Mine too, I am playing CIv games for more than 10 years and recently started watching his videos and I am amazed.. Love this game so much more right now. Any way, what do you think about Civ IV vs V?
I recently started watching your videos. It's nice to see that you still comment on your guides even if they're a little bit old. By watching your guides and games I feel like I know a lot more about the game, and I'm thankful for it. Can't wait to see Civ VI videos if you happen to play it in October.
My hopes are really huge for this game. I think that the sole "unstacked cities" approach could create a whole new dimension to playing the game. Although for highly competetive players like yourself it could mean that the game won't be as good for MP, since the starting location could really be everything. But I think it's unlikely they'd screw it up this way.
I watched all your guide videos and the byzantium liberty game in the last to days (my pc broke can not play anything) and i like this video most. Especialy because there was a little discusion going on between the two of you. If you make more of these shorter guides i would like to hear more discusions with other good players (i have a hard time beating emperor ai myself :/ ). Anyway thank you for all your videos, even tho i do not play multiplayer i still learned a lot and got some pretty sick ideas and strategies i want to play and test. Keep the videos coming, im a loyal subscriber now.
Minor tip. If you are moving onto a hill, actually use your first movement point before doing it. On the assyria start, you agonized over moving your warrior onto the wine... your settler had already forfeited his opportunity to look around from standing on that tile, and it would have cost you absolutely nothing, because you spend both move points moving onto that hill anyways.
Wow, so, i always avoided mountains like the plague because they don't seem to give a yeild and you can't improve them. i know they can make certain wonders but, why else are they beneficial?
Observatories. They can only be built if your city is adjacent to a mountain and (in the unmodded game) give a +50% science modifier to the city, which is huge. For your capital, an adjacent mountain is one of the most all around powerful starts.
Great video! This will help many people in the community. Having both you and zempt discuss the starts was very informative. I would like to see a lib vs tradition video with both of you discussing that too, along with different expansion options depending on which tree you opened. Good job guys :) BCBWolfy
at 18:30 the settler move should have been up to the wine to the NW and then SW to the sheep hill. That way, the settler could have had a better glimpse of what was up in the NW while only making it in one move. Then, there would have been more info to determine where the warrior should ahve been moved.
Tʜᴇ Gᴀᴍᴇ Cʜᴀɴɢᴇʀ It's a tradeoff. Moving blindly isn't likely to improve your start,e specially with strategic balance on, but sometimes a superior position is fairly close.
On the third one, why didn't they even consider the possiblity of moving onto the grassland hill forest next to the mountain? Give up coast, get hill and mountain, and the silver that was out of range. I guess coast is strong enough that you do it, and most of the negatives to coast are the tiles, which you'll have anyway.
9:30 so your only reason to move over the river and sacrifice one workable tile in early game is having the mountain, as far as im concerned if you settle on the spot you will be able to build macchu picchu and observatory? (2tile- rule) i mean yes by moving that one tile you will be able to accquire more gold fairly early but isnt having 2 tiles with 2 food 1 prod wo/ upgrades better for the first couple of turns?
+FilthyRobot wow thanks for the fast answer, youre right 2 tile rule only appears to apply to wonders, which noob me forgot. whats your point on the production/food issue though? dont get me wrong im not trying to tell you whats better im asking you for your insight.
+atombindungen You still have an immediate growth tile and another good growth tile in the 2nd ring (which you can purchase from gold from meeting a CS). The mountain and corresponding observatory is very much worth the loss of the deer in the first tile.
A question about your Assyria start around 17:00. I would have moved my settler to the forest hill adjacent to mountain in a heartbeat. I don't remember hearing you say anything about it, but you abstained from that position because it wasn't on the coast, right? You talked a lot about the importance of settling on coast. Besides cargo ships giving twice the yield of caravans, I don't see why this is so important. It also leaves you vulnerable to naval attack.
Mindless Ambience Briefly: Coastal tradition with food cargo ships is one of the strongest science games out there. One of the game ending techs is atom bombs, and these can be delivered nearly anywhere on the map with naval dominance and carriers.
So your argument against naval vulnerability of coastal cities is that nukes can hit anywhere? I see where you're coming from, but nukes don't come until the modern era. With a coastal city you're vulnerable starting at Navigation. Not knocking coastal cities, I acknowledge the benefit of cargo ships too. Just saying that they do have their downsides. And I really would've considered settling on a non-coastal tile in that one.
Mindless Ambience Nope. What I'm saying is that in the unmodded game, entire games often end if one player is vastly ahead in science and has the location to effectively nuke the other contenders. And that coastal tradition is one of the absolute strongest science games. Frigates can be defended, often without having to tech for your own frigates. It's not worth giving up some of the strongest starts in the game without something like England in the game.
Ah ok I understand. How would you recommend defending against a frigate bombardment without your own frigates though? Caravels are mostly out of the picture, so I'm assuming you mean using ranged land units to defend. I think there would be many cases where frigates could stand out of range of land units and fire on a city unopposed.
1) Don't be taken by surprise. 2) Stack city combat strength that are likely to be attacked. Castle, walls, get red fort if possible, etc. Tech era and population both contribute to city-strength. 3) Stack units. Gallease+xbow+roads+potential citadel spots. Frigates are 2 range. There aren't many likely city configurations where the city can be shot where you can't shoot back at all.
+Dlxgp Yeah it used to be my instinct to attack barbarians but I've come to realize, if they are not extremely close to you and your civ doesn't have perks related to destroying barbarians don't bother, let some other greedy civ deal with the risk of attacking them and it may give you a slight advantage for other things
I know you've recorded a tradition liberty opener guide! You said so on your stream yesterday! I know you don't like it, but for us n00bs it'll be quite useful. This video was super useful to me, thanks!
A lot of good information in your videos, it's help me improve my game play. I play single player exclusively for various reasons, but I get a lot out of your videos.
Filthy, why did you not move your warrior across the river and onto the grassland hills when playing as the huns? I understand the visibility wasn't as good as moving north toward the grassland, but I think that hill start would have been worth settling on, even if it takes another turn to settle and we lose the initial salt yields. Anyone else agree?
i bought Civ 5 complete edition for 9$ last night because of pka and i thought i look up your channel to see if you had any guides and i wasnt dissapointed hopefully the game is as good as i think it is.
Great video! I wonder why you don't use your settler to explore though (sometimes you move it through rough terrain when there's flatland next to it, wasting a movement point and losing out on a little bit of visibility).
My strategy is a tradition liberty mix, and I only go down honour, piety, or patronage as an extra, when I get the oracle the free policy will be patronage if I don't yet have it
On the last segment, I immediately jumped at the tile to the southeast in the crux of the rivers. Is there a reason why that wouldn't be a good choice? I was thinking the defensive bonus of four river crossing, the potential of the hills and woods and still being fairly close to the horses and salt would have been balancing.
I agree with you Filthy Robot! But I do not understand, why does jungle is bad place for settling capital by civilization developers' logic? For example India, Siamese civilizations are developed in early history of our world!?
But I agree that civilizations like Rome, Greece, Carthage(Phoenicia), Babylon, Egypt, Persia and China developed because fertile and productive location in early history.
When looking for a place to settle a new city, there will sometimes be a location that has many great tiles in its 3-tile radius, but none of these tiles will be in the city's immediate borders, so if you found a city there it will take some time before the city's borders expands to take up these tiles. Alternatively, you could settle adjacent to a couple of these good tiles, but some of the other good tiles would no longer be in your city's 3-tile radius. Assuming that you don't have enough gold to just purchase all the tiles, what do you do in a situation like this?
Mindless Ambience Depends on what type of empire you're building, what social policies you have, how likely those tiles are to be stolen by another player, and how much you need those tiles NOW as opposed to later.
I have to second Ben Closel's comment. Please do a guide on tradition vs liberty. Specifically, liberty openings seem to work best when you build the monument after the first scout is kicked out, but I rarely have enough info to make the call on that turn. Also, your game loaded much faster than mine. Any tips on good hardware or settings for running civ v faster.
As a Dane, I can confirm that there exists no reason we shouldn't have a coast bias xD Our capital city, in our native language, literally means: "The Merchant's Harbour", although some would say it just means "Purchase a Harbour". That's just cause they don't look into it's namesake further tho..
Assyria screamed for warrior on sheep and sertler into hills. I cant imagine why you didnt figure it out. Settling then on a hill next to cows on T 3 makes really strong capital.
Hey. Thanks again for this. Could you provide a handy list (like the wonders') of priorities one must look for when settling for new cities in both the early game and later on? Thanks!
What happens when you start on Tundra? Been trying to play Russia recently, and their Start Bias is Tundra- and with my luck, it'll be a mix between Tundra+Desert. I realize it has the benefit of getting Deer+Furs, which means grabbing Goddess of the Hunt makes it salvageable... but sometimes it's just flat Tundra which is near worthless And sometimes a mix of Snow, which is actually worthless. Thoughts?
Sometimes you have to move, or hope that your expands can make up for a bad start. There's a few Russia games in my videos, and a few of them have the issues you mention.
I've been only playing for roughly about 40-50 hrs and im pretty bad, but i've never thought about settling on a luxary before, always thought that it was just good to construct on it, and also maybe this is a shit thing to do but is it good to spam farms etc on random tiles in your city?
If you have no cattle, luxuries, or anything like that and you have a worker sitting around, a couple things you could do include: 1.build farms (like you said.) eventually when your pop increases having extra farms on tiles gives you something to have citizens work. 2. Build mines. Mines are extremely helpful on hills and certain luxuries. They increase productivity on the tile it was built on so that helps. 3. Chop down forests/jungles/marshes. Doing this adds around 13-20 production to the current thing being built in the nearest city. Taking a turn or two off of the production of whatever you're building at that time. Hopefully I explained some of these correctly lol
I think the, maybe not worst but most inconvenient start I ever had in a multiplayer was starting with Egypt and in jungle. Literally, it was 10x10 tiles of nothing but jungle with maybe 1-2 luxury resources and some bananas. No production at ALL. Yeah growth is nice and all but if you cant build shit you become an automatic nonfactor so fast it hurts.
Because the advantage of getting the mountain is vastly outweighed by losing bananas, losing the early happiness from the silver, no starting tiles to work, and worse overall tiles (that we've scouted).
i dont get it.. at 12:14 you say you dont want to move on the copper cause you lose food.. but either way do you not get 5 food regardless? if you stay where you are at 12:14 you get 4 tiles = 5 food. if you move on the copper you get 5 tiles = 5 food. am i missing something here?
You would loose immediate food. When you settle your city you only get one citizen which can only work one tile. If he settles on the copper all the tiles in the immediate vicinity only have one food each. This means it will take much longer to get a second citizen. Early game this is huge because a difference in 2 or 3 citizens can lead to a very significant production difference.
ahh yeaah i played for a few days more and i understand how you lock in and micro manage your cities now. Makes total sense. but thanks for the reply :D
Not really. What you want is to be continually increasing in population at a quick and consistent rate, which means you need more and more food the bigger you get. If I was absolutely forced to pick a golden ration, I'd say 3:1 or about exactly a plains river tile.
When your only remaining food tiles are poor like 2food/2gold or 2food/1prod should one just switch to working production until the food tiles impove or you get new tiles?
_When your only remaining food tiles are poor like 2food/2gold or 2food/1prod should one just switch to working production until the food tiles impove or you get new tiles?_ No, you generally just keep focusing Food all the time until you're unhappy. At that time, growth is so slow that you focus Production instead. The exception would be if you're building Settlers or need some breakpoint built as fast as possible e.g. Wonder--if switching to production saves you turns on building that Wonder. Whenever you're building Settlers you just focus Production, or anything other than Food, since obviously you can't grow while building one. In general 1 Production is worth about 4 GPT. You just don't want negative GPT while you have 0, or it'll be taken out of your Science.
useful for peoples playing a quick speed, personalty i playing at marathon speed (the slower), so the time for tec and stuff are way way longer. Anyway i don't move a lot the 1st settler, my next cities do the rest to adjust with my needs.
How come you'd rather settle directly on a wine tile? Isn't that just the same thing as not doing, and then having a citizen work that tile permanently?
Awesome guides man! So when settling a capital, focus first on growth tiles, then hammers, strategic resources, then coastal cities, river cities, mountains, then anything else? What do you want to prioritize here?
There are 2 wonders that require a mountain with 2 tiles of your capital, and if your capital is adjacent to a mountain it can build an observatory, which is +50% science.
Kastane Flint The goal is to maximize the best tiles for the city. Settling on luxuries or strategic resources connects those resources automatically when you acquire the appropriate tech, so it doesn't matter if you settle on them. However, settling on a tile prevents building an improvement. So settling on a tile like plains salt (that starts as 2-1-1, but becomes 3-2-1 when improved) denies the city 1-1-0 in yield each turn, and settling on cattle denies the 0-1-0 from the pasture. In general, it's nice to settle on mining luxuries on hills or calendar or camp resources because you're likely gaining yields that you wouldn't otherwise be working.
+FilthyRobot so if I start next to gems on a hill, it might be a good thing to settle on it? if so, why? what does improving gems on a hill do compared to improving gems on a plain, such that in general it is nice to settle on it?
I noticed that you really like to settle on the actual river itself. I'm not sure that's a great idea, watermills and gardens aren't that strong buildings, and hydrodams are too late game. I personally bump settling on the river slightly lower in priority than hills and mountains.
The watermill is an awesome building. +2 food and +1 prod early is amazing. Gardens are so-so, mostly because it's hard to find time to build them. Hydroplants, especially on long rivers, are also very good. Rivers also offer a really nice defensive position and provide +25% land trade route gold. I don't think mountains or hills are quite as important (although I like hills when I can)
FilthyRobot I dislike watermills, because they still cost too many hammers for my liking. They're competing with granaries, compbows, colosseums, workers, etc, on the "what to build list". I like settling on hills for the free +1h. Think of it this way. Not settling on a river frees up a freshwater tile for a +1f civil service farm. Settling on a hill gives +1h. That's almost as good as a watermill, and it doesn't cost any hammers.
Nicolae Carpathia Do you primarily play team games? 2v2, 3v3, etc? Comps and Colosseums are pretty low priority items in FFA games. Like all infrastructure, the hammers spent are an investment and, unless the game is super short, it's one well worth it.
Nicolae Carpathia So it's basically in really short term +1 hammer and +4 Food or +3 hammers and +2 food. Me personally I would choose the +3 hammers and +2 food because you really need it to pump out them early buildings (They give you SOOO MANY buildings to work on at a time that if you don't have good production you will be building them all the way up till the other people are about to attack you with a huge army).
Wow you too screwed up that wine start - the settler should have first moved to the wine and THEN to the hill exposing 2 more tiles - and your friends suggestion to go to the deer was correct.
I just restart my game until i spawn on a perfect spot that makes me win on turn 10. Cant play with less than 20 luxuries on my first city
Your Civ V guides are still the gold standard all these years later!
I never knew that settling on a luxury gave it to you. I have 300 hours and I always assumed that it destroyed it
Sorry for the necro, but it only gives it to you once you research the tech for it. You've probably figured that out by now though
@@alecmueller3299 If I, lets say, settle on Incense but don't have Calendar researched, but then I research Calender, will I then get Incense?
Yes
Is it the same for strategic resources?
@@reubenfromow4854 for example?
The start with Rome tho... man I would have played that game I think hahaha
Watching your vids improved my game immensely. Very informative and entertaining. Cheers!
Nice to hear!
Mine too, I am playing CIv games for more than 10 years and recently started watching his videos and I am amazed.. Love this game so much more right now. Any way, what do you think about Civ IV vs V?
Wow, Mind blown about how much I did not think about in my 100 hours played... Fun video and very good info.
Glad to hear you're enjoying it!
Basensproductions You're telling me I've played 700 hours
Hydro Hydra Hah :D Yeah amazing stuff in this vid for sure...
100 hours = knowing the basics
200 hours = starting to know how to play
300 hours = mediocre
Seems fair!
With 200 hours into the game, I have learned I have oh so much to learn. Loving all of these videos.
Thanks man Im a late comer to the game but you are the Big Daddy of Civ 5 Videos :) learning so much.
Glad to hear!
Puck aNm Meaning that he protects Little Sisters from all the splicers of the Civ 5 community?
Come to think of it, there _is_ a mod that adds Rapture as a civ.
blarg2429 Lolol XD
This comment did not age well...
iv played civ games for 15+ years and i still learn stuff from your videos, i love it
+mikezissou Nice to hear!
I recently started watching your videos. It's nice to see that you still comment on your guides even if they're a little bit old. By watching your guides and games I feel like I know a lot more about the game, and I'm thankful for it. Can't wait to see Civ VI videos if you happen to play it in October.
I'll definitely be playing it. Here's fingers crossed that it'll be good!
My hopes are really huge for this game. I think that the sole "unstacked cities" approach could create a whole new dimension to playing the game. Although for highly competetive players like yourself it could mean that the game won't be as good for MP, since the starting location could really be everything. But I think it's unlikely they'd screw it up this way.
Loving all of your Civ5 videos, only just noticed they are 8 years old. Damn.
I watched all your guide videos and the byzantium liberty game in the last to days (my pc broke can not play anything) and i like this video most. Especialy because there was a little discusion going on between the two of you. If you make more of these shorter guides i would like to hear more discusions with other good players (i have a hard time beating emperor ai myself :/ ). Anyway thank you for all your videos, even tho i do not play multiplayer i still learned a lot and got some pretty sick ideas and strategies i want to play and test. Keep the videos coming, im a loyal subscriber now.
This was a lot more dynamic and informative than the average tutorial, I kinda like this style and I hope you'll do more like it.
just watching the thought processes of you guys in action is amazing
Just started playing CIV 5 or any CIV for that matter! Discovered FilthyRobot and his tutorials the other day Just want to say THANK YOU! :-)
31 minutes for something that takes one button click to do. But yet I watched the entire thing and loved it!!!
Minor tip. If you are moving onto a hill, actually use your first movement point before doing it. On the assyria start, you agonized over moving your warrior onto the wine... your settler had already forfeited his opportunity to look around from standing on that tile, and it would have cost you absolutely nothing, because you spend both move points moving onto that hill anyways.
great video. looking forward to more in this series.
I saw the title and thought what could I possibly need to know about founding my capital I just click settle...I'm such a noob.
Wow, so, i always avoided mountains like the plague because they don't seem to give a yeild and you can't improve them. i know they can make certain wonders but, why else are they beneficial?
Observatories. They can only be built if your city is adjacent to a mountain and (in the unmodded game) give a +50% science modifier to the city, which is huge. For your capital, an adjacent mountain is one of the most all around powerful starts.
Thank you for letting me know.
This video is very interesting you should make another
I was screaming at the computer on the 3rd video about the warrior wine move. Move the damn settler to the wine then to the hill!!!!
Me too. Settler should have moved to wine then sheep. 1 move
Great video! This will help many people in the community. Having both you and zempt discuss the starts was very informative. I would like to see a lib vs tradition video with both of you discussing that too, along with different expansion options depending on which tree you opened.
Good job guys :)
BCBWolfy
His "almost as garbage as you get" is better than most of my starts 😂 I never seem to get accessible luxury or strategic resources
at 18:30 the settler move should have been up to the wine to the NW and then SW to the sheep hill. That way, the settler could have had a better glimpse of what was up in the NW while only making it in one move. Then, there would have been more info to determine where the warrior should ahve been moved.
Hi, FR,
Thanks, especially, for the discussion about whether to go with Tradition or Liberty.
I’ve had this in my watch later for 4 years
Good for you
You were awesome on PKA. Glad they brought me here.
So its definitely worth sacrificing the first turn or two in order to potentially get a better start
Tʜᴇ Gᴀᴍᴇ Cʜᴀɴɢᴇʀ It's a tradeoff. Moving blindly isn't likely to improve your start,e specially with strategic balance on, but sometimes a superior position is fairly close.
On the third one, why didn't they even consider the possiblity of moving onto the grassland hill forest next to the mountain? Give up coast, get hill and mountain, and the silver that was out of range. I guess coast is strong enough that you do it, and most of the negatives to coast are the tiles, which you'll have anyway.
"Lakes are amazing for Aztecs and pretty shitty for everyone else"
More of these please! Its really fun to watch
can you please do a Raze/Puppet/Annex guide? I never know what to do when i capture a city
Really interesting to watch. If I may ask, how are you screen sharing with your friend?
He is more than likely streaming on twitch without a delay.
@bill gates ah yes because discord was around in 2014
plz don't 6 year necro
@bill gates possible Skype. Skype was around in this time period.
he says its on skype at the very beginning
9:30 so your only reason to move over the river and sacrifice one workable tile in early game is having the mountain,
as far as im concerned if you settle on the spot you will be able to build macchu picchu and observatory? (2tile- rule)
i mean yes by moving that one tile you will be able to accquire more gold fairly early but isnt having 2 tiles with 2 food 1 prod wo/ upgrades better for the first couple of turns?
+atombindungen Observatory isn't a 2 tile rule, you have to be adjacent to build an observatory.
+FilthyRobot wow thanks for the fast answer, youre right 2 tile rule only appears to apply to wonders, which noob me forgot. whats your point on the production/food issue though? dont get me wrong im not trying to tell you whats better im asking you for your insight.
+atombindungen You still have an immediate growth tile and another good growth tile in the 2nd ring (which you can purchase from gold from meeting a CS). The mountain and corresponding observatory is very much worth the loss of the deer in the first tile.
yes observatory seals the deal i guess,
bigup for replying on an 8 month old video immediately!!
definitely one of the Civ5 PvP Moguls!
Liberty:
Making the Best of a Bad Situation Since 19:48
So the bested start is costly river hill with silver on it next to wounder that counts as mounten
A question about your Assyria start around 17:00. I would have moved my settler to the forest hill adjacent to mountain in a heartbeat. I don't remember hearing you say anything about it, but you abstained from that position because it wasn't on the coast, right?
You talked a lot about the importance of settling on coast. Besides cargo ships giving twice the yield of caravans, I don't see why this is so important. It also leaves you vulnerable to naval attack.
Mindless Ambience Briefly: Coastal tradition with food cargo ships is one of the strongest science games out there. One of the game ending techs is atom bombs, and these can be delivered nearly anywhere on the map with naval dominance and carriers.
So your argument against naval vulnerability of coastal cities is that nukes can hit anywhere? I see where you're coming from, but nukes don't come until the modern era. With a coastal city you're vulnerable starting at Navigation.
Not knocking coastal cities, I acknowledge the benefit of cargo ships too. Just saying that they do have their downsides. And I really would've considered settling on a non-coastal tile in that one.
Mindless Ambience
Nope. What I'm saying is that in the unmodded game, entire games often end if one player is vastly ahead in science and has the location to effectively nuke the other contenders. And that coastal tradition is one of the absolute strongest science games.
Frigates can be defended, often without having to tech for your own frigates. It's not worth giving up some of the strongest starts in the game without something like England in the game.
Ah ok I understand. How would you recommend defending against a frigate bombardment without your own frigates though? Caravels are mostly out of the picture, so I'm assuming you mean using ranged land units to defend. I think there would be many cases where frigates could stand out of range of land units and fire on a city unopposed.
1) Don't be taken by surprise. 2) Stack city combat strength that are likely to be attacked. Castle, walls, get red fort if possible, etc. Tech era and population both contribute to city-strength. 3) Stack units. Gallease+xbow+roads+potential citadel spots.
Frigates are 2 range. There aren't many likely city configurations where the city can be shot where you can't shoot back at all.
This guy logically thinks on where and why to settle, and am here trying to attack something
+Dlxgp Yeah it used to be my instinct to attack barbarians but I've come to realize, if they are not extremely close to you and your civ doesn't have perks related to destroying barbarians don't bother, let some other greedy civ deal with the risk of attacking them and it may give you a slight advantage for other things
I know you've recorded a tradition liberty opener guide!
You said so on your stream yesterday!
I know you don't like it, but for us n00bs it'll be quite useful.
This video was super useful to me, thanks!
This guy is is so intense lmao, seems like a lovely guy though 17:20 😂
A lot of good information in your videos, it's help me improve my game play. I play single player exclusively for various reasons, but I get a lot out of your videos.
Really interesting and helpful, thanks!
Keep up the good work and GL HF!
I really appreciate these guides. Hope you come out with more of them in the future.
Filthy, why did you not move your warrior across the river and onto the grassland hills when playing as the huns? I understand the visibility wasn't as good as moving north toward the grassland, but I think that hill start would have been worth settling on, even if it takes another turn to settle and we lose the initial salt yields. Anyone else agree?
Wow, what a fucking Petra dream Cusco was.
my friend as Japan once, had 3 wales, pearls and 2 or 3 fish lol. Only issue was locked in the corner
i bought Civ 5 complete edition for 9$ last night because of pka and i thought i look up your channel to see if you had any guides and i wasnt dissapointed hopefully the game is as good as i think it is.
I did exactly the same xD
dude you are the best ! keep up the good work ! cheers
Absolutely loving this vids man.
Great video! I wonder why you don't use your settler to explore though (sometimes you move it through rough terrain when there's flatland next to it, wasting a movement point and losing out on a little bit of visibility).
this should be a weekly series, only 1 or maybe 2 cities.
You're a pro , I really learned alot. Thanks! :)
That liberty vs tradition talk would be amazing.
My strategy is a tradition liberty mix, and I only go down honour, piety, or patronage as an extra, when I get the oracle the free policy will be patronage if I don't yet have it
It's only when your headphones break and you try to watch the video with subtitles that you realize how hilarious google subtitles really are.
On the last segment, I immediately jumped at the tile to the southeast in the crux of the rivers. Is there a reason why that wouldn't be a good choice? I was thinking the defensive bonus of four river crossing, the potential of the hills and woods and still being fairly close to the horses and salt would have been balancing.
I agree with you Filthy Robot! But I do not understand, why does jungle is bad place for settling capital by civilization developers' logic? For example India, Siamese civilizations are developed in early history of our world!?
But I agree that civilizations like Rome, Greece, Carthage(Phoenicia), Babylon, Egypt, Persia and China developed because fertile and productive location in early history.
Watching your videos made me realise im doing everything wrong.
When looking for a place to settle a new city, there will sometimes be a location that has many great tiles in its 3-tile radius, but none of these tiles will be in the city's immediate borders, so if you found a city there it will take some time before the city's borders expands to take up these tiles.
Alternatively, you could settle adjacent to a couple of these good tiles, but some of the other good tiles would no longer be in your city's 3-tile radius.
Assuming that you don't have enough gold to just purchase all the tiles, what do you do in a situation like this?
Mindless Ambience Depends on what type of empire you're building, what social policies you have, how likely those tiles are to be stolen by another player, and how much you need those tiles NOW as opposed to later.
Watching 5 minutes of Filthy talk about Civ 5 is inspiration enough to uninstall Civ 6 and go back.
for the start with 3 wines . why didn't you move the settler on the hill and the warrior on the deer or the wine ?
When you started as Huns, it is good to settle in river hill near gems and lake.
I learnt so much on the game watching this vid. thanks
I have to second Ben Closel's comment. Please do a guide on tradition vs liberty. Specifically, liberty openings seem to work best when you build the monument after the first scout is kicked out, but I rarely have enough info to make the call on that turn.
Also, your game loaded much faster than mine. Any tips on good hardware or settings for running civ v faster.
10:47 Should have moved the settler onto the wheat tile first for extra free information.
As a Dane, I can confirm that there exists no reason we shouldn't have a coast bias xD Our capital city, in our native language, literally means: "The Merchant's Harbour", although some would say it just means "Purchase a Harbour". That's just cause they don't look into it's namesake further tho..
for assyria, you could've moved your settler up to the wine instead of the warrior, then onto the sheep hill.
Assyria screamed for warrior on sheep and sertler into hills. I cant imagine why you didnt figure it out. Settling then on a hill next to cows on T 3 makes really strong capital.
I am quite new to civ still learning about it your video helps alot
Hey. Thanks again for this. Could you provide a handy list (like the wonders') of priorities one must look for when settling for new cities in both the early game and later on? Thanks!
What happens when you start on Tundra? Been trying to play Russia recently, and their Start Bias is Tundra- and with my luck, it'll be a mix between Tundra+Desert. I realize it has the benefit of getting Deer+Furs, which means grabbing Goddess of the Hunt makes it salvageable... but sometimes it's just flat Tundra which is near worthless And sometimes a mix of Snow, which is actually worthless.
Thoughts?
Sometimes you have to move, or hope that your expands can make up for a bad start. There's a few Russia games in my videos, and a few of them have the issues you mention.
Yeah just watched your latest Egypt start... such awfulness, yet that's what I get about 50% of the time. X_X
I've been only playing for roughly about 40-50 hrs and im pretty bad, but i've never thought about settling on a luxary before, always thought that it was just good to construct on it, and also maybe this is a shit thing to do but is it good to spam farms etc on random tiles in your city?
If you have no cattle, luxuries, or anything like that and you have a worker sitting around, a couple things you could do include:
1.build farms (like you said.) eventually when your pop increases having extra farms on tiles gives you something to have citizens work.
2. Build mines. Mines are extremely helpful on hills and certain luxuries. They increase productivity on the tile it was built on so that helps.
3. Chop down forests/jungles/marshes. Doing this adds around 13-20 production to the current thing being built in the nearest city. Taking a turn or two off of the production of whatever you're building at that time.
Hopefully I explained some of these correctly lol
Civilization 5 bnw is three tile strategy. Every time assume early three tiles for every city. Three tile psychology.
I think the, maybe not worst but most inconvenient start I ever had in a multiplayer was starting with Egypt and in jungle. Literally, it was 10x10 tiles of nothing but jungle with maybe 1-2 luxury resources and some bananas. No production at ALL.
Yeah growth is nice and all but if you cant build shit you become an automatic nonfactor so fast it hurts.
Thanks for this excellent commentary.
I know these are 3 years old but I love them :)
Why didn't you settle on the hill bananas with the vikings at the start?
Because the advantage of getting the mountain is vastly outweighed by losing bananas, losing the early happiness from the silver, no starting tiles to work, and worse overall tiles (that we've scouted).
i dont get it.. at 12:14 you say you dont want to move on the copper cause you lose food.. but either way do you not get 5 food regardless? if you stay where you are at 12:14 you get 4 tiles = 5 food. if you move on the copper you get 5 tiles = 5 food. am i missing something here?
ps im new to the game been playing for only 4 - 5 days never played Civ before
You would loose immediate food. When you settle your city you only get one citizen which can only work one tile. If he settles on the copper all the tiles in the immediate vicinity only have one food each. This means it will take much longer to get a second citizen. Early game this is huge because a difference in 2 or 3 citizens can lead to a very significant production difference.
Kevin Clark
Exactly
ahh yeaah i played for a few days more and i understand how you lock in and micro manage your cities now. Makes total sense. but thanks for the reply :D
I know this video is almost 2 years old, however is there some sort of golden ratio for food:production? when settling a city
Not really. What you want is to be continually increasing in population at a quick and consistent rate, which means you need more and more food the bigger you get. If I was absolutely forced to pick a golden ration, I'd say 3:1 or about exactly a plains river tile.
When your only remaining food tiles are poor like 2food/2gold or 2food/1prod should one just switch to working production until the food tiles impove or you get new tiles?
_When your only remaining food tiles are poor like 2food/2gold or 2food/1prod should one just switch to working production until the food tiles impove or you get new tiles?_
No, you generally just keep focusing Food all the time until you're unhappy. At that time, growth is so slow that you focus Production instead. The exception would be if you're building Settlers or need some breakpoint built as fast as possible e.g. Wonder--if switching to production saves you turns on building that Wonder.
Whenever you're building Settlers you just focus Production, or anything other than Food, since obviously you can't grow while building one.
In general 1 Production is worth about 4 GPT. You just don't want negative GPT while you have 0, or it'll be taken out of your Science.
useful for peoples playing a quick speed, personalty i playing at marathon speed (the slower), so the time for tec and stuff are way way longer.
Anyway i don't move a lot the 1st settler, my next cities do the rest to adjust with my needs.
How come you'd rather settle directly on a wine tile? Isn't that just the same thing as not doing, and then having a citizen work that tile permanently?
Why not settling on the bananas? It's also a hill and it will give you a lot of food which is important at the beginning
Fuck you are good. I feel so out of league now
Awesome guides man! So when settling a capital, focus first on growth tiles, then hammers, strategic resources, then coastal cities, river cities, mountains, then anything else? What do you want to prioritize here?
How does he see all of those icons for food and coins and animals?
Yield and Resource icons. Toggle them on. Button near minimap bottom right.
thanks keep up the great work. You have a new sub
lexxon11 Glad to hear!
So do I understand this correctly: If you settle on a lux. resource you will get it and not destroy it?
correct
im just plopping down whereever i start and put my warrior on autodiscover xD
on the last scenario, i'm surprised you didn't consider the 2nd turn settle on the mountain/river
For the huns game, I think settling in place would've been better - inland lakes with cargo ships are quite powerful (both in MP and in SP)
It's a lake, not coast, which means you can't run cargo ships through it!
Really! Dang, never knew that
Are ruins disabled in the no quitter group games? It seems like it would make shoeshone useless.
Kevin Lust They are not disabled
How do you know your guarantied iron and horses, because a lot of times I never have iron in my capital?
Strategic Balance under advanced settings :)
Why is having mountains near your city such a benefit?
There are 2 wonders that require a mountain with 2 tiles of your capital, and if your capital is adjacent to a mountain it can build an observatory, which is +50% science.
What game were you talking about when people thought you two were hostile towards each other? I know this is a year and a half old :/
I am a tad confused. When is it smart to settle on ressources, and when is it not??
+Kastane Flint gonna leave this comment here for an answer
+Israel Chua You need to clarify what you're asking. What type of resource are you asking about?
In general. What ressources is it smart to settle a new city upon, and which is not? Is it smart to place a city on iron as an example? On cattle?
Kastane Flint
The goal is to maximize the best tiles for the city. Settling on luxuries or strategic resources connects those resources automatically when you acquire the appropriate tech, so it doesn't matter if you settle on them. However, settling on a tile prevents building an improvement. So settling on a tile like plains salt (that starts as 2-1-1, but becomes 3-2-1 when improved) denies the city 1-1-0 in yield each turn, and settling on cattle denies the 0-1-0 from the pasture. In general, it's nice to settle on mining luxuries on hills or calendar or camp resources because you're likely gaining yields that you wouldn't otherwise be working.
+FilthyRobot so if I start next to gems on a hill, it might be a good thing to settle on it? if so, why? what does improving gems on a hill do compared to improving gems on a plain, such that in general it is nice to settle on it?
I noticed that you really like to settle on the actual river itself. I'm not sure that's a great idea, watermills and gardens aren't that strong buildings, and hydrodams are too late game. I personally bump settling on the river slightly lower in priority than hills and mountains.
The watermill is an awesome building. +2 food and +1 prod early is amazing. Gardens are so-so, mostly because it's hard to find time to build them. Hydroplants, especially on long rivers, are also very good. Rivers also offer a really nice defensive position and provide +25% land trade route gold.
I don't think mountains or hills are quite as important (although I like hills when I can)
FilthyRobot I dislike watermills, because they still cost too many hammers for my liking. They're competing with granaries, compbows, colosseums, workers, etc, on the "what to build list".
I like settling on hills for the free +1h.
Think of it this way. Not settling on a river frees up a freshwater tile for a +1f civil service farm. Settling on a hill gives +1h. That's almost as good as a watermill, and it doesn't cost any hammers.
Nicolae Carpathia
Do you primarily play team games? 2v2, 3v3, etc? Comps and Colosseums are pretty low priority items in FFA games. Like all infrastructure, the hammers spent are an investment and, unless the game is super short, it's one well worth it.
Nicolae Carpathia So it's basically in really short term +1 hammer and +4 Food or +3 hammers and +2 food.
Me personally I would choose the +3 hammers and +2 food because you really need it to pump out them early buildings (They give you SOOO MANY buildings to work on at a time that if you don't have good production you will be building them all the way up till the other people are about to attack you with a huge army).
Wow you too screwed up that wine start - the settler should have first moved to the wine and THEN to the hill exposing 2 more tiles - and your friends suggestion to go to the deer was correct.
Better place it on fertile ground.
Can make it grow faster that way.
Then can create more units to train it.
"You have been overruled by the Senate"
ah the good old days..