Design a starting strategy for 2x production

[EdwardTKing]

1. In single production the order of importance is:

Food > Production > Trade

but in multi-player it is:

Production > Food = Trade

2. I press the F11 key. If others have more population, land
area, wealth; it does not worry me; but if one opponent
consistently has more production I know that I am
ultimately doomed!

3. Tabulating city starting squares:

Single Production Double Production

Grassland (Shield) Excellent Good
Grassland (Without) Excellent Poor

Plains Good Poor
Buffalo Good Great
Wheat Great Good

Forest Bad Good
Pheasant Poor Great
Silk Poor Excellent

Hills Adequate Poor
Coal Good Poor
Wine Great Excellent

Excellent > Great > Good > Adequate > Poor > Bad

This could be extended for Peat, Glacier, Gold etc etc.

Arguments welcome!

[SlowwHand]

Factors like food are not nearly as critical in 2x.
City site selection therefore, also not as critical.
Building Pyramids in 2x is a waste of resources.

Just opinions.

[Caesar the Great]

most of all 2x allows for more city specialization than in 1x, in 1x you have to worry about food, which can prevent you from switching to trade or production squares, in 2x food is very rarely a problem and so you can have a size 3 city working on 3 forests or 3 ocean squares....

although i'm sure all the vets here already know everything in this thread.....

i'd like to agree caravans become much more important, especially trade routes between two of your own high trade cities, many people in MP don't welcome trade routes very openly..... so between two high trade cities they could give a real nice boost to the trade, connect them with roads and even more.....

[rah]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Factors like food are not nearly as critical in 2x.
City site selection therefore, also not as critical.
Building Pyramids in 2x is a waste of resources.

Just opinions.

On the contrary, in MP games, which only have a tendency to go one session, the pyramids provides a big boast to the power graph due to the extra population that it will help you develop. And since a lot of people judge how they did on what the PG looks like, it can be satisfying building it. Those cities built on gold/iron, get to three people a heck of a lot quicker. And once those start celebrating, look out.


Rah

[War4ever]

Originally posted by rah


On the contrary, in MP games, which only have a tendency to go one session, the pyramids provides a big boast to the power graph due to the extra population that it will help you develop. And since a lot of people judge how they did on what the PG looks like, it can be satisfying building it. Those cities built on gold/iron, get to three people a heck of a lot quicker. And once those start celebrating, look out.


Rah

Good point Rah..... however in games that go longer than one session the pyramids are a great addition. I know everyone WLT*D for growth but after that you often have a couple of civs whom are close on the graph. The pyramids can speed your growth or allow you to make a comeback.

Best early combo is HG and pyramids...... now i know that many will state other combos and they are right. But for early expansion and for the cost of Mikes or Leos..... i can have both of these and they will service me better in the early game.

I love the pyramids and i notice not too many people will build it...well thats starting to change

However depending on the situation , you may want different wonders

[rah]

Yes, it does seem to be changing a bit. Before pyramids was usually built by the person that missed out on all the other wonders. And when it was built, the person would say "I had to build something". But in the last few months, I've seen it built a lot earlier and when there is still a choice. And war4 is absolutely correct about it in the multiple session games. The person that missed on the happiness wonders and is using communism can be greatly helped by the pyramids. (if he got it of course)

RAH