Bad location starts

[Campo]

Playing at the higher levels, what do you do if you get bad starting locations?

I play small maps (because of the time it takes on bigger ones). If I start out on one of the poles then I just restart. However sometimes I get a non-pole land area that doesn't have good city locations -- few rivers, or small island, or no 3-or-4 special site for a science city.

What do other people do with that kind of start? Do you continue on or restart? If you don't have a good science city location, do you just not have a science city (and skip those wonders)?

[Smash]

wander till you find better land.At least 1 whale anyhow

[Ming]

Ditto...
But if it looks really bad, I'll just go the ICS route hoping my newly built settlers can find someplace better.

[Steve Clark]

Any coastal city near a river is a good, not great, place for a science city. Whales or Gold will just make it easier.

[Ming]

quote: Originally posted by Steve Clark on 04-12-2000 03:02 PM Whales or Gold will just make it easier.

No kidding... I thought we were discussing BAD starting locations.

[Bohlen]

If I get a location I don't like, I just keep playing. Sure, you ideally want your SSC on a river with some specials, but on the coast isn't bad at all. I like the challenge of a bad starting location. Also, I think that the AI civs are usually in the same boat if what you have to build on is sand and swamp.

Also, I think a starting position near one of the poles is awesome. This may not be as true for small map games, but opening trade routes to cities near the other pole can be very lucrative. It also allows you to be an isolationist if you want.

[Steve Clark]

Missed my point Ming. Campo was looking for a very wet spot with 3-4 specials. A coastal city with 0-1 specials would be good enough.

[Campo]

Yeah, I do want 3 specials for my science city. I have trouble generating as much science as I see other people report here. Part of my problem is growing the city too slowly in the early game.

Recently I got a couple starts on the poles, with no land bridge to a real continent. After circling the pole I just gave up and restarted.

[Ming]

If you are going to play just against the AI, the best way to avoid terrible starting positions is to take the Romans. If you don't like playing the Romans, you can always customize the tribe...

It seems the computer has a GENERAL tendency to lay the civs on the map in order, providing the best locations for the "white" civ, and the "lesser" locations to the later civs. It doesn't always do this, but it seems to most of the time. Usually, when I get a bad starting location, it's usually because I'm playing on a small to mid size map, and have selected the last civ in the rotation.
So maybe there is indeed another advantage to playing the white civ

And Campo... I agree. If I start on the arctic in a game against the AI, and there is no land bridge... I would restart too...
Unless that was the challange I was trying to play

[The Mad Viking]

I'm playing an Emp level game now, and despite a large map I started on a rather stingy island. My science city has 3 river tiles and about 6 ocean (1 whale) with all the land tiles grassland. There was room for 3 decent city locations, plus 2 infill on worse sites with overlapping radii, and 1 more on a promontory. There is 1 unused tile left on the island. The island had not one hill, no mountains, and only 6 forest tiles. I have found it rather challenging, most of the surrounding islands lacked rivers, hills and mountains too...

But I'm enjoying the challenge!

[geofelt]

If you are looking for a challenge, or at least a change of pace, then by all means, finish out your bad location starts. You will become a better player. I agree with Ming that bad locations come from small maps and purple civs.
Even with no land bridge, an arctic start is playable. Find a location with a whale special if possible, in range of a tundra(not arctic) square. Research map making first and build a trireme to get off. You will be behind, but you can still win.
Perhaps we should try an arctic start comparison game.

[Campo]

Considering that I just won my first honest game at Emperor, I can't afford to be too challenged or I won't have a chance to win. I'd like to get a few solid victories under my belt before I make it any more difficult.

[axi]

I played on Deity, Raging Hordes, 7 civs, small map, as the Greeks once and I won with a score of 346%, by spaceship, but after having conquered all civs (I was aiming for score). I did exactly as prescribed (Map - making - trireme), but I never changed my capital (so the main problem of mine, before I went republican was the devastating corruption). I actually built 2 cities on the pole (I had 2 settlers because of deity). The Romans had definitely the best spot in the game and went so big that they were the last to be conquered.

My first savegame though is in the year 2050BC, when my first trireme has just found the first land and my warriors are contemplating of landing on a hut.


------------------
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell

[Viktor Maximus]

Restart the game

[The Mad Monk]

I take a cue from poker: when you got a bad hand, fold and wait for the next deal.