Izulde, I'm right there with you. I played the demo and its all I can do to not spend the $50 on the full game.

So, I was going to quit and restart but decided to stick my first game out and have now recovered and survived the attacks from Russia. I have started to focus on technology more and am now fielding Minutemen and cannons and have just about completed the Rifling tech which will give me riflemen think 19th century. I am in 1680 so am ahead of everyone else. I lost my one northern city on a peninsula to Russia who razed the city. I still have three large well defended cities and one small growing one on a far distant continent across the oceans.

A few things I have noticed:
-If you build forts and do not quickly occupy them with combat troops another nation will claim them. Also, you can build forts anywhere you want not just in your territory but be careful. I built two forts just outside my territory and another nation sent settlers and built cities right near them thus when the fort was done it was that nation property damn.
-One thing that I don't like about units being able to change to transport ships from land is you can not trap units at the a sea unless you blockade the ocean as well. I guess that is realistic.
-I am playing in the third AI level and the AI is decent.

Interesting. I have just been playing around, noticing a lot of fixable bugs, but will not play for real until the first patch or two. Way too many examples (and some personal examples) of an inept tactical AI, esp. in the first 150 turns on normal. An outnumbered, inferior defense can easily hold off much larger superior units because the AI do not know how to use 1upt well, esp. range and embarking attacks. You can use Zone of Control much, much better than the AI can.

Going on the offense in the early game, take 3 range units and 3 ground units (like Swords) plus a worker or scout and see how many civs you take out, even at higher difficulty levels. Problem is that it is easy to draw them out piecemeal (with the worker, for exampe) to slaughter. In the first 100-150 turns, you will encounter nearly defenseless AI cities: 2-3 weak units in each.

Promotions come fast and easy since you get good points just standing around while a few arrows fly at you, not to mention really good points in attacking. Since you will have less units (and can move them better), promotions become very powerful, esp. when the unit is upgraded and do not lose them. Some suggested that playing on huge maps will help slow down the pace but many cannot get huge maps to work without crashing.

I've played a couple games on huge maps in strategy view with no crashes.

For some reason the game likes to crash whenever I quit, though. That's funny.

Forgot to check back in. It works fine on her laptop, v10/11. Played it some on the plane and a good bit last night.

Hmmmm..yeah, I've played nothing but huge maps. Other than the crash I was getting when I first tried to run, I haven't gotten those.

I just finished a huge earth map game where I won the Diplomatic race as Rome. I played at prince level and leaned on city states heavily.

I was crashing frequently in the last 100 years or so usually when the view swung across the globe to another unit. The graphics would just freeze. However, I was determined to finish it so I just cranked the graphics all the way down and saved every turn.

I was positioned in the Egypt area at the start so I build along the Nile. The game ran fine until I started exploring the Oceans and scouted out the Americas. I guess it was just too much for my setup. Think I'll stick with standard size maps for a while.

I had a crash last night when playing a tutorial, the screen went black, but I could see my cursor.. had to cntl-alt-del and come back - been fine since.

I can not get the game to play anything but Direct x 9 though I am above recommended specs. Bummer.

I agree promotions needed to be made less powerful or AI needs to be ramped up to account for it. As you mentioned another option might be to make promotions less easy to get. I had a group of minutemen get created we march across a allies territory and we got a promotion.LOL.

and This


You just described all of my early cities until about 1000 AD.:D

I have played nothing other then huge maps and have been fine, D x 10/11 on my laptop with an i5 and Intel integrated graphics.

Then it has to be a vista 64 issue.

I am running Win 7 64 myself. It might just a be a 64 bit problem.

After a few games this weekend, I personally find the whole "You don't need as much expansion to do well" to not be that true. In Civ 5, I can still do well with only 3 cities, but I easily do far better with more cities and resources.

As long as you build happiness buildings to keep up with the expansion, the only limiting factor becomes money. You have to be a bit more cautious about what you build to make sure you can afford it is all.

My experience appears to be more like yours, Alan. In my current game, (Standard, Continents, Prince) I am Rome and my first 2 neighbors have already been crushed under the boots of my 5 legions. As long as I keep my happiness in the low negatives, I don't seem to be having any troubles. I'm debating whether to pause the warmongering until I can annex my last 2 Japanese puppet cities or to just roll through Babylon's 3 cities next. I'm leaning towards warmongering.

Yeah. Although having a large empire means you can find it harder to keep the people happy and acquire new social policies, the edge you get in researching and production seems to outweigh that.

I don't know how many of you guys play the Europa Universalis games but in that series the amount of gold (would be beakers in Civ) it takes to research a new technology is higher for bigger nations, I think something like that would work well for Civ 5 to make having a small or medium sized empire more attractive.

And while I don't miss religion, espionage, or corporations I do miss vassals. If I found a number of cities on a new continent I'd like to have the option of letting them go in order to reduce costs while remaining allies. And the same goes for when I take a few opposition cities, I know they can be rules as puppets but they will build expensive city improvements that don't help much, seemingly won't build work boats to take advantage of pearls/whales like an AI Civ would, or defend themselves. It'd be nice to leave them in the game but as vassals, I don't really like razing cities unless they are in really bad spots and you can't raze cities that were originally capitals anyway.

Don't annex if you are in the low negatives, just keep rolling.

One of the key strategies is to be really friendly with a Maritime city-state. That way they can provide your empire with plenty of food while you concentrate on better things.

Fo, I don't miss those things either but I think alliance with city-states took the place of vassals. That is something the AI understands (marginally) as well. It just doesn't know how to do 1upt or diplomacy, which were the two things I feared when I first heard about them. Diplomacy they can improve just by having the AI value things far more important instead of offering everything to you when they want peace. I'm not confident on 1upt since the AI could not fight well with something as easy as SoD in Civ4, how does one expect them to handle something more complex? I fear that they will simply give the AI a +33% combat bonus to make up for it.

1.0.0.20 patch has been released. Making baby steps in the right direction...

Modding - Installer and permissions fixes. Should address any
remaining mod download and install issues.
Full screen crash fix. Game will now restart in Windowed mode if
it cannot find a suitable full-screen resolution on first start.
Hall of Fame now records data correctly when using a Windows
username with special characters.
Deal expiration fixes.
Fix for Puppet State production exploit.
Misc crash fixes.

Win 7 64 bit on mine. Probably not as simple as that because I have no problems as I stated above.

Enjoying the game so far, but I noticed something odd after I conquered Belgrade.

Belgrade is located on the coast at the very south of the continent (Pangaea) and the only reason I conquered it was that it was located on a narrow pass that led to the other side of the coast and a nice deposit of coal. The damned Siamese are to my north-east so I can't get to the coast that way. There is a big mountain range between Belgrade and Siam.

Anyway so I conquered Belgrade and moved a couple of settlers to go put down a couple of cities on the slim, but rather mineral rich, sliver of land along the east coast.

I wanted to build a workboat as there are some pearls by Belgrade...but I ran into a problem. Despite being along the coast, apparently Belgrade is not coastal. I can't build any ships or anything like a harbour. I can't figure out what the problem is.

I also can't get any work boats over to it because it's cut off by ice in each direction.

Anybody have any idea what the problem is?

There's just something amusing about playing as the Indians and conquering the French before the birth of Christ.

Also sneaky how when they offered their capitulative peace treaty - all their gold and resources - they tried to sneak an open borders arrangement in there.

I'm guessing this might be the problem - because it doesn't have open access to the ocean/any of your other cities via the ocean the game doesn't consider it a coastal city?

When I got offered that I was allowed into their borders but I did not allow them into mine, just because one side has open borders does not mean both do anymore

All the seazones in front of Belgrade are open, the ice is several spaces off in each direction.

I haven't played all that much yet, but what does buying tiles do besides expand your city?

Lets you instantly expand your city without having to wait on culture but for a price. Useful in grabbing a strategic or luxury resource before someone else can grab it, or for cutting off another civ's access to a different part of land.

Oh - I guess only if both sides offer it?

Ahhh. ok.. so if there is a resource I want, I should buy it up?

Do you find yourself buying tiles when you have the money?

One thing I'd like to know - can the growth of a city usurp tiles (edit: er, still usurp, that is) that other cities had been using? If they aren't being worked, for example?

Early in the game, absolutely. 50-55 gold is a bargain compared to bringing in a key resource. You can only work out to 3 tiles and it does get expensive further out. After buying a tile or two, I save my early money for city-states.

Double-check that the coast hexes are not ocean?

I just won a game with a city at 102 culture development and did not unlock the achievement for 100+ culture from one city.

No, I've not seen that. Culture Bomb is the only way I've seen to take land from an enemy

I save my early money for an aggressive city. I place it near my opponent to challenge their resources, and then buy the land near theirs to lock them off and set my borders.

I do the same, but I find it pisses them off to no end. So make sure you are ready for the inevitable war that will be coming.

No, the first ocean tiles are ice. Although I could probably reach one ocean tile that's not ice, but surrounded by ice. Cities can reach out three tiles yeah?

Still, ocean or not it doesn't make much sense, especially since there is a pearl resource right there. Work boats if nothing else should be allowed to be built.

I just checked and there are three achievements I've gotten in my games, and not unlocked. I've gotten Magellan, City of Lights, and Death Before Shame.

After my last game where the AI Civs largely left each other alone (on a small continents map), they have pretty much gobbled each other up this time. The game began with eight Civs and is now down to three at the start of the Industrial Age and I only took down two of them. I try to play peacefully but I just enjoy the combat so more on this game than Civ IV. Plus I was next to the Aztecs who I never get along with in any game and the Indians thought it would be a great idea to declare war on me when I had many times more cities and units than they did, that war lasted about four turns before they were conquered.

Based on the games I have played and from reading about other people's experiences this seems to occur regularly on large continents (playing a Terra map this time), the AI likes to scrap but doesn't seem to be very good at naval warfare/invading overseas/founding new cities away from their home continent.

Most likely a problem with Steam. Unfortunately Steam doesn't do offline achievements, I've had times when I lost connection to Steam either on my end or theirs and haven't unlocked achievements I've gotten on other games. No idea if they plan on adding the ability to get achievements offline.

This would seem right from a game I played earlier today. Played on a small archipelago map and won a cultural victory without being attacked, and I don't think that any Civs were conquered. I noticed a few wars between civilizations that shared islands and some city states being conquered, but all civs stayed around. Not sure how much of the peace I maintained had to do with trying to maintain good relations by giving extra luxury resources away and doing research agreements and how much was them not being able to do naval combat. I also wasn't too close to anyone, I only shared a cultural border at sea with Ramses late in the game. Also, in my experience it seemed a lot of the time I'd been attacked in other games was due to other leaders being upset I was settling near them.

BTW, anybody else had a problem with civs not getting going?

Okay, small map and Pangaea.

I (America) am in the south, Persia is to my west, Egypt to my north-west, Arabia directly north, Siam north-east, Ottomans east-north-east.

Early in the game I made two additional cities, Persia added another, and Siam added four or five. Seeing Siam, I decided to be a bit more aggressive in filling up my 'area'. Where I'm located has natural borders (mountain ranges) in all directions with three major passes and two small coastal passes to the south and west.

Siam meanwhile continues expanding in the north and east.

Egypt, Turks, Persia and Arabia seemingly do nothing for quite some time until finally in maybe the Medieval or Renaissance Era, I forget which (btw, I'm using marathon length) Peria starts expanding rapidly to my west, Egypt adds three or four cities, the Arabs add a few cities in the center of the map and the Turks add one at the far north and on the western side of the massive Siamese empire. They also tried to build one down by my southern border, but I dealt with the little bastards.

Anyway, I just found it odd that all the other civs other than Siam took so long to actually do anything. Has anybody else noticed anything like that happen or is it more likely just a freak occurence?

Siam is freaking annoying, though I've got the main pass into my lands from Siam well defended.

Siam also set up shop in a few far flung cities on the other side of the map, which I find annoying but isn't really anything new to Civ. I hate when civs do that though.

Got the 'are you sure you wanna attack a city?' popup while the game was thinking between turns.

It never would go away, so I had to force-quit. :(

I haven't seen that in any of my games so far with one exception: India. They don't spread much at all it seems, ever. Probably because of their penalty to add too many cities.


I have seen quite often a civ will get set back pretty badly because of settlers getting captured by barbarians. They seem to continue to want to settle one spot and if a Barbarian is near, it will keep picking them off. So maybe in some of the cases you have seen it was barbarians causing them problems?

Great tip, and I unwittingly hit right on it. Smashing Babylon made me allies with Rio, whom Nebby had just attacked. Now I've got growth despite negative happiness. I had to recalibrate the tiles my cities were working to ensure I didn't have too much growth.

Thanks Bucc!

For those that are wondering how this game typically plays or wondering that the commotion has been about, read Sulla'a walkthrough and review. He was the one that did the famous early walkthrough when Civ4 had just come out (and taught a lot of us how to play).

American Empire

Just started playing my first Huge map game. And man huge maps are so much easier than Normal or small maps. It seems the larger the map, the easier the game. My prince level game on a huge map seems easier than my beginner level small map game.

I think the AI just doesn't handle all of these choices in the huge map too well. This is completely opposite of Civ 4 where the larger maps seemed tougher to me. After this game is done, I'll likely go back to a small map, seems more fun.

Recap of Civ I through IV. Nice to relive the past some.
The history of Civilization: 20 years of Wonders

I have been trying out the City-States strategy playing as Greeks and it has been a lot of fun. I wanted to learn how to manage such a relationship (it's easy if you have the gold and the policies) and what I can get from them (tons of stuff). I'm about to ally with a Militaristic city-state so that will be interesting.

One of the simplest strategies is to sell a luxury good to a civ for 300g, which will give you -5 happiness. Then turn around and pay 500g to a city-state which will give at least 1 luxury good in return.

If you want to maximize city-state relationships, skip the early policies and shoot toward the Patronage one (rah detailed this). Wonders are easy to build even with no build bonuses and not only did I get Great Library but went ahead and built Oracle which gave me a policy for free. It's not even 500bc and I have all but one Patronage policies.

In the meantime, I have been dealing with Barbs and Brutes and my one souped-up warrior is doing the job after being softened by a trireme (using range weapons against the AI is easy, they have a hard time dealing with such). Now I am ready to build the UU Cavalry and Hoplites. Also, the AI doesn't know how to use embarkings and naval units well at all. I got Optics early and while I have to stay on the coast, I can get around really well - sending units to attack Barbs and to get ruins on islands and such.

So far I have found the militaristic city-states to be pretty under-whelming.

Reading through this thing right now and to be honest, this guy should quit playing this game. It is too easy for him it seems. I am also pretty sure he has called me stupid a few times as well.

reminds me of the No Mutants Allowed reaction to Fallout 3:

"You changed it, thus it sucks."

A lot of his comments do come off as that. Some of his comments I agree with though, like the one unit per tile should be for military only. I hate not have multiple workers on a tile. It is also a touch annoying that cities can work so many tiles now, yet they will never come close to being that big, or even as big as I would get them in Civ IV.

I would like cow, wheat, deer, and other food bonus tiles to be more valuable, that would help with city growth.

Agreed. That was one of his points as well. Like I said, he makes some pretty valid points (like that one). Overall though it seems like the guy only plays the game to rip it a new asshole because it is so easy for him. I admit I am taking away a few things from it though, because he talks about how easy it it yet I am pretty sure in my current Prince level game I don't have a very solid chance of winning. I know I have not adapted to this version yet, this will help a little.

Somebody just got a new laptop for his birthday with plenty of horsepower to run Civ5.

Of course, it's for business use.

**giggle**

For some reason, I thought the manual said the one unit per tile was for military only.

I haven't been able to stack workers, but I have been able to stack one military and one civilian unit.

Yeah, you're right:

Units are subject to “Stacking” limitations – two military
units may not end their turn in the same hex, nor
can two non-military units, but one military and one
non-military unit may end their turn stacked in the
same hex.

Eh, my experience is a bit yes and no.

Sometimes they can give you some pretty crappy units, like a scout. Why would I want a scout? Idiots.

However when they're actually giving you decent units, like when they were giving me cannons, then it's not quite so bad. Could still be much better.

It would be better if they either provide some other smaller bonus (aside from resources) or if the units they provided were in some way unique. Perhaps they could cost slightly less or something, I don't know.

I had several cultural city states providing over half my culture, and I was able to develop some very large cities thanks to maritime ones.

Militaristic though, one decent (or worse) unit every twenty turns or so...for the money you're spending? Eh.

Yeah, the issue is that indeed I sometimes do get a nice unit, but even when I do, I still have to pay maintenance on the unit I get so it still costs me. For the gold I pour in, I could just buy the units instead for maybe just a slightly higher cost but with more control of when and where I get it.

The best way to have a military city-state under your influence would be through completing city-state missions/requests and getting the influence that way instead of paying. SOme of those can set you up for influence over a city-state for a while, then you have some pretty cheap units coming your way. Otherwise, I agree the investment is not worth it.

I've sometimes taken the crap units that they have given me and then re-gifted them back to the city state for extra influence. It just ended up being more effort than it was worth. I usually just wait for one of the other city states to ask me to destroy them and then do it.

Wife and I are playing a LAN game, having a ton of crashes that freeze either one of our computers...frustrating.

I am now allied with 7 city-states.

I am having my most competitive game yet. It is around 1990 AD and the Arabs are the only AI Civ left (I am the French). They have more cities, GNP, and production while I have a bigger population and slightly better tech. They invaded one of the city-states I am allied with so I declared war on them (although they are only a militaristic city-state, Tyre provides me with a ton of oil which I need for tanks and airplanes). For this game I picked a Terra map and we are fighting a war on three different fronts, separated by inland seas, it's pretty fun.

The one thing I don't understand is that the Arab units have a +25% strength bonus for being in friendly territory, but this shows up even when both my unit and his unit begin the battle in my territory. It kind of unbalances things considering that we are at the same technology level.

Could you gift it to a different city-state instead?

yes, you can gift military units to any city state for a small amount of influence (seems very small)

It IS very small, to the point where it's not even worth it.


Yeah. The last time I looked in my America game I was getting a unit every 17 turns (though that might have gone down as I progressed an age or two).

During that time, lets say I was making...10 gold per turn. 1700 gold, so yeah I could probably buy a unit of my choosing, or even two. Haven't really bothered purchasing units so I'm not sure what they usually cost.



Also, started a new game (Egypt, One City Challenge) and once again I have one civ blobbing hugely while the other follow at a more sedated pace. In this game it's France, in my last game it was Japan, and in my first game it was Siam. It's always one state that goes wild with expansion.

Depends on which unit and if you have any bonuses to lower the cost. Generally units cost between 200 and 800 gold though.

How does the one city challenge go? Is there anyway to keep up with other civs while having just one city? Do you have go aggresive to keep the other civs down?

Are you able to at least puppet any cities you conquer, or must you raze them?

You must raze them as you cannot control, even partially, more than one city. I think the main thing in OCC is to be strong enough to hold on to what you got (since you are building a very large, valuable city). Also you have to be prepared to prevent another civ from winning if they are close.

What happens if you are forced to take an enemy capital?

Also, how do we get allies or city states to give us units?

I'm not sure.


Militaristic city states will give you a unit every 17 turns or so if allied. Other allied city states will give one on a occassion if they are really happy with you (I got a general without even fighting). From civs, I don't know, may be via the trade dialog?

Thanks. I get Generals what are they good for other than a golden age or a Citadel? And what is a Citadel for?

I didn't know Great Generals can do golden ages?

I'm waiting for my general to catch up to my troops but I think he will give a 25% boost to strength for those units within 2(?) hexes of him. Classic wargame stuff.

Citadel, if I recall, is a really, really strong tile that probably is meaningless for gameplay.

General's three options are:

1) Start a golden age. (nothing special here)

2) Adds 25% strength boost to all units within 2 tiles. The general counts as a non-military unit so CAN stack with a military unit. It does not combine with a military unit as it did in Civ 4, but you can have it move with a military unit to provide it constant protection.

3) Build the citadel. This building will overwrite whatever improvement is in the hex you choose to build the citadel. Building the citadel consumes the general. The citadel will give 3 points of damage to any enemy unit that ends a turn adjacent to it.

I used the Citadel once in a one tile ithmus on a hill between me and Egypt. It's wasn;t that hot. It totally kept Egypt out though

Thanks everyone for the answers.

Noob question incoming. Never played Civ before and this is for Civ IV, but it's such a basic question I figure I can ask here. (CIV V doesnt run for me so since I've never played before Civ IV and V are no difference to me)

I've played, or I should say I've STARTED to play, a couple games now. I tend to get to about 750 BC and restart because I feel I've made such critical mistakes that it's better to just learn from them and start over. But with the flow of so much information some stuff just goes in one ear and out the other. (I've probably put about six hours of game time in, but probably 10 hours of reading forums, basic strategy guides in. Probably the wrong way to go about it but the first time I fired up the game I was so lost.)

Now to the question. The tiles around my city, they have their production labels (food, commerce, production). When I start to build improvements on them, to get the results from each tile do I have to have a citizen working it? Like early on, my city population is only two or three. Am I only getting commerce, food, production from the two or three tile that i have citizens on or do I get it from all the tiles, but just a bonus from the ones being worked on?

Additional question. One game I started, I got to around 700 BC or so. I decided to open the world builder up, just to see the computer and see how either far behind or ahead I was. Cheating, yes, but I really wasn't using it to find resources. I'm more worried about understanding the game then the victories right now. But my city was in an area of high commerce and food, but there as only ONE production in my city. I noticed I was so far behind and that was probably because it as taking 30+ turns to produce a fucking worker. Is that just terrible placement of the city, being fucked on the map gen, or was there something I could do to make up for that? There was quite a bit of stone nearby that I probably should have utilized earlier, but didn't, would that have made up for it? Or am I totally off base?

And a third question that came up as I was typing this. How quickly do you have to plant your first city? Is that pretty much something you need to do within a few turns? First couple games I was wasting probably six-ten turns trying to find a good place to put my city and then eventually getting my settler there.

Thanks for the input.

1. Citizens working tiles.

2. Had only one hammer in my initial city, was I fucked?

3. City placement. Initial city, how late is too late?

Well I did this game on Chieftain since it was my first go at OCC on Civ5, so it'll be a little harder on the higher levels.

You have to do a really good job of balancing everything when you do OCC though. It can be easy to get behind if you don't pay attention to one area.

I went with Egypt for one reason and one reason only, +20% production on Wonders. Add with that some of the other bonuses you can get on wonders from policies and such, and you can really benefit by building them. Wonders give culture, plus their bonus, plus Great People points, and are completely free of maintenance.

You need to make certain that you're in a good defensive position as well, as you can't really afford to screw up too much in war. You can take your chances and attack other civs as you see fit, but you have to be vigilant and protect your capital. Walls, Castle, etc. are definitely something worth taking despite the maintenance costs. Especially when you can get some wonders or policies that greatly increase their strength. I'm in the middle of the renaissance era right now and Thebes has a combat strength of about 59.

The biggest problem I've found is gold. You don't really realise how much money you get from trade routes until you have none. You've got to keep an eye on maintenance costs and work with other civs in trading to make some money.

Personally for the city I focus on food and production first, then science and then gold.

If you're only going to have one city, it needs to be big so you can work as many tiles as possible and have what specialists you need to keep up with everybody else.

Production needs to be high because you can't rely on other cities helping by producing units or wonders or whatever.

Science you need to do what you can when you can to keep that high or you'll fall behind eventually. It's not as big a problem early in the game, but later on as the AI have many more cities all producing science you may start to lag behind.


As for my Egyptian game. I started out on a small peninsula that was nearly all grassland with some hills and lots of forests. So I started out in a good location to grow a large population. I had some silk and marble around too so that I could trade.

My first priority was building a worker so that I could get improving some of those hills and improve my production. Only after that did I build a scout (not like I was going to be expanding much anyway) and then an archer to deal with any barbarians.

Kept improving my land, building some wonders and other buildings as I saw fit. Focusing mainly on science and gold producing buildings, along with the defensive ones.

Eventually Rome tried to start some crap with me, I used mainly ranged units and retreated back to Thebes and just nailed the little bastards from a distance. Eventually got a peace treaty out of them by giving some silk.

After that I made a beeline towards getting longswordsman and then cannons, while also working on a castle and The Kremlin.

Rome invaded again, I did the same this time only was more prepared and eventually they gave in. Got a good bit of gold, lots of resources, a very good war all around.

Since then Rome hasn't really been picking fights with me, though I did DoW them once and repeated the previous war more or less. I've sent a portion of my army off to fight away form my home peninsula a few times when somebody needed to be brought back down to size. Gotten some gold from each of those wars as I've kept ahead of everybody else technologically.

As for City States I've mostly kept allied with some maritime once to get more food. I'm also allied to Sidon who have provided me some useful units this time around.

I'm going to continue with this game for awhile longer and see how later era's play and then I think I'll give it a try on Prince level.

You only get hammers, gold or food from the tiles you have a citizen working. But it doesn't hurt to go ahead and improve tiles before you're ready to work them as you'll get a new citizen eventually.

Remember though that in Civ IV a city can only work tiles that are within two tiles of the city.


Mines add to production of a tile, and certain terrains have different values so it depends on where you were somewhat. Grasslands are brilliant for growing huge cities, poor producing buildings/units quickly. Though the high population gives you the potential to have a high production value if utilized correctly.

So yes, a few mines probably would have helped, and any resources like stone too.


I usually do right away, unless I see some really good reason not to.

When you start out you're already in a good location. May not always be perfect but it's usually above average. Roaming around looking for a different spot just gets you off to a slower start than the others.

1. Each population works a tile. So, if you have 2 population, then only 2 of those tiles are being worked. You can choose which ones, too.

2. You were likely fucked. I think we need more info to draw a better conclusion.

3. You should be building your first city on the first turn. 99.9% of the time I do and usually on that tile it starts on.

Not sure what more info meant, but I did an overhead shot. It's kind of hard to see, but you might be able to break it down. You can see the three mines by my capital. I may have got started on those too late. I just recall it take sooo lonnngg to get a worker or warrior.

http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/k...enShot0000.jpg




A lot of good information for me in your post but out of all of it this made a lot click for me. I knew you had to build by resouces and what not. That is was essential, but somehow that basic law slipped past me.

In Civ4, it was 99.999%, Civ5 shaping up to be about 95-99%, depending on bias start or not.

Remember that in Civ IV, you can use your surplus food to build workers, too.

I'm not sure that I'm too fond of the bias start, I kept starting and restarting games with America and every time it seemed I was stuck in between a desert and tundra/snow/ice with a little bit of plains in between and a couple of city states taking up the nearest good locations. Sort of annoying.

Although such a location can be quite decent for later in the game when you hold the vast majority of the worlds oil. :cool:

I think it is biased towards the UU. Doesn't America have a big bomber or something? But you can always go into advanced setup and not do a biased start.

Hmm, I think I found a bug... Do you see it?

The number of horses?

the underwater pyramid?

Yeah, for some reason ever since I had a deal with another civ to give them horses for money, since the deal has ended, every turn it keeps adding the horses to my total (and adds gold per turn to the other civ's total).

Now I'm up to 1700 horses available while the other civ is making like 400 gold per turn now.

I would rather have the gold....


But, you should report this and submit your saved game.

Nogram

It's been a known bug since the release.

Edit: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=384564

Thanks Bucc!


Such ashame I don't think there are enough hex tiles in the map to use up all 12000 horses that I now have :)

Too bad that bug didn't happen with iron.

Speaking of iron, by late BC I was pulling in 36 iron. It was one of the last Patronage policies that really bumped up resources from a city-state.

Figured out that the game doesn't crash much at all in single player. Soon as my wife and I start a LAN hosted game, crashes all the time.