a worker, then a settler (Louis starts with agriculture and the wheel, so the worker first is a must if I have corn, rice, or wheat nearby.) Pyramids in turn give me a great engineer after a few turns, which I can trade in for the Parthenon (great artists are a must for cultural victory) or Great Library to help keep on top in tech.
However, this particular game, my first warrior ran into Montezuma not to far off. And between his city and mine, in the untamed wilds, horses and stone next to each other! Stone guarantees pyramids with an industrious civ, even if you wait awhile to start building them, so that's big. Horses are even bigger. allowing an early military push. So I started work on a settler and founded Orleans (the second French city) on the stone and horses. I rearranged my tech goals to get horseback riding, then alphabet. Trading horseback riding to the mongols for Fishing, Hunting, and Mining, researching archery, and my two cities build barracks and start cranking out horse archers. Now, I smash into montezuma and take all but two of his cities (in civ3 on monarch, there would be no WAY to wage a war with only two cities against an opponent with something like 6 or 7.) So, the whole game, I only built one settler, right off the bat, and now it's 1600, I have three cities above 15 000 culture, another 6 or 7 for infrastructure, and about half the game's wonders so far.
Endgame is where I suck, so I'm not sure I'll win, but this shows that, given starting resources, it can be worthwhile to build a settler first.
Speaking of endgame, let me know what you think of my strategy for the future: I have a great engineer sitting around, so I'm going to rush for democracy and build the statue of liberty (copper, industrious, and an engineer should do it), that's a free specialist in every city (and, thanks to sistine chapel, +2 culture all around.)
Next, beeline to electricity to get the three modern culture-beast wonders: broadway, rock and roll, and hollywood, in each of my three culture cities. On monarch, I may not get all three, but the great artists that they generate should compensate in the losing city. Broadcast towers ASAP, then max out culture rate, set the cities to produce culture, and turtle till the end.
My strategy, from the get go, was to try for a cultural victory, or, failing that, space race. To pull this off, I play as Louis XIV, with industrious to build wonders and creative to boost culture (2 per city * about 600 turns is only 1200, not much, but there aren't any philosophical and industrious civs.) My strategy is to rush for masonry, to start building pyramids while waiting for my first city to hit size 3 to build a worker, then a settler (Louis starts with agriculture and the wheel, so the worker first is a must if I have corn, rice, or wheat nearby.) Pyramids in turn give me a great engineer after a few turns, which I can trade in for the Parthenon (great artists are a must for cultural victory) or Great Library to help keep on top in tech.
However, this particular game, my first warrior ran into Montezuma not to far off. And between his city and mine, in the untamed wilds, horses and stone next to each other! Stone guarantees pyramids with an industrious civ, even if you wait awhile to start building them, so that's big. Horses are even bigger. allowing an early military push. So I started work on a settler and founded Orleans (the second French city) on the stone and horses. I rearranged my tech goals to get horseback riding, then alphabet. Trading horseback riding to the mongols for Fishing, Hunting, and Mining, researching archery, and my two cities build barracks and start cranking out horse archers. Now, I smash into montezuma and take all but two of his cities (in civ3 on monarch, there would be no WAY to wage a war with only two cities against an opponent with something like 6 or 7.) So, the whole game, I only built one settler, right off the bat, and now it's 1600, I have three cities above 15 000 culture, another 6 or 7 for infrastructure, and about half the game's wonders so far.
Endgame is where I suck, so I'm not sure I'll win, but this shows that, given starting resources, it can be worthwhile to build a settler first.
Speaking of endgame, let me know what you think of my strategy for the future: I have a great engineer sitting around, so I'm going to rush for democracy and build the statue of liberty (copper, industrious, and an engineer should do it), that's a free specialist in every city (and, thanks to sistine chapel, +2 culture all around.)
Next, beeline to electricity to get the three modern culture-beast wonders: broadway, rock and roll, and hollywood, in each of my three culture cities. On monarch, I may not get all three, but the great artists that they generate should compensate in the losing city. Broadcast towers ASAP, then max out culture rate, set the cities to produce culture, and turtle till the end.
Comment