An Advanced Guide to Initial Settler Moving

[dukeblue1987]

An Advanced Guide to Initial Settler Moving

*This guide is geared towards H2H. It is much more risky to move settlers in FFA.

Moving your initial settler is becoming a staple in the games of many top players. Specifically, Morte, TyShine, P2M2, Thrasher, and myself. We move our settlers very often, and probably the majority of our H2H games. I’m sure there are many more, sorry if I left you out.

A lot of the newer strategies posted by top players recommend moving your initial settler. This is a skill that requires more than blind luck. This is a guide for those who are saying, “Move my settler? Are you crazy!?”

Why Move?

There are a bunch of reasons why you should move your settler.

Walk-ins
Map Knowledge and barb knowledge
Quick gold
Closer to barbs
Closer to AI
Closer to Human (depending on chosen civs)

Here are a few potential risks of moving your settler

You get blocked by a barb hut and have no trees.
You move directly to a human player (depending on chosen civs)
You settle with no grass and have a bad gold map/can’t take an AI.

What to consider when considering

1. Your opponent. Against poor competition you really don’t need to move. A nice balanced spot will win you every game. A tried and true method. You won’t get any super fast starts that you might have gotten if you had moved your settler, but you don’t need them to win. There is always some risk when moving, so why take the chance?

Against good players I suggest moving almost every time. I have first hand experience on the benefits. I’m going to pick on Thrasher because it is my favorite thing to do and also because we have played a lot of games against each other.

When we first started playing I moved my settler every game and Thrasher did not. I was winning at a clip of 60-70% of games. I consider Thrasher one of the elite players, so this is a great winning percentage. I eventually told Thrasher to, “Start moving your settler every game until something good happens.” It took him a little bit to learn the skill (like anything you get better with practice), but he soon became an expert. Recently, Thrasher has winning the majority of our games. It is very obvious that settler moving makes a big difference.

2. Your civ. Some civs are simply better to move than others. Remember, any civ that starts with no tech or a 20 beaker tech can pick up HBR from a goodie hut. Civs with a more advanced tech can only get gold or a spy. I would only recommend taking HBR if you already have some gold from another hut or a couple naming tiles (or you’re Aztecs).

Aztecs – The easiest civs to move. You start with 25 gold, which means that you can get a walk-in almost every game. You can also get HBR from a hut and get your first horse out 3 turns later. Finally, you can settle next to a barb hut and take in on the same turn (assuming its before 3500 when the barbs usually grow).

Spanish – They are probably the 2nd easiest civ to move. I don’t specifically look for a whale. A naming tile gives you a free warrior and a good chance for a walk-in. If you happen to stumble on a whale with 2 trees, great! I wouldn’t settle without at least two trees though.

Arabs – You want to be closer to the action so moving is a good idea. You can get a 6 or 9 attack warrior army very fast which will take any civ including a human. You are almost guaranteed a cap or gold with the Arabs so that takes out the risk of settling with no grass.

Indians – You can settle on any production resource for a warrior than turn. You also can find some good dye/oak/rubber/ iron spots. Basically, there are a lot of decent spots to settle.

Germans – A warrior army attacks a 4.5 and will usually take a cap early no problem.

Japanese – You don’t need grass anyways so it takes out the risk of no growth. I like to move when I horse rush with them (always in H2H).

Russia – You have a big starting map so it is a little less risky and you can make better decisions on which way to go.

Mongols – It is nice to get a goodie hut for a quick warrior. A walk-in is huge because of the +50% trade.

France – You have nothing else going for you. Why not try to make some luck?

China – You are so good anyways that you really don’t need to risk moving. They are one of the few civs I don’t move unless I know I’m on a peninsula. However, you can settle with just 1 tree and still have 4 production which is nice. You also can build a settler so there is no growth risk.

Zulu – I only move if you are on a peninsula to get closer to huts/other civs.

Americas – you can move and settle at 4000bc b/c of the great person but you really don’t need to. The great person will pick up gold and map knowledge anyways.

English – Finding dye is good if you get a tree too. Just work gold. I wouldn’t move looking for dye, its just nice of you happen to stumble upon it.

Greeks – If you move two turns you can switch out of democracy with no penalty. The courthouse gives you plenty of options for where to settle and you can often link a couple resources together.

Romans – You only need two trees and one grass. Water is optional because you get cities so fast anyways. You don’t really need to move as the Romans though, they are very good balanced.

Egypt – Finding desert is nice as long as you still have two trees.

3. Your early game goals. If you are horse rushing (like you probably should with most civs), I recommend moving your settlers.

4. Your map position. Always move if you are on a peninsula near the poles. Staying there will starve you of gold. You want to be in the middle of the map where there are plenty of AI’s to abuse and barbs to take.

Tips

A general rule of thumb is to move towards the middle of the map. If you start in the middle, move horizontally. You wan’t to be in the middle of everything. Always check your position in 4000 and check the mountain ranges. You know that is land. I like to move away from mountains most of the time as those are bad places to settle. In 3900, check the mountains for any civ borders.

Don’t worry about grass. Assume you will take a cap or get 100g in H2H. Yes there is some risk, but it is worth it. You only need 2 trees and 2 water. If you know you will get a walk-in, anything will work.

Your first goal is always to get a walk-in on the AI. You need a goodie hut (25 gold), or two naming tiles (1 with Spanish). The Indians can settle on a production resource for a quick warrior too. There is another tread I made about abusing the AI which you can learn more about walk-ins.

If you find an AI but can’t get a walk-in, threaten them for 25g then take it is 10 turns with a horse army.

After 3700, let your opponent move first so that you don’t run your settlers into his warrior.

Don’t panic if you don’t settle in the first few turns. I have had very powerful games when settling as late as 3200. Hopefully you will get a walk-in soon. If it’s 3000, you have no chance at a walk-in so you better be settled.

Start moving with the Aztecs. They are the easiest to learn with. After 30-40 games you should have a good understanding of the concept.

Move with caution when playing against the Zulu or Aztecs.

You will probably lose some stupid games at first. This is a skill and it takes practice to master.

As always, feel free to add anything. I will try to update it when I get some feedback.

[Aheadatime]

I like. There are akward moments where you must choose between losing a turn heading for a visible friendly (hill), or moving directly into a civ border in the other direction. Usually i go for the hut, but these are very precise little details everyone must learn to cope with on their own. I think if you recorded the way we all move our settlers, you would see some big differences as well as some similarities. Usually, i try to stay away from mountains, but it really depends. I move towards them if i feel/know theres a shore in the other direction, and it usually pays off with friendly/AI. Other times, ill intentionall move away from the center when my opponent is off to a good start in the first couple moves (american finds HBR, aztec finds HBR, 100g fast, artifact) so i can have a bit (not too much) of space to deal with their initial blast. Only times that moving my settler has failed me are island starts and barb blocks.

[ScottieX]

Yup pretty much how i play it.

but I thought america and settler moving is twice as devastating as the average because you are more likely to get gold and you can stack flip settle with the gp and also use the GI for gold or gb for warriors etc...

you could bump into a settled human while walking and still kill him.

of course i suppose why take the risk when your almost guaranteed a win anyway....

[sn1p3rk1ll3]

I like it when I stumble upon a hut for 25g and have a movement left seeing some borders move from forests to water/grass/...
you settle, rush a warrior and see another warrior stepping just in the other direction...good ol' walkins against otherwise hard to beat players

[TyShine]

You dont need to settle with anything, but you had better be sure you can get an AI. Ive settled without production before, and without water many times.

[sn1p3rk1ll3]

You dont need to settle with anything, but you had better be sure you can get an AI. Ive settled without production before, and without water many times.

no production sounds kinda stooopid

[Aheadatime]

no production sounds kinda stooopid

But hes completely right. Ty mentioned how you should be sure youll get an AI cap. I once moved my settler as arabs, found an AI with warrior in other direction at 3400, settled in the worst spot ever (2 mountains, 2 deserts, 2 water tiles, a one-food plain, and a hill), rushed a warrior, and took his city in 3100, after initiating diplo in 3200, since he was 2 tiles away at that point. This is why settling takes a while sometimes, because you have to calculate gold, warrior movement, their warrior movement, and if its an AI, then also the dates for all of the above. Ppl sometimes send me garbage mail while i take 45 seconds per turn for the first 6 turns each, and then i turn around with 2 HA's at their doorstep 10 moves later lol.

[FF-GTR]

Thought I'd linky link to other pertinent threads (walkin and AI abuse) since they are related to settler moving:

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/sho...hlight=abusing

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/sho...ghlight=walkin

Any tips on hitting named tiles and huts? I have been trying to learn this, but too often wind up with horrendous starts. For instance, the other day as mongols I walked until around 3400 (maybe later) without hitting a single named tile or seeing a single hut. I tried to follow some rules of thumb - avoid walking over same space twice, hit river squares or large clusters of a single type of tile (seems to increase chances of named tile), use hills whenever possible to get a larger look for huts, move diagonally off hills to see more squares. But it was horrendous, I went for a last ditch walk in attempt (wound up warrior v warrior) on AI and quit to aztec who already had HBR before I had two warriors out or any money at all.

So while I see how settler walking can be very helpful, I obviously need practice. Is getting absolutely whooped pre 2000 a bunch of times just kind of a part of the learning curve?

[dukeblue1987]

So while I see how settler walking can be very helpful, I obviously need practice. Is getting absolutely whooped pre 2000 a bunch of times just kind of a part of the learning curve?

Pretty much, yes.

Even if you don't get any gold (happens sometimes), you still know where all the barbs you passed where. Settle with two trees and go get them. You should be closer to the barbs than your original spot. It doesn't always work out that way, but more often than not you end up getting the barbs quicker by moving.

With the Mongols, you're really hoping for a goodie hut and a walk-in.

[Zefelius]

Very perspicuous write up! Of course you've been doing this for a long time Duke, so you know all this from extensive experience. This will help the noobs quite a bit. The experts here on the forum have been settler moving more predominantly for the last 3-6 months---Morte even longer. Indeed, you know a strat guide is almost common knowledge amongst the elites and very good players by no later a date than 2 months prior to it being posted!

Here's a question, though: since a few of the civs seem to benefit from this quite a bit, do you think this has any impact on the relative strengths of civs---enough to nudge them upward a little bit in the rankings? Are the Aztecs, e.g., a but stronger now than they were back in 2009? They've always been good, but are they even better now? How about the Indians, and so forth?

Civ-Curious,
Zef

[dukeblue1987]

Very perspicuous write up! Of course you've been doing this for a long time Duke, so you know all this from extensive experience. This will help the noobs quite a bit. The experts here on the forum have been settler moving more predominantly for the last 3-6 months---Morte even longer. Indeed, you know a strat guide is almost common knowledge amongst the elites and very good players by no later a date than 2 months prior to it being posted!

Here's a question, though: since a few of the civs seem to benefit from this quite a bit, do you think this has any impact on the relative strengths of civs---enough to nudge them upward a little bit in the rankings? Are the Aztecs, e.g., a but stronger now than they were back in 2009? They've always been good, but are they even better now? How about the Indians, and so forth?

Civ-Curious,
Zef

I think so. I think the Aztecs are arguably the 3rd best civ in H2H, even better than the Zulu. Many people would argue but I can win as many games with the Aztecs. The Zulu are pretty bad unless they get a couple early caps. They get 2 negative bonuses in the fast pop growth (if you don't get irrigation to bump your cities up to 4 then expanding is brutal) and 50% gold.

I think the Spanish are also much better in H2H when you move your settler and most likely horserush. They get a bunch of walk ins which makes their horses twice as fast. Plus, you can have galleon support for scouting and an extra 1 attack.

As far as I'm concerned the Aztecs and Spanish should move every H2H game because they are so much better off.

[watdog11]

Greeks – If you move two turns you can switch out of democracy with no penalty.

Could you please elaborate on this? Thx

[Zefelius]

I think so. I think the Aztecs are arguably the 3rd best civ in H2H, even better than the Zulu. Many people would argue but I can win as many games with the Aztecs. The Zulu are pretty bad unless they get a couple early caps. They get 2 negative bonuses in the fast pop growth (if you don't get irrigation to bump your cities up to 4 then expanding is brutal) and 50% gold.

I think the Spanish are also much better in H2H when you move your settler and most likely horserush. They get a bunch of walk ins which makes their horses twice as fast. Plus, you can have galleon support for scouting and an extra 1 attack.

As far as I'm concerned the Aztecs and Spanish should move every H2H game because they are so much better off.

Thanks. That makes sense. Reading your guide and others' as well makes me want to play again! Alas, I'm still stuck in a small town teaching summer classes!

[MadDjinn]

Could you please elaborate on this? Thx

you can't change gov on turn 1 (despotism).
turn 2 you are put in democracy. (so now can switch gov)
turn 3 you settle. (and be in despotism rather than democracy)

is what he was going for. (moving the settler for a few turns before settling on a nice spot.

[HydroDragon]

This really annoys me. It works for everyone else but not me!

I decided to try settler moving again today, as the Aztecs.

First game is a FFA against Rome, China, Japan and French A.I. I move for two turns, get a hut for 25 gold which shows me Seven Cities then I find I'm on an island....gagh. I came up with a crazy plan to make something of it though.

I settled on 2 water/1 fish/2 grass/2 crap/barb. The barb turned out to be marble, which wasn't very useful. Anyway, my plan was to tech Bronze and Iron from my capital, get seven cities with a galley, then pump legions out of the 100g city and a settler rushed from my cap.

It actually worked! Everything went according to plan. Rushed a barracks in one of the other cities. I put 3 vet legion armies and a vet archer on the galley then....galley-dropped japan. Overkill! I kept the galley in the area though because I suspected he had a roaming horse army. This paid off. He attacked Kyoto (I'd rushed an archer to prevent him from taking it after the first attack), got wounded, and I killed him with a legion army off the galley. He quit after that.

China had taken out Rome so it was just the two of us. I sailed my galley up to Beijing, which was walled with a vet archer army. No hill.....so I went for broke and threw my legions at him. It should have worked. It didn't. My first army wounded him then I retreated....my second army didn't scratch him. 9 vs 12 and no wound? I let it go to the end because I knew it was over if I didn't wound him. I tried another 9 vs 12 and lost again, wounding him once. I tried a 1 vs 7 with my archer....you never know.....but yeah, I lost that one too. Then I quit.

The second game was a H2H vs a zulu player. I moved sensibly, got a hut for 25 gold, passed a barbarian then saw the zulu borders. He'd catch me with warriors if I turned back so I just settled and tried to catch him with a warrior. I wasn't fast enough, he won the button race and took my cap.

Is this just extreme bad luck or just me? First an Island start, and then not only do I walk into the player in H2H, but he's Zulu, THE ONLY CIV THAT COULD HAVE WALKED IN ON ME.

[MadDjinn]

wow. I think it's you ability to quit when you have a good run that's sinking you, not anything else.

those retreated legions could sit there and heal then try again. no rules against that... sometimes the first attempt doesn't work, but the second one will.

and besides. you've got 3 cities now, had a 7cities start (so that makes up for the island) and you quit?

[HydroDragon]

After the exchange, had I retreated my second army, I would have been left with 2 double-wounded legion armies, a healthy legion army, and an archer. Inside his culture border. So I would need to retreat, heal twice, then come back in.

He could easily make another archer army in that time.

I didn't mention he had a massive tech lead, irrigation, 5-pop cities everywhere, etc.

All I had was a 2-pop capital with no trees. 2-pop barracks city with 4 trees, 2 sea tiles, no food. 2-pop city sharing 2 trees with the barracks city, 2 sea tiles and 1 food. Kyoto was at 1 pop, so it was pretty much useless.

I have no techs except Bronze/Iron, Horseback Riding from Japan and the Irrigation tree (I missed Irrigation by 1 turn), plus practically no gold, at about 1000-0 BC.

I don't see how I have any chance there.

[dukeblue1987]

I didn't mention he had a massive tech lead, irrigation, 5-pop cities everywhere, etc.

I think your error in the FFA game was that you attacked his cap which had walls. Why not pick off some of the weaker pop 5 cities? That’s a 10 pop swing for every city taken. He defends at 18 in his cap, only 12 in other cities. Plus, he can't have archer armies everywhere, can he?

Also, I hate playing FFA, so I don't have as much to comment on settler moving in that format. I would be much more hesitant to move since you're not guaranteed 100g. The Aztecs are probably OK though.

In the H2H game, it sounds like you just got a big unlucky and lost a button race. Keep practicing, preferably in H2H and not against the Zulu!

[elthrasher]

I think your error in the FFA game was that you attacked his cap which had walls. Why not pick off some of the weaker pop 5 cities? That’s a 10 pop swing for every city taken. He defends at 18 in his cap, only 12 in other cities. Plus, he can't have archer armies everywhere, can he?

Yup, plus half the players out there quit so easily, you might've gotten him to quit after taking his worst city. Even after failing at his cap (I wouldn't have gone straight to the cap with walls), you could still hunt for weaker cities. Never quit!

Also, I hate playing FFA, so I don't have as much to comment on settler moving in that format. I would be much more hesitant to move since you're not guaranteed 100g. The Aztecs are probably OK though.

Yeah, in a FFA getting that 25 gold to rush a warrior might actually hurt you when you don't find much more gold and could've banked that 25. But still the Aztecs are probably your best bet for moving in a FFA.

In the H2H game, it sounds like you just got a big unlucky and lost a button race. Keep practicing, preferably in H2H and not against the Zulu!

Moving against Zulu or Aztecs is pretty risky.

But it sounds to me like you did everything right. You're supposed to completely blow it the first few times.

[HydroDragon]

Maybe, but my galley was on the wrong side of the landmass to transport legions anywhere but his capital, and legions themselves are quite slow...

And as China, I wouldn't be surprised if he did have archer armies everywhere. I had my militia looking around and he had at least a single archer in every city...it would take at least 4 turns to get to any of them.....

I did kill one of his horseman armies during my initial landing, so I didn't think he had many counters. But even a single legion army could have given me problems.

But yeah, he was China and he had a tech lead, better cities....I didn't feel I had a chance.

[FF-GTR]

OK I am completely sold on this now. In a practice run against only AI, I just had 4 cities (karakorum, 2 captured caps, and a grown 2 pop barb) at 10 pop, pottery and bronze (stolen) at 2800 BC and was a turn or two from my first Keshik army. A start like that rivals strong USA starts or SCOG starts.

One cap was a walk in, the other a 3 vs 2.5 warrior army victory.

That's exceptional, but wow.

He could easily make another archer army in that time.

That's not the worst thing. Even if you don't take the city, those hammers he's wasting on archers are not going towards tech or expansion. Plus after an attack like that he might not press you at all, and you can wander those legions around and maybe find another city, kill a lazy HA, etc. I agree with Mad, should have stuck that one out. An uphill battle, but who knows. I love when I see the opponent start making extra archer armies (except maybe english).

Of course if you didn't have time for a long game, rolling the dice like you did was the right thing.

Also, maybe going for irrigation (risky since you were against china) was not a great move with that city setup - not enough cities to warrant the risk? Had you been hitting CoL instead you might have been in a stronger position, since those legions probably bought you quite a few turns of no pressure from opponent. Hindsight of course...

Also it sounds like regarding the OP, settler moving worked for you there, since without it your island start probably would have been even worse.

[Aheadatime]

Maybe, but my galley was on the wrong side of the landmass to transport legions anywhere but his capital, and legions themselves are quite slow...

And as China, I wouldn't be surprised if he did have archer armies everywhere. I had my militia looking around and he had at least a single archer in every city...it would take at least 4 turns to get to any of them.....

I did kill one of his horseman armies during my initial landing, so I didn't think he had many counters. But even a single legion army could have given me problems.

But yeah, he was China and he had a tech lead, better cities....I didn't feel I had a chance.

Still, within 4 turns youd have 3 vet legion armies vs a single archer army, which would be at 12 def. Youd win, hands down. You could have grown kyoto and gone from there while attacking him, you progress while hes stalled in defense mode. Other cities could be on tech aiming towards CoL. This means you could have a city out of kyoto, a city out of the captured chinese city, and place them all on balanced, switch to CoL, and have a great shot. Taking outer cities was your best bet, doubting that youd be able to take them is silly, especially since if thats the case, you should have doubted your ability to take his cap. The walls ruined it, for some reason walls > vet legion armies in my experience, i never attack a walled-in city. Learned this doing many roman legion rushes.

[HarryGodwinson]

I nearly always move, but not far. I don't like moving more than 3 tiles unless theres a very good reason to. If I can settle by a barb hut in them 3 moves and have at least 1 grass and 2 trees I'm more than happy. Take out the 1 flag barb and I'm on my way.

[elthrasher]

It's not something you can really count on, but settling Rome on cattle and two trees is just amazing. Rome doesn't really need to move, especially in FFA, but if you go for a walk-in and wind up with cattle instead, that's probably even better.

[spatenfloot]

Don't forget that you'd likely learn new tech when taking the outer China cities. Plus many opponents start making poor decisions once you begin taking their cities away.

[MorteEterna]

My tip is to get only gold from huts. Techs are bad so early in the game, even HBR. With 25 gold you should take any capital, that's what I do with every civ. If I want, and if I can horse rush, I'll get HBR and produce horsemen with all the cities I've got. Getting HBR with no caps and no early advantage, is bad. So, never choose a tech.

[elthrasher]

My tip is to get only gold from huts. Techs are bad so early in the game, even HBR. With 25 gold you should take any capital, that's what I do with every civ. If I want, and if I can horse rush, I'll get HBR and produce horsemen with all the cities I've got. Getting HBR with no caps and no early advantage, is bad. So, never choose a tech.

Yeah, I agree. I used to get it when I'd move my settlers with Russia, but then you still have to hammer out warriors because waiting 5 turns for your first horseman is really dangerous. You could get killed by the AI in that time or send your horse the wrong way and not get gold fast enough. Then your opponent wanders up to your cap.

It's probably worth setting your tech if you're Aztec or already have 20 gold.

[dukeblue1987]

I nearly always move, but not far. I don't like moving more than 3 tiles unless theres a very good reason to. If I can settle by a barb hut in them 3 moves and have at least 1 grass and 2 trees I'm more than happy. Take out the 1 flag barb and I'm on my way.

Yes, it is really nice if you can settle in 3900 (2-3 tiles of movement) right next to a barb. Warrior in 3600 and you take the 1 flag barb. Just make sure to manage your city quickly so that you can rush a 2nd warrior that turn before the game "auto ends" your turn. This gives you two warriors and a good chance at a walk-in between 3200-3000.

If you don't get a walk-in, 5 turns later (hopefully you have a couple water tiles) you should have pick up at least 40 gold to rush your first horse. This usually gives you a horse army about 2700-2800 with a couple warriors out as scouts/defenders for your horses. Good start.

[FF-GTR]

OK so having experimented, it seems to me that moving the settler results in one of three categories of outcomes:

1 - Excellent - Walk in or get 50g+ and perhaps spot an artifact. Also get map knowledge. An alternate to walk in is putting yourself in position for a 3 vs 2.5 cap assault (4.5 if arab). You probably walked until at least 3700, likely later.

2 - Moderate Gain - 10 - 25g and settle next to barb, or even just settle next to barb and get map knowledge and a resource/better settle spot. You probably only walked a few spaces.

3 - Abysmal - You have at the very least lost time, and possibly put yourself closer to a rush civ or made your position worse. Against a good player you will probably lose.

In addition, there is special case of moving - just one square in 4000, when you can tell an adjacent square gives you 2 water and 2 tree. This is solely to gain map knowledge, and is a nice no risk treat if you want to be cautious.

For my current mongols, it is always either 1 or 3, never 2.

I would guess that Aztecs have a much reduced chance of 3 and a much better chance of 1

Likewise guess that Zulus have a much better chance of 1

Likewise guess that Arabs have a slightly better chance of 1 due to better warrior army odds or even attacking with a single warrior.

Resource using civs have more incentive to move.

If you know you are facing aztec, zulu, arab (in that order) then moving is riskier.

Likewise moving is riskier versus USA/China, but also the gamble is probably more worthwhile since you want to hit them hard and early anyway (especially USA).

Does that seem accurate?

I also think that your evaluation of your opponent's skill makes a difference...

EDIT I know some of that is just recap of Duke, just trying to summarize for my own benefit I guess.

[spatenfloot]

I'd say never move the Zulus since the warriors get extra movement anyway.

[MorteEterna]

I'd say never move the Zulus since the warriors get extra movement anyway.

I'd say to move them twice since they get extra movement.

[FF-GTR]

I'd say to move them twice since they get extra movement.

Makes sense to me, since for instance it gives you a bigger window to get walk ins, since you can hit the AI the same turn you settle if you have 20 gold. Or if you collect gold, you will be able to send warriors in different directions more quickly, further improving your early map knowledge advantage.

[dukeblue1987]

OK so having experimented, it seems to me that moving the settler results in one of three categories of outcomes:

1 - Excellent - Walk in or get 50g+ and perhaps spot an artifact. Also get map knowledge. An alternate to walk in is putting yourself in position for a 3 vs 2.5 cap assault (4.5 if arab). You probably walked until at least 3700, likely later.

6 v 2.5 if Arabs. 4.5 v 2.5 if Germans or a hill. I would never risk 3 v 2.5 unless I thought I would lose otherwise. Threaten for 25g, then just wait to get a horse army and you will take it easy in 10 turns. It will be pop 3 too.

2 - Moderate Gain - 10 - 25g and settle next to barb, or even just settle next to barb and get map knowledge and a resource/better settle spot. You probably only walked a few spaces.

This is probably saving you at least a few turns because your warriors walk half as fast to the barbs as your settler. Turns mean everything early on. Plus you have map knowledge.

3 - Abysmal - You have at the very least lost time, and possibly put yourself closer to a rush civ or made your position worse. Against a good player you will probably lose.
This is a risk of moving, always. However, the more you move, the less frequent this happens. The maps follow fairly predictable patterns.

In addition, there is special case of moving - just one square in 4000, when you can tell an adjacent square gives you 2 water and 2 tree. This is solely to gain map knowledge, and is a nice no risk treat if you want to be cautious.

For my current mongols, it is always either 1 or 3, never 2.

I will try to breakdown how I move with the Mongols. Always access the map first. See if there is a hill and move onto it (only if its in the direction you think you should go). If no hill move 2 spaces diagonally toward the mainland if possible. Don't worry about staying close to water. If you see a goodie hut, take it for 25 gold. Now you can move around for a walk-in or at least get a warrior the turn you settle. If no goodie hut, try to find the first two tree spot you can. Two water if possible, but it isn't super important. Mongols work production in the cap and let the barb huts tech. Grass isn't important. You might have lost 3-4 turns, but you are probably at least a few turns closer to some barbs. Plus you have some good map knowledge and you might be able to threaten an AI quicker.

I would guess that Aztecs have a much reduced chance of 3 and a much better chance of 1

Yes, they are the best at moving.

Likewise guess that Zulus have a much better chance of 1
Only move if on a peninsula. Otherwise there warriors move 2 spaces so it isn't a big gain. It is very good if you do move and get a goodie hut for gold. It's like 3 movement in one turn.

Likewise guess that Arabs have a slightly better chance of 1 due to better warrior army odds.

Agreed, as well as the Germans.

Indians are a special case, since they may also want to walk to find a resource.

If you know you are facing aztec, zulu, arab (in that order) then moving is riskier.

Yes. I wouldn't move unless you're on a peninsula and would be gold starved.

Likewise moving is riskier versus USA/China, but also the gamble is probably more worthwhile since you want to hit them hard and early anyway (especially USA).

Does that seem accurate?

I like to be close to the USA. Being close to China is 50/50. They can build warriors faster than you. However, if you leave them alone they will just out expand and out tech you. Luckily, not many good players use China.

I also think that your evaluation of your opponent's skill makes a difference...

Responses in bold. Sorry it is hard to see with this new fantastic format...

[HydroDragon]

I'm really jealous of you people....still no walk-in.

All of my attempts at settler moving have failed epically. 2 island starts in 4 games. Only saw 1 friendly hut, and there are never any 2-tree spots.

Strangely enough, with my mongols I have a 100% failure rate when it comes to settler moving but also a 100% win rate. xD

By the way, my gamertag is HydroDragon95 if anyone wants to add me. I'd like to add some of you guys so I can play some high-quality opposition but I don't know what your active gamertags are.....

[HarryGodwinson]

I'm really jealous of you people....still no walk-in.

All of my attempts at settler moving have failed epically. 2 island starts in 4 games. Only saw 1 friendly hut, and there are never any 2-tree spots.

Strangely enough, with my mongols I have a 100% failure rate when it comes to settler moving but also a 100% win rate. xD

By the way, my gamertag is HydroDragon95 if anyone wants to add me. I'd like to add some of you guys so I can play some high-quality opposition but I don't know what your active gamertags are.....

We played a game a few days ago where I suffered because of moving my settler. Had to settle Berlin by no food and a hill. You finding early KT and finding me straight after and soon I was dead

[HydroDragon]

I remember that. You killed the knight but I killed your warrior army and maybe a single warrior too. It was probably hopeless unless you took another city because 100g wasn't looking very likely and you couldn't even build a settler manually...

But hey, at least you found 2 trees. I've had to return to my starting spot twice.

[HarryGodwinson]

I remember that. You killed the knight but I killed your warrior army and maybe a single warrior too. It was probably hopeless unless you took another city because 100g wasn't looking very likely and you couldn't even build a settler manually...

But hey, at least you found 2 trees. I've had to return to my starting spot twice.

Yeah I was screwed. I couldn't expand because of no food. I'd spent all the gold I had off 1 hut fighting off your knight, and there were no more huts on my little island.

[dukeblue1987]

I'm really jealous of you people....still no walk-in.

All of my attempts at settler moving have failed epically. 2 island starts in 4 games. Only saw 1 friendly hut, and there are never any 2-tree spots.

Strangely enough, with my mongols I have a 100% failure rate when it comes to settler moving but also a 100% win rate. xD

By the way, my gamertag is HydroDragon95 if anyone wants to add me. I'd like to add some of you guys so I can play some high-quality opposition but I don't know what your active gamertags are.....

My gamertag is RIP Nelson, feel free to add me. I play random every game and I move my settler nearly every game

[Zefelius]

I'm really jealous of you people....still no walk-in.

.....

You'll get the hang of it. Remember that timing is crucial. Sometimes you're close enough to an AI that after moving your settler you can get a quick walk-in even before they have their first warrior out in 3500. If this doesn't happen, though, you're still closer to the action and you can often get a walk-in during the second period (sometime between 3400 and 3000, usually) of empty AI caps. You also have to time how close the first AI warrior is to his cap.

To do this most efficiently, everyone needs to know the differences between AI civs in terms of empty caps. The Greeks, for example, leave it open longer at the beginning (I think until 3300). Since I haven't played for a month, maybe Duke or TY or someone can add this info to the thread, as it makes a difference for settler moving strats.

[dukeblue1987]

You'll get the hang of it. Remember that timing is crucial. Sometimes you're close enough to an AI that after moving your settler you can get a quick walk-in even before they have their first warrior out in 3500. If this doesn't happen, though, you're still closer to the action and you can often get a walk-in during the second period (sometime between 3400 and 3000, usually) of empty AI caps. You also have to time how close the first AI warrior is to his cap.

To do this most efficiently, everyone needs to know the differences between AI civs in terms of empty caps. The Greeks, for example, leave it open longer at the beginning (I think until 3300). Since I haven't played for a month, maybe Duke or TY or someone can add this info to the thread, as it makes a difference for settler moving strats.

I made another thread that has all of the specific civ info. The link is in post 8 on the first page of this thread. Or you can search for "A Complete Ongoing Guide to Abusing the AI."

The Greeks get their first pike in 3200.