With what unit do you like to explore, initially?

[Scouse Gits]

tonic - If we were that worried about corruption in the early game, we wouldn't ever build many cities.

Those far away places have to be well fortified - but that is not a hard task. Once this is achieved, if there is room, I start a secondary sleaze in the colonies! I prefer two power bases to one.
------------
SG (2)

[tonic]

SG(2): But what about the severe corruption losses of production, trade and science if you are in anything other than governments available later (democracy, communism and fundamentalism)? And how vulnerable your faraway isolated outpost is to attack.

[Scouse Gits]

EST – I beg to differ about advanced tribes!

Those far off outposts of empire can be very useful, whether they are on the home continent or not. An extra city can only boost your research – and you gain another production centre. The advanced tribes discovered miles away from home could become vital later in the game, as a staging post for military strikes on new territory. I often re-name them Cuba, to remind me of an evil plan!
----------------
SG (2)

[East Street Trader]

Bad players, Ming? You mean like folk who voluntarily found in a locality with no, or little trade, perhaps?

I have not played MP but suspect that small maps may be commoner than big. If I'm right that is going to be the factor (IMHO) which undermines this sort of approach rather than its merits or de-merits when playing on large maps. On a large map I intuit that there will still be some sort of shot at catching up. You'd have to be pretty unlucky not at least to get some good choke points. Would that not help?

I accept the margin will be different. If my human opponent is size three in his capital when I found I agree I'm toast. Even in his poor location, the human opponent will at least make the best of a bad job in choosing his city square and will not butcher his land development. He will have placed his second city sensibly too and will be exploring, or will have found, sites for cities which do have decent trade. Now I need a big slice of luck (like FINDING him and having some hut legions/chariots handy ha, ha, ha) to have any chance.

But I might take the advantages of the delayed start which you eloquently describe against letting my human opponent get to size 2 before I go to work.

[Ming]

I agree DaveV...
I never use just one strategy. My strategy is totally dependent on the situation. And against the AI, just about any solid strategy will work

The goody hut strategy is great against the AI... but not against humans. Because you can get away with wandering for 10 turns against the AI... If you can get away with it against humans, they aren't very good players

[DaveV]

Ming - just because you can get away with something against the AI doesn't make it a good strategy (someone told me that once ). The fact that you're not recommending wandering for a long time in MP says something.

There's a fine balance here between spending too many turns searching, and building your capital in a bad spot. I hate it when I build my capital one square out of range of a whale; on the other hand, I hate it even more when I'm ten turns into the game with no cities built.

[Ming]

DaveV...
Against the computer (not human opponents) delaying starting your first city may actually put you ahead of the game. If your starting location doesn't have much trade, dropping a city right away could hurt you.
(Yes, I'm sure the ICS'ers will comment on this one)

If there is no or limited trade available, your capital and second city may be generating so few beakers at first, that each science will take forever to get.
By spending some time looking for a location that has some trade specials, and looking for huts, you can get off to a faster start.
As we all know, tipping a hut before your first city only provides good things... non units, money, or sciences (maybe a science you don't want early) Some claim that eventually, you might get a city, but I've never wandered that long...

This strategy can get you out on the board much faster, assuming there are some huts nearby, and you get a unit for one or two of them.

I usually can have some money in the bank, a few non units way out ahead scouting, and have a capital producing three to four times the science beakers that an average starting location gets you. And sometimes, a science or two too.

The AI always gets off to a slow start, so you really aren't falling behind... you will catch and surpass them quickly.

BUT, as I said, I don't recommend this in an MP game. However, I will still take a turn or two to see if there are any trade specials or huts nearby in an MP game. But, I won't wait too many turns or I will fall behind big time against humans.

[DaveV]

Why is everyone so worried about finding supported units in a hut? I want to have four cities as quickly as possible; each city can support a garrison unit and a scout. If either of those units comes from a hut, so much the better. During those turns when you're wandering like the Ancient Mariner, you could instead be generating trade arrows, and researching techs on the path to Monarchy.

Horse of course.

[East Street Trader]

SG(2)

1. The cities are distant from your capital and have productivity/happiness problems to be managed. Treasury won't be up to quick fix solutions. Exploration phase can get bogged down by having to divert units to martial law/defence purposes.

2. The untipped huts in the pattern which are near the advanced tribe city won't yield NON units (IMO it is hard to over-estimate the value of those early NON units. They boost city productivity in the critical early days but their freedom is still a great boon in early democracy and beyond).

3. Because your cities now develop in separated clusters you don't get to have internal communications which makes defense in the early middle game quite a lot more taxing.

4. But worst - this is subjective but I'm pretty sure about it - your research seems to slow.
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited June 16, 2000).]

[Scouse Gits]

EST - Why are Advanced Tribes a problem?
-------------
SG (2)

[East Street Trader]

Hawkx9

I am another of the delay founding brigade. IME it pays to hold your nerve. I often look in the 5 top cities screen after founding and am not too dismayed to see the A1 civ capitals are at size 3. You will (usually) still get your early wonder of choice and your better land development/use of crutches will soon catch you up in population.

I suspect that this tactic may only work - or work best - on large maps. One of the main points is that your hut units get well away from your capital and then any new unit is a Non. Once you found, delay tipping any still untipped huts too near your cities (maybe even until they are inside a new city's radius).

You also make early contact with the civs on your continent and get to occupy strategic points. And as the exploration phase ends you have units to send back for martial law purposes.

Incidentally, if the first hut is a unit, IME the next one is too; if the first hut is a tech the next one is too, etc. In fact if the first is a four footer the next one is likely to be the same (but that's less dependable).

The downside is bad tech slowing you up in getting to monarchy. (But then the early contact might solve that from good tech trades.)

Oddly enough advanced tribes can be quite a problem too.

Try it (on a large map). I think you'll like it.

Ming - tried to stay unburned by advancing my diplos one square at a time - turned out I don't have the patience - so I'm back to saying what I usually say which is *!#> ^*}<.

East Street Trader

PS And before you found you don't get barbs - but I expect you know that.
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited June 15, 2000).]

[Ming]

Hawkx9... It really depends on what I find.
Against the AI, I really don't feel a compelling need to lay a city down until about 3200 BC. If I get a few non units, and find two solid city locations, I'll stop my wandering much earlier.

Knowing where one hut is helps a little... then you start guessing. I will pick the direction that I'm most interested in, and follow the pattern. If nothing is there, I will check where my other units are to see if somebody can easily check in the other directions. Once you know two full four patterns, you know where they all are... assuming no ocean

[Smash]

for 1x deity vs AI
settlers usually wander abit and hopefully NON units are found then it is easy.IF NO units are found I do this:

2 cities.

Cities build warriors which are sent out.Most likely will find some kind of unit.Archers or legions are sent home.Horses and chariots keep exploring while warrior circles towards home.

2nd warrior in each city can be finished before size 2.If I find a gold hut I rush them and send them in other direction for short excursion.If not,they fortify and either 1 starts wonder(if wonder tech) 1 starts settler.No wonder tech, then both start settlers.

1 unit returns to each city just before size 3.
or
Settler(s) are finished before size 3.

If hut units are supported then instead of 2nd warrior I switch to a settler and move supported units towards home.Again,if gold huts are found then settler(s) can be built on or before the same turn as cities reach size 3.

If 1 city started a wonder then 2 units head there and get resupported(if necessary).Monarchy is usually close now so 3 units will be ok.

[Hawkx9]

Ahhh... double production, no wonder.

Say, Ming... (or anyone else) How long do you wander, tipping huts, before you lay stakes? Also, I know that huts have a 'pattern' and I have used the map editor to examine it, but I still find it difficult to predict hut locations. You never know what corner of the "hut pattern" you've just found, etc. Any tips?

------------------
Peace