First Settler on Monarch

[wertyu70]

After a month of Monarch games, now I have just reach the level that if I can manage to survive up to Middle Age then I will win but about 50% of the times I'm defeated by an aggressive AI (Toku, Shaka or Mongol leaders) in the early game.
I'm still learning how many soldiers I need to stand their DOW and I miss a lot about diplomacy and I'm confident I'm improving.
But, reading some DARs and AARs, I feel I'm doing something wrong in the early game.

Before posting one of my game, I'd like to check with you some of my early moves,
maybe I can correct some big mistakes.

The first question is about the first settler.

Usually my build order is:

Worker, Warrior, Warrior, Settler

I wait the city to reach size 4 before starting the Settler,
sometime I delay it building barracks for some turns.

In the meantime I research worker techs and by the time I'm building the Settler
I have already got BW -> Slavery, so I can whip 2 citizen to get the settler.

Is this a mistake?
I read of many people starting to build the settler as soon as they reach size 3.

[Ming]

I think it's all a matter of opinion. In SP games, my first build is usually a worker or work boat depending on what techs I start with and what my land looks like (usually a worker) I then build a warrior. If I started with with a warrior, I will then start building a settler planning on having my searcher warrior meet up with the settler for my second city. If I started with a scout, I will build the second warrior and have it start moving out to the location I want for the second city. The size of the city seldom makes a difference. The way it works, I'm usually building the settler with a size 2 or 3 size city... and if I have Bronze, will whip it when I can. Now, if I'm a turn or two away from increasing pop, I might delay by building something else before starting the settler, but I don't say to myself, my city must be size 3 or 4 before I start building a settler. Many times, it's size 2.

[trev]

Almost never will I build a settler before my city is around size 5. generally I build worker first and learn food producing techs, followed by hammer producing techs. By the time I build a settler I usually have built a barracks and 3-4 armies or a wonder depending on how good my hammer supply is and acess to stone etc. Building a settler with city size 5 working mostly improved squares halves the build time for the settler. Chopping may help speed it, rarely do I whip for it, I like my cities big enough that I can build units quick enough in a crisis, often I run a little short on units initially but structure my cities so I can get more quickly if needed. MP games units are a higher priority.

[Ming]

MP games units are a higher priority.

NO ****

[Dinner]

I play a lot of MP so usually I'll build a warrior to defend my capital then a worker then a settler though that will depend on which techs I have. Since if I don't have a useful tech for the worker (no roads, chopping, or agriculture) I may build something else (another warrior or something).

[Dinner]

NO ****

I played against a guy who didn't know that tonight. He is a poster on another board but didn't attack me even though I was stuck on a tiny peninsula, I didn't have bronze, I didn't have iron, and I didn't have horses. He waited until I had long bows to attack and even then he only did it with axemen and he didn't have iron working yet.

I ended up killing his civ with long bows and cats. God I love newbs.

[rah]

The biggest error of new MP players. Not building units because they don't expect anyone to attack in the first 100 turns.

[Ming]

While Trev brings a good point of view to the table, and one that makes sense... my biggest concern waiting that long is the possible loss of critical strategic resources or great city locations to the AI... which cranks out settlers very early. There have just been so many times where there is a key city location between my civ and another, and I barely get the settler there in advance of the AI. I fear that if I waited for the city to grow that larrge, I would have missed the spot. But I do whip and chop the first settler, and then let the city grow back. At lower sizes, the city grows back quickly and then I have another city already.

[Blaupanzer]

First two cities post capitol are usually strategic resource coverers, then at least 1 and hopefully 2 for hot locations (good resources or good tactical location or both. First settlers are the goals of the first three cities in reasonable speed based on defenses, neighbor identification, and neighbor proximity.

SO I start SP games with a general pattern :warrior, worker, warrior, warrior, settler, warrior, barracks, warrior. I vary that depending on the worker techs known by the civ (i.e., if the Wheel is known go worker first OR if start with mysticism and a 2nd gold tile go for a religion and possibly move the worker back a step. Also, insert Wonders and better units if needed and available. Note that city size means nothing to that rubric, and both chopping and whipping will be dependent on what is available and when versus happiness/health issues near and long-term.

[Ming]

A question... Why in SP games do you build so many warriors so early? I can understand the warrior, worker, warrior routine (especially if you start with a scout) but then the extra warror before a settler, than yet another warrior, barracks and another warrior? That seems like a big delay for the second settler... especially if you are trying to cover resources before the AI gets to them.

Not disagreeing, just asking.

[Blaupanzer]

Two warriors go with the settler, 1 rides each worker, no city is ever empty, and I use raging barbarians, symbolizing all the would-have-been-great civs we never heard of because the nomads ate them.

[Sarco]

I might be doing it wrong, but my first build is usually settler in sp (monarch).

If I can research BW right away, I go for worker first in order to chop settler, and I might go for work boat if I have the opportunity.

I don't play raging barbs. My reasoning is simply that I want to get more cities faster and grab land. I'm just going on feeling though, no real calculated strategy. Am I dead wrong?

[Blaupanzer]

I might be doing it wrong, but my first build is usually settler in sp (monarch).

I don't play raging barbs. My reasoning is simply that I want to get more cities faster and grab land. I'm just going on feeling though, no real calculated strategy. Am I dead wrong?

All methods that work are correct. SP is YOUR game. The idea is for you to enjoy it. I might try your method tonight.

[rah]

In SP, no problem. In MP, you'd better not start to close to someone. I've eliminated quite a few civs in MP during the first 20 turns when there capital was building a worker or settler

[Sarco]

In SP, no problem. In MP, you'd better not start to close to someone. I've eliminated quite a few civs in MP during the first 20 turns when there capital was building a worker or settler

Yes, MP is a quite different game of course.