Cottages on rivers?

[gdgrimm]

If you've put that cottage on gems on a river bank then it's really quite annoying cause you have to work it all out.

Oh, you poor thing. That sounds so horrible. Gems and cottages on a river. Life must be really painful.

[Shr3dZ]

If you have a floodplain and a grassland on a river, on paper there is no difference which one gets the cottage and which one gets the farm (the total is the same). The only difference is when youre not working them both, when you have to suffle around yer citizens and you end up not working one of them you can choose when you get more food - ie:

a
working the farmed floodplain = 4 food 1 commerce
working a cottaged grassland = 2 food 7 commerce

or the opposite

b
working a cottaged floodplain = 3 food 7 commerce
working a farmed grassland = 3 food 1 commerce

with 'a' you have more flexible terrain, more food or less food, with 'b' you have a more balanced terrian, but if you need to remove 1 food off your total to get your city stagnent you wouldnt be able to.

of course youd need to know what the city was lacking or has too much of (the surrounding tiles) in order to decide which is better for the city. most of the time cottaging them both is my perfered methodology.

[couerdelion]

The flexibility is nice but I suspect it has limited uses

Happy caps do indeed jump around a little unless you have gone for the Monarchy-style military entertainment when your military can be built up to balance the needs of a growing population.

That said, if I have farmed a river plain it's probably because I need a little more food to support a high production/commerce special tile. If I've also got a flood plain then there is every chance that I already have a cottage on that one.

The net effect of working both tiles one farm and one cottage on a floodplain and grassland river are the same regardless of which is built where

The arguments for flexibility only make sense if you find you have surplus worker resources. It would imply that you are developing tiles that you are not generally using. If I have reached a happy cap and suddenly discover the rest of the world with their spices and fur then my capital with its market place will see four more happy citizen. It is possible that I have not been working one of those tiles during the period when I have reached my cap. Once the cap is raised, I simply work both of them and so there is not advantage gained from having the farmland on the floodplain.

But the cost of the extra flexibility is more work for your workers since you spend an extra turn to build the more expensive improvement on the more difficult building tile. I remain unconvinced that the benefit justifies the cost.

[fed1943]

IMHO,Shr3dZ put the data in the correct way,so that a decision can be taken upon.The problem boils down when one can work one of the tiles,but not both.And why?Probably,lack of people (here,cottaged floodplain is better)or health cap (nothing wrong to floodplain,since it gives 1 surplus food)or happy cap (here,I'm not so sure;but,if create a SP is not possible,then the game is probably at the begining,so there is good hope of geting happy resources).So,until something new,I remain with cottaged floodplains.Please,show me I'm wrong,if I am.
Best regards,

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Shr3dZ
If you have a floodplain and a grassland on a river, on paper there is no difference which one gets the cottage and which one gets the farm (the total is the same). The only difference is when youre not working them both, when you have to suffle around yer citizens and you end up not working one of them you can choose when you get more food - ie:

a
working the farmed floodplain = 4 food 1 commerce
working a cottaged grassland = 2 food 7 commerce

or the opposite

b
working a cottaged floodplain = 3 food 7 commerce
working a farmed grassland = 3 food 1 commerce

with 'a' you have more flexible terrain, more food or less food, with 'b' you have a more balanced terrian, but if you need to remove 1 food off your total to get your city stagnent you wouldnt be able to.

of course youd need to know what the city was lacking or has too much of (the surrounding tiles) in order to decide which is better for the city. most of the time cottaging them both is my perfered methodology.

I agree that if you have both its equal either way you do it. I was just saying I would rather build cottages on floodplains than farms. In another words, I prefer 3 food 7 commerce to 4 food 1 commerce.

[Willem]

Originally posted by tetley
Do you ever find yourselves tearing down villages in later ages to support more pop/specialists? I guess I'm still in the Civ3 mindset where pop for settlers & hammers were everything, and tech broker your butt off for gold.

In Civ4, gold is everything so you tend to hang on to whatever is generating it. Planning is essential when it comes to Cottages, you don't want to have to tear down something that's taken so many turns to build up. So look for locations that you know you aren't going to need for food later, or even for an irrigation alley once you get Civil Service.

[unamablebuiler]

it is identical iff you aren't FIN try it and see i used 2 pairs of squares to compare the river bonus buling the cottage on the river brings the bonus earlier if you are FIN and you gain about 20 to 50 commerce depending on speed. However it is a one time bonus as far as i am aware to get the ability to irrigate away fom rivers lakes until you get biology you need to conect farms, no feeder no irrigation. Before CS i irrigate half and the other half is cottages if i am FIN so that i can irrigate everything else too. if i am not FIN then i irrigate for extra food along the river and cottage the drier areas.
i also aim for 4-5 towns per city excep for coastal then it depends on the ammout of water i have in city radius.

[joncnunn]

There's a new tool to growth management in Civ IV.
The avoid growth button; elimiates the need for +1/-1 food micromangement yo-yo.
It will store that +1 until the basket is full, but not grow until you turn the switch off.