Unfavorable land can be pretty broadly defined, but for basic argument, I'd describe it as a starting location where you have a large amount of tundra or desert around you, making expansion difficult.
Another unfavorable situation would be when you find more than one neighboring Civ close to you, especially where the Civs are competing with you for expansion in different areas.
I've spent a lot of time quitting games early in the hopes of getting better starting locations, but ultimately, this isn't going to help my play and won't prepare me for MP. So rather than saying "restart if you dont have a river, bonus food tile" I want to get some ideas for compensating for bad starting locations.
In the first situation, obviously you want to avoid expanding into the desert until better terrain is used up. But assuming you have a lot of plains and desert together, should you still try to expand and use the plains? What are the implications of having to settle in land that then requires a heavy worker investment to be habitable (let alone profitable)?
In the latter situation, where borders are abutted by opponent Civs, I am going to try an early warfare method, in which the sole effort of my war will be to prevent the enemy Civ (or Civs) from expanding into terrain that I want. I've tried to fight wars of conquest in the era of the Archer/Spearman, but it's so costly and difficult. I thought that attacking any enemy units OUTSIDE of their cities, especially when new settlers head out, would be a more cost effective use of the limited early game resources. Any other useful ideas for establishing toeholds in the ratrace?
Another unfavorable situation would be when you find more than one neighboring Civ close to you, especially where the Civs are competing with you for expansion in different areas.
I've spent a lot of time quitting games early in the hopes of getting better starting locations, but ultimately, this isn't going to help my play and won't prepare me for MP. So rather than saying "restart if you dont have a river, bonus food tile" I want to get some ideas for compensating for bad starting locations.
In the first situation, obviously you want to avoid expanding into the desert until better terrain is used up. But assuming you have a lot of plains and desert together, should you still try to expand and use the plains? What are the implications of having to settle in land that then requires a heavy worker investment to be habitable (let alone profitable)?
In the latter situation, where borders are abutted by opponent Civs, I am going to try an early warfare method, in which the sole effort of my war will be to prevent the enemy Civ (or Civs) from expanding into terrain that I want. I've tried to fight wars of conquest in the era of the Archer/Spearman, but it's so costly and difficult. I thought that attacking any enemy units OUTSIDE of their cities, especially when new settlers head out, would be a more cost effective use of the limited early game resources. Any other useful ideas for establishing toeholds in the ratrace?
Comment