The first worker

[Sperricles]

OK, so what do you do with the critical first worker? I propose that unless you are industrial, you add it to your first city on the first turn to be able to pump out your second city 5 turns earlier.

Why only if you are not industrialist, you may ask? Well an industrialist can build 3 sqaures of road by the time the settler is built 10 turns. And the worker will finish the fourth with perfect timing (this all assumes grassland/plains , which is usually able to be worked out) This means the settler will only take 2 turns to get to that next city spot.

Comparison:
5 building-------10 building
5 moving--------2 moving

Net turn difference of 2 turns only! But as cities start getting further from you capital (after about 4 cities) and especially if you build a granary in your cap b4 the next settler your capital's settlers will only take 7 turns to reach those outer circle cities, now you have the advantage. It seems that usually those outer ring cities are the ones most fought for in the land grab battle, because those cities are often in grasp of 2+ civs.

One additional advantage industrial civs will not only get there faster, they will get defending units there fast, by keeping the woker as a road builder instead of adding to population. If lucky, your expansion road may even find a luxury or strategic resource. And need I mention the tech bonus of roads? At 3 squares a road though, the non industrial civs seem better off to me to add the worker to the city and get another city sooner.

The real question for the industrial civs is "When do I build the second worker?"

Anyway let me know what you think.

[Dis]

Interesting. I have never thought about combining it with my capitol city.

I improve a couple of tiles then start roading to other city sites.

[vmxa1]

Well I would say combining it to your capitol is not a good plan if you play at Emp or Deity.

[alva]

Interesting. I have never thought about combining it with my capitol city.

IIRC someone tested this strategy when CIV3 came out, the result was that it didn't pay-off.

[WarpStorm]

His strategy seems to rely on having at least 2 bonus grassland (or better) tiles. I find that my first worker is often busy mining my crappy starting land so that I can get some shields.

[Oerdin]

I use him to build roads and connect resources to my capital.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I use him to build roads and connect resources to my capital.

Me too. I try to secure as many resources as possible right from the start.

[Albert]

as well, what if your settler ends up in the middle of a swampmountainarctic area, then you have no roads home back to bigmama.

nope, I`ll go for the golden roads.

[Stuie]

Move to decent tile-mine-road-move to next decent tile-mine-road-move toward second city-road-move toward second city-road-....

I place an early emphasis on mines, then roads, then connecting my cities, and then connecting the luxuries/resources once an infrastructure is in place to take full advantage of them. Of course, if a luxury/resource is "on the way" toward one of my cities, I'll take the time to connect it even if it's a tile or two out of the way.

[Panag]

hi ,

build roads to expand AND other tile improvements

have a nice day

[MoonWolf]

I'll go for roads and mines. Having all cities connected is something I prioritize. Often my capitol has reached level 3 when my first settler is finish, so it won't really help much to add the worker.

[Mazarin]

roads/mines/irrigate...it depends on the starting spot

[aaglo]

I prefer building roads above all other improvements.
- faster expansion
- increased movement
- increased commerce
- road network with luxuries and strategic res. is obviously important
- build roads towards opponents -> resource trading & fast attacking force.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by alva


IIRC someone tested this strategy when CIV3 came out, the result was that it didn't pay-off.

ja, i did some tests with that and it always ended up bein counter productive.

especially on emp/deity

[Azeem]

I always use them to build roads, that way I get a nice little cash boost at the start. By the time I get Monarchy, I'm ALWAYS in deficit so it's better that I get a bit of income early on. Road building is also good for expanding faster, especially for "industrious" civs or civs without the "expansionist" quality.

[Sperricles]

Hmmm,

The majority of discussion seems valid but also seems to be based on one or two assumptions: Single Player Mode and/or Playing against the AI. If those assumptions are correct, then the stream of yuppie yesses above makes sense. Now as devil's advocate, let me propose a scenario/argument or two where this makes a bigger difference: Multi-Player and/or small maps.

Resources are key to winning the game, and arguably the most important resources are the strategic resources, followed by luxury, since they are so hard to replicate and so rare.

In rebuttal to the argument about securing resources early on, I have a point to make. Since no civ starts with iron, and only one starts with the wheel, it may take a while to know if you have the strategic resources you need in that capital city. Roads will help you get resources, but the fact of the matter is the best way to get a resource is to claim it FIRST and one of the best ways to claim it and defend it is to get a city to it and build right on top of it before anyone else can.....this favors pumping out the settler sooner and claiming as much land as possible as quick as possible before anyone else can.....cities 2 turns earlier will help with this. And the smaller the map, the more difference claiming those cities will be. Since the first cities may be the only ones you get before discovering your border with a neighbor. Once you get past small map size though, the roads will kick in, but before then roads take quite a while to build the settlers are going to come before you can have enough roads to matter (especially if you are not industrious) Build more workers you say? Well, you sacrifice more settlers and thus cities I say.

Another point.....the AI seems to pillage mainly when it helps in a war to cut off a supply line. In MP, especially if you are facing the Zulus, Aztecs, Greeks, or Carthagians, you are going to deal with players who will constantly and unrelentlessly pillage just to paralyze your production, movement, and progress in general and without even attempting to conquer your city. Workers out building roads are easy prey to become Aztec/Zulu slaves. And the precious road network you build early on will be easy to pillage since you probaly don't have enough armies yet to defendevery sqaure of it. Now on the flipside if you are building settlers and defenders and doing it sooner than everyone else you will get your first 5-7 cities much faster (especially if building a ring around your capital), and that can help you make a perimeter sooner to seal off some of your lands. Those lands that are sealed off can then make roads and improvements without fear, because the frontal cities will give them enough warning to respond to pillagers. Additionally the pillagers will have to pass through a lot of your empire to get to them, and you will have more chances to take pot shots at them before they pillage. In fact, if they notice there is nothing to pillage, they may turn their attention to a more vulnerable player who has something to pillage. Anyone who has faced Aztec/Zulu pillaging swarms in MP can attest to the frustrations I have pointed out.

Score is another consideration. Try adding that first worker to your capital in MP and notice the slight score difference. Notice the difference grow when you build your second city 2-5 turns before your enemies. In short games with a time limit and powergraph decision, score matters and this strategy will help.

Also please remember that the context of my arguments increases for civs that are not industrious since the opportunity cost of building roads/improvements is much greater since it takes so much longer.

So in light of Multiplayer ( the game is called Play the World ), small maps, and score....let's see if that makes a difference to you.

[Nevs23]

The first Worker?
Make other tile improvements and Build roads to expand.

Unfortunately is there no multiple poll.

[Dominae]

As someone who has tested the "join the Worker on turn 1" hypothesis, I can confirm that it does not work. Many players seriously underestimate the huge effect early tile improvements have on later success.

The argument that non-Industrious civs benefit from this strategy while Industrious ones do not strikes me as odd. I would say the non-Industrious civs need their Worker more, because if they lose it first turn they've got some big catching up to do, terraforming-wise.

I guess if you're playing a half hour game, joining your Worker for points might work. But for any game that lasts a reasonable amount of time, you'll always get your points worth by not joining the Worker.

Finally, the argument that terraforming is not good in MP because so many players pillage is interesting, but also faulty. A lot of MP is about guessing what your opponent is up to, and planning in consequence. It would be pretty cool to see 4-5 Hoplites show up to do some pillaging, and find nothing to pillage. What a waste of time for the Greeks! But the problem is that this maneuver leaves you utterly weak economically, so much so that the Greeks are probably 4-5 Hoplites worth of production up on you. You can only change your basic strategy up to a point; not terraforming is taking it a bit too far.

But, all this said, this a very commendable example of "thinking outside the box". Players who do this are bound to win more MP matches than those who do not.


Dominae

[Panag]

Originally posted by Dominae
As someone who has tested the "join the Worker on turn 1" hypothesis, I can confirm that it does not work. Many players seriously underestimate the huge effect early tile improvements have on later success.

The argument that non-Industrious civs benefit from this strategy while Industrious ones do not strikes me as odd. I would say the non-Industrious civs need their Worker more, because if they lose it first turn they've got some big catching up to do, terraforming-wise.

I guess if you're playing a half hour game, joining your Worker for points might work. But for any game that lasts a reasonable amount of time, you'll always get your points worth by not joining the Worker.

Finally, the argument that terraforming is not good in MP because so many players pillage is interesting, but also faulty. A lot of MP is about guessing what your opponent is up to, and planning in consequence. It would be pretty cool to see 4-5 Hoplites show up to do some pillaging, and find nothing to pillage. What a waste of time for the Greeks! But the problem is that this maneuver leaves you utterly weak economically, so much so that the Greeks are probably 4-5 Hoplites worth of production up on you. You can only change your basic strategy up to a point; not terraforming is taking it a bit too far.

But, all this said, this a very commendable example of "thinking outside the box". Players who do this are bound to win more MP matches than those who do not.


Dominae

hi ,

just one Q , to all of you as players "why on earth would you want the first worker to join the city anyway"

have a nice day

[Albert]

Originally posted by panag

just one Q , to all of you as players "why on earth would you want the first worker to join the city anyway"

have a nice day

A good point. Wheres the fun in counting turns and look at the theoretic chanses for pillaging and a "two turn faster to the resources" settler.

Lets play the game. not make it a scientificly master degree.

[Sperricles]

In answer to "why?".......first of all, because its there. Dominae, excellent response, I appreciate the input and your perspective from actual testing. This is a controversial practice to me, and indeed not one that I am fully convinced is always of value, but believe may have appropriate contexts. My testing is also starting to favor the results you have mentioned, with one other exception:

The MP Aztec Rush Scenario:

Without doubt, the Aztecs are more and more deadly the earlier and steadier they can launch those jaguars ( and no one else can launch 2 movement attackers from the beginning ). I have noticed that by joining the worker to the city on the first turn, Aztecs can often generate 5 shields per turn from the start. This translates to a jaguar being produced every single turn, even right from the start. (assuming accelerated production, which is bread and butter to MP games). Pumping out units like that in the earliest turns of the game can devastate unprepared neighbors and even prepared neighbors (with a spearman or 2 warriors) that live anywhere close, (this is especially appropriate for the tiny/small MP environment as well)

Back to the disrespectful question of "WHY?" that some critics have so quickly issued without giving the matter adequate thought: This may help to understand how much more you need to be ready than you think when "dueling 1 vs. 1" in MP with a player who chooses the Aztecs. Although I play for fun too, I have one oxymoronic point to make to my critics...if you are only playing for fun and not for thought or strategy...why did you click in and spend any time reading this article in the first place?

[Albert]

Originally posted by Sperricles
I have one oxymoronic point to make to my critics...if you are only playing for fun and not for thought or strategy...why did you click in and spend any time reading this article in the first place?

I guess you cought me of guard with this one

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by Albert


A good point. Wheres the fun in counting turns and look at the theoretic chanses for pillaging and a "two turn faster to the resources" settler.

Lets play the game. not make it a scientificly master degree.

Huh?! You read this thread why? If you're playing for fun without analysis....ah, Sperricles already said it. Seriously though, while I would admit this discussion definitely dives into the realm of strategy-forum type posts, it's a good notion to bring out; particularly since the 'unwashed masses' of Civ3 MP (read: Gamespy Chatroom crowd who plays on our ladder) don't bother to read anything outside of this forum.

Originally posted by Panag
hi ,

just one Q , to all of you as players "why on earth would you want the first worker to join the city anyway"

have a nice day

Panag, is it arrogance, stupidity, or poor reading comprehension which causes you to make inane, unconstructive posts on threads which make people curl their lips? Do you get bored ten seconds into the posts and not bother to read what people are saying and just hit 'post?' Do you have some sort of elitist hatred for anyone without at least "King" by their name or something? In theory, we should encourage new and different theories/thoughts. End of flame. Have a nice day.

Originally posted by Sperricles
I have noticed that by joining the worker to the city on the first turn, Aztecs can often generate 5 shields per turn from the start. This translates to a jaguar being produced every single turn, even right from the start. (assuming accelerated production, which is bread and butter to MP games). Pumping out units like that in the earliest turns of the game can devastate unprepared neighbors and even prepared neighbors (with a spearman or 2 warriors) that live anywhere close, (this is especially appropriate for the tiny/small MP environment as well)

*This* I think is one situation where the strategy you propose might work, especially if there's several good production bonuses in your city's starting radius. You do need to make sure that you pop a settler out at some point though, because if you don't overwhelm your foe immediately, you can find youself getting overwhelmed, 3 or 4 cities to 1. (I've seen Aztec players do this in their wild frenzied determination to smear their foes - simply leave Jag production on and never look back.)

[Panag]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon


Huh?! You read this thread why? If you're playing for fun without analysis....ah, Sperricles already said it. Seriously though, while I would admit this discussion definitely dives into the realm of strategy-forum type posts, it's a good notion to bring out; particularly since the 'unwashed masses' of Civ3 MP (read: Gamespy Chatroom crowd who plays on our ladder) don't bother to read anything outside of this forum.



Panag, is it arrogance, stupidity, or poor reading comprehension which causes you to make inane, unconstructive posts on threads which make people curl their lips? Do you get bored ten seconds into the posts and not bother to read what people are saying and just hit 'post?' Do you have some sort of elitist hatred for anyone without at least "King" by their name or something? In theory, we should encourage new and different theories/thoughts. End of flame. Have a nice day.





*This* I think is one situation where the strategy you propose might work, especially if there's several good production bonuses in your city's starting radius. You do need to make sure that you pop a settler out at some point though, because if you don't overwhelm your foe immediately, you can find youself getting overwhelmed, 3 or 4 cities to 1. (I've seen Aztec players do this in their wild frenzied determination to smear their foes - simply leave Jag production on and never look back.)

hi ,

man , its a sincere Q to hear other people's views and opinion's on it , .....

one that so far has brought forth intresting answers , .... all but the one from you , before you post such BS , learn a few things about courtesy and this site , ....

keep your flame to yourself the next time , thanks in advance

have a nice day

[Panag]

Originally posted by Sperricles
In answer to "why?".......first of all, because its there. Dominae, excellent response, I appreciate the input and your perspective from actual testing. This is a controversial practice to me, and indeed not one that I am fully convinced is always of value, but believe may have appropriate contexts. My testing is also starting to favor the results you have mentioned, with one other exception:

The MP Aztec Rush Scenario:

Without doubt, the Aztecs are more and more deadly the earlier and steadier they can launch those jaguars ( and no one else can launch 2 movement attackers from the beginning ). I have noticed that by joining the worker to the city on the first turn, Aztecs can often generate 5 shields per turn from the start. This translates to a jaguar being produced every single turn, even right from the start. (assuming accelerated production, which is bread and butter to MP games). Pumping out units like that in the earliest turns of the game can devastate unprepared neighbors and even prepared neighbors (with a spearman or 2 warriors) that live anywhere close, (this is especially appropriate for the tiny/small MP environment as well)

Back to the disrespectful question of "WHY?" that some critics have so quickly issued without giving the matter adequate thought: This may help to understand how much more you need to be ready than you think when "dueling 1 vs. 1" in MP with a player who chooses the Aztecs. Although I play for fun too, I have one oxymoronic point to make to my critics...if you are only playing for fun and not for thought or strategy...why did you click in and spend any time reading this article in the first place?

hi ,

, okay , that has to be tried out

very intresting

have a nice day

[Dominae]

Sperricles, I was not aware that you played AP (which, obviously, changes strategy somewhat). Since I have no experience with AP, I'll comment no further. But let me say I can see how joining the first Worker is more powerful with AP on than off (always the better option? I dunno).


Dominae

[Sperricles]

Good Point Friedrich with the warning on forgetting to expand, and thanks for the support for advancing MP theory.

Panag, your replies are welcome, though like Friedrich, I would advocate including arguments to back your opions, and evidence to substantiate your arguments where possible. Let's make this a Constructive thread.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
Panag, is it arrogance, stupidity, or poor reading comprehension which causes you to make inane, unconstructive posts on threads which make people curl their lips? Do you get bored ten seconds into the posts and not bother to read what people are saying and just hit 'post?' Do you have some sort of elitist hatred for anyone without at least "King" by their name or something? In theory, we should encourage new and different theories/thoughts. End of flame. Have a nice day.

One more personal attack like this against a fellow member of this site, and you will get restricted.

Discuss the issues... argue strategies... disagree... fine.
But if you want to make personal attacks against other members... find somewhere else to post.

[Underseer]

I use a combination of roads and tile improvements.

Actually, irrigation takes precedence over mining (provided the appropriate bonus resources are around). My first few cities do nothing but crank out settlers, so I need enough food production to keep up with the constant population drain.

Of course, depending on the terrain irrigation may be useless. *shrug*

[Panag]

hi ,

a Question ; when do you build your second worker , ...

another Q ; how is your use of the first worker related to the civ you are and the traits the civ holds , ....

they are general Q's for everyone

have a nice day