Your Building Sequence in the Early Game

Mountain Sage · May 21, 2003, 06:34

Hi everybody,

I thought it would be interesting to put together our different strategies on WHAT, WHEN, HOW and especially WHY we build city improvements and/or military units in a certain sequence.

Do you start with Warrior-Warrior-Settler-Temple?
Or Warrior-Worker-Granary-Warrior?
Or Warrior-Settler-Wonder?
Or...

I understand much depends on the civ you're playing, the level, the land, your goals etc., but are there 'good' and 'bad' ways to start?

Epistax · May 21, 2003, 06:44

Good: Warrior, Warrior, Settler.
Bad: Colossus

Mountain Sage · May 21, 2003, 07:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Epistax
Good: Warrior, Warrior, Settler.
Bad: Colossus

I can understand that if you build the Colossus first you won't build any settlers for a long time, but why is it 'better' to build Wa-Wa-S instead of Wa-Wa-T-S, or Wa-Wa-Wo-S?
Tis is what I'd like to understand. Why do you go for a specific building queue instead of for another one?

Epistax · May 21, 2003, 07:19

Well I typically do W-W-S, then depending on my tech, real defense then another S, a building then another S (rare), or perhaps additional warriors.

I've never really done the grainary route. Depending on my starting location, population may not be the last thing to be enough for settler production, that is, it may take longer for me to accumulate the shields for a settler than two expand twice. This isn't always the case however.

Depending on what others put here, I may try a grainary. Perhaps I don't see it as an advantage because the improvement only helps that first city, whereas it will be the first city to stop the rexing process, and may build a wonder.

Dominae · May 21, 2003, 11:21

Single-Player, Emperor level:

Expansionist: Scout, Scout, Granary, Settler/Worker/Warrior+

Militaristic: Warrior, Archer, Settler, Archer+

Americans: Warrior, Granary

Aztecs: Jag, Jag, Jag, Jag, Settler

Depending on the map I sometimes build a Settler before the Granary, but on most reasonable starts I typically build a Granary now. The AI is just too easy to keep off your back. I've been experimenting with building Warriors, then a Granary, then a Temple before the first Settler. I'm not sure if that's a super idea, but it sure is fun and makes for a very strong capital.

Delaying the first Settler with the Aztecs seems sub-optimal, but I'm betting that I'll be able to use those first four Jags to begin taking out my nearest neighbor, which is arguably worth the cost of a slower REX.

Dominae

badman · May 21, 2003, 11:55

I almost never bother to build ancient wonders, building lots of settlers is more important to me.
My queue looks like this

warrior-warrior-settler-warrior-... or
warrior-granary-settler-settler-...

If I'm expansionist I'll replace those first warriors with scouts.
MS: it's better not to build temples too early because you need to grab as much land as possible as fast as possible.

Arrian · May 21, 2003, 11:58

Hmm...

With most civs, particularly non-militaristic ones, on my usual standard map:
3-4 warriors, granary, settler.

With China, if I have forest to chop: warrior, archer, warrior or archer, then I decide whether or not to go granary or settler, barracks.

-Arrian

lmtoops · May 21, 2003, 14:04

Almost always it's warrior, warrior, settler, warrior (spearman?). I was reading about the archer rush, which I have never attempted, and that sound interesting. In the early build que, I generally don't concern myself with buildings.

If I find a good settler farm, then I build a granary. If I have a border city or I lack luxary resources, I will build a temple. But all of this is later in the game.

OPD · May 21, 2003, 14:48

With a standard start - 2 grassland sheild tiles and no bonus resources I'll go

warrior, warrior, warrior, warrior, warrior, settler, granary

then the second city builds

granary, stlr, stlr, stlr, stlr ....

the next few cities build barracks then units only

I swore never to build a wonder in my capital after being beaten to the GL too many times all that early production wasted can ruin a game.

I'm going to try granary before stlr does this make expantion alot quicker?

Arrian · May 21, 2003, 15:02

OPD,

I do the granary first because of the way goodie huts work.

For those who don't know, you can only pop a settler from a hut if:

1) you do not have an active settler
2) you are not currently building a settler (easy to just switch production to foil this one)
3) you do not have more than the average number of cities per civ in the world

I have found that if I go straight for the granary after having built 3-4 warriors to explore with, my chances of getting a settler from a hut are decent. And if I don't, so be it, the granary will pay off.

-Arrian, the gambler

Chemical Ollie · May 21, 2003, 16:13

Warrior-warrior-settler or
Scout-scout-settler

ghen · May 21, 2003, 16:33

Usually I do Warrior x3 then a settler, but I don't think this has paid off for me very much. If I get a luxury early I always build a granary as fast as I can and forgo military in favor of workers early.. but if I have to wait 20 turns for pottery then the granary comes after my first settler. If I get pottery out of a goodie hut early (which happens alot it seems like) or start with it I build 2 warriors if they're 5 turns or 1 at 10 turns and then start my granary. If my capitol starts on wheated flood plains though its obviously not needed

cumi · May 22, 2003, 03:20

I usually play with french.

Depending on my starting possition, I build worriors until the build time for settler is exactly the same time, as until my first city reaches size 3. So at the moment, when the city is 3, the settler is ready. In the meantime I got 3-4 worriors.

After the first settler, I build another one, and then I usually start with the pre-build for GL. Maybe a settler more before that. If the capital is on good terrain, for beeing a settler-factory and the chances for other (potencional) cities for beeing it are bad, I start a wonder in other city (non-settler-producer city). I usually also "name" a city for ptoducing military.

Which city will start wonders, will be the/a settler factory or "baracked" army-producer mostly depends on the terrain, starting position and the distance of my neighbours.

cumi

trev · May 22, 2003, 05:19

I generally play aztecs, and produce jags initially, aiming for settler when city reaches size 3, on most cities early will contiue with jag, jag, settler.

The jags are used for rapid exploration and maybe stacked for attack when suitable enemy located and explored.

Once a war starts build mostly archers instead of jags and add barracks to the higher production cities.

These days I generally start a war early in the game, and so need the veteranarchers for the war. Capturing cities early from an enemy is better stategy than building your own with settlers

Mountain Sage · May 22, 2003, 06:04

Very interesting so far...

It seems that building a worker is not one of the first priorities, correct?

And when do you start building temples/granaries/barracks?

Cumi:
as a 'French expert'

, my building order is very often:
Wa-Wa-Wo-Wa-G-Se. The second worker (you get the first for free) immediately starts building a road (double-speed!), while in the meantime the first improves 4-6 tiles, then starts another road. Try it once and let me know.

cumi · May 22, 2003, 06:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Mountain Sage
Very interesting so far...

It seems that building a worker is not one of the first priorities, correct?

Yes, I can live quite long with my initial worker. Actually there is no need in the beginning to improve the whole map. I improve 2-3 tiles for my capital, until I don't start a wonder...

I am building workers in very-very corrupt cities, where the growth and the time to complete a worker is same = 10 turns.

Quote:

And when do you start building temples/granaries/barracks?

Granaries, almost never. Never...

Temples after Library and Marketplace...

Baracks in 1 or max 2 cities, where a the settler production has no sense, the potention for growth is verly low. Mostly in the cities in middle of forest.

Quote:

Cumi:
as a 'French expert'

Don't laugh

, I didn't tell, that I am an expert. I would say I quite an experienced beginner. I play France, because I think they are the easiest for me....

Quote:

my building order is very often:
Wa-Wa-Wo-Wa-G-Se. The second worker (you get the first for free) immediately starts building a road (double-speed!), while in the meantime the first improves 4-6 tiles, then starts another road. Try it once and let me know.

I will not wait so long with the building of the first settler. Why do you need 4-6 tiles to improve?

cheers

cumi

ghen · May 22, 2003, 06:56

Usually my 2nd worker is built by my 3rd or 4th city, and only when its going to reach size 3 or more which means I end up building something there first too, spearman usually, or archer if I brought defense with the settler.

alva · May 22, 2003, 06:56

Cumi, try the granary route for once, I'm sure you'll be happily surprised. It's very powerfull, just don't get anxious at your initial slow growth.

cumi · May 22, 2003, 07:05

Quote:

Originally posted by alva
Cumi, try the granary route for once, I'm sure you'll be happily surprised. It's very powerfull, just don't get anxious at your initial slow growth.

You mean to build granary before anything else? Or you mean the Wa-Wa-Wo-Wa-G-Se order mentioned by Mountain Sage?

AJ Corp. The FAIR · May 22, 2003, 07:09

Usually 3 or 4 warriors (especially when industrious, they'll be built rather quickly). 2 to explore, make contacts, fight babs or try to steal AI workers/settler. 1 or 2 for city defense.
Then it sure is time for the first settler.

Then it depends on circumstances, although temples are usually also high on my priorities.

AJ

Epistax · May 22, 2003, 08:35

I've learned from this thread, I think I'll try out a granrry in my next game. I can't say I agree with a total lack of workers to start. It's always a top priority of mine to have my cities and lux's connected.

Mountain Sage · May 22, 2003, 08:45

Cumi,

The reference about the 'French expert' was about me, since some people keep telling me I should play another civ, at least once! (which I did, and will do).

I build my Wa-Wa-Wo-Wa-G-Se sequence for the following reasons:
My first 2 warriors go out scouting. By then, I have irrigated+roaded 1 tile and mined+roaded another one. My city hits then size 3, this is why I build a worker now. Then I build another warrior for defence and happiness. By the time I finish my settler (after the granary), my city will fall back to size 3-4. Then I build anothe warrior for happiness+defence (as to not increase the luxury slider too high).
Afterwards, it depends: usually it's another settler, then a Wonder, or barracks+military if I'm threatened (on standard maps).
The reason why I build an early worker is that while the first one still improves the tiles of my capitol, the second one starts a road to where my next city will be. Then it will go on to the third emplacement.
In the meantime, my first worker will have improved 5-6 tiles around my capitol. Why so many? Since worked tiles give you more output that an unworked ones, your city can grow at least to sixe 6 and use all the worked tiles. The main reason why I do this in one shot is that after completion, my worker will do the same on city 2 etc. To backtrack and work tiles in your capitol is a waste of turns!
At least on huge maps, every city builds a worker at size 2. Since city 2 has the benefit of the second worker (the first one is out building roads), the other one will also build roads, to hook up luxuries and especially to speed up the next settlers. With industrious workers, you can build an amazing road network in no time, chich will help speeding up settlers and grabbing the best land. Besides, all city tiles are worked faster than the cities grow.
As for the G, I build it to speed up my city growth, either for a S factory or for a Wonder, since I want that city to size 12 (if on a river).
The time you spend on NOT building immediately a settler is well compensated by the faster settler output later on and by the time gained in getting faster to the right spot.
Try it once, and you will see.

cumi · May 22, 2003, 09:08

Mountain Sage,

sorry about the "Frence expert" thing, I misunderstod it

. If it was as I read it (very fast) at first time, would be true for me, too. We have to try some other civs, too

.

I am a kind of visual type. It would be nice to see a graph

about growth (number of cities) with and without granaries in (let's say) standard circumstances. I will maybe try this with excell.

BTW I made an excell table, for calculating the maximum size for a city.

You "only" have to type in the number of tile-types available.

Kirby · May 22, 2003, 10:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
Single-Player, Emperor level:

Expansionist: Scout, Scout, Granary, Settler/Worker/Warrior+

Militaristic: Warrior, Archer, Settler, Archer+

Americans: Warrior, Granary

Aztecs: Jag, Jag, Jag, Jag, Settler

Dominae

What is your build order for Deity, archer/archer/archer...?

FWIW I just do the warriors then settlers at size 3 thing until I have 5 to 8 cities. IMO granaries are too slow on Deity... but then I'm not a _winning_ Deity player either.

Dominae · May 22, 2003, 10:51

I'll get back to you on Deity...I'm still learning.

Granaries are still good, I think, unless land is in really short supply.

I would not recommend Archer-Archer-Archer on Deity, since it's suicide to attack the AI so early on, since it gets so many free troops (and it produces them so much faster).

Dominae

cumi · May 22, 2003, 11:12

I made a graph, by simple rules. I am not sure, that my rules are correct under these conditions:

1. I took standard conditions:

- each tile has 2 food, 2 shield
- the core city tile has only 1 shield
- no corruption taking account

this means, the food box is growing each turn by 2. I hope this is correct.

- one city producing ONLY settlers
- the other one FIRST Granary then ONLY settlers.

The first city produces the following:

turn 32, 64, 96, settler

The second city:

turn 17 granary, 23, 39, 56, 73, 90 settler.

The following graph shows the food box. When the city size is increased by 1, the food box falls back to 0!

Epistax · May 22, 2003, 11:15

You're saying a city building a granary before a settler gets its first settler done before a city that just builds the settler? Doesn't sound right.

--

I see the contention. Each tile has 2 food and 2 minerals? I'd say the norm is to have a choice: Two food and no production or one food one production.

cumi · May 22, 2003, 11:22

Sorry, I just edited the picture just a few minutes ago in my massage.

cumi · May 22, 2003, 11:23

Epistax,

2 shield and 2 food is a typical mined shielded-grassland.

....hm maybe its too much, thats, why the granary is done before a settler....

Mazarin · May 22, 2003, 21:55

on standard maps, 60% water, emperor, I usually go with warr/warr/gran/settler/pyramids...all other cities will produce barracks, archers, workers and settlers (not dropping below size 3). I usually have a military force that is strong enough to take out an enemy -and with the huge benefit from the pyramids, the newly conquered cities will grow really quickly. On maps with more water, I won't build the pyramids myself, but hope my neighbour builds them for me.