the city on the hill

[borgbart]

hills give a defensive bonus to units fortified on them... does this still apply to units garrisoned in cities built on hills? are there any other pros/cons to building on hills?

[bongo]

Towns/cities/metros get the defence bonus of the underlying terrain.

Only cons of building on a hill is that you don't get to build a mine there.

[Plotinus]

The other bonus of building on a hill is that the tile on which a city is built always gives at least two food, irrespective of type. So if the area you're settling is short on food-rich squares, build on the hill for a little bonus. The combination of this and the defence bonus means that I generally build on a hill for preference, where possible.

[borgbart]

wow, thanks. that's odd that in civ3 the city square is the same (production-wise) regardless of underlying terrain, if remember correctly it wasn't so in civ, col or civ2.

[Last Conformist]

It's not strictly independent of the underlaying terrain, except for food.

I don't have the details in my head, but I believe it's the max of one and the base yield of the terrain (incl resource bonuses) for shields and trade, plus size bonuses for Ind and Com.

And of course there's the Agr food bonus.

[:) Smiley]

There is also the visibility bonus for being on a hill.

[Dr. A. Cula]

No, there isn't. You get the same visibility even for cities in plains. The borders give this.