They said in one of the previews that it would use the tile it's built on and the 8 surrounding it, but according to my city status it's only using the tile it's built on. The whole system just seems very... "meh" to me. I mean if you actually built things on top of tiles with yields that did something it would be kind of interesting, say you could build "farms" that take up one tile and you could build them on food tiles to "harvest" their yield that would be kind of cool. Just automatically using the one tile the city is built on is kind of boring though.

I agree.

As it is now, there may as well not be any difference in yields between different squares, even if the 8 surrounding resource squares are considered in base resource generation. Each new city may as well just produce the same number of base resources before improvements are built.

I understand the strategy concept with later buildings adding and subtracting from the grain/material for various benefits but it seems awfully bland right now. Personally I find city building a chore as I simply queue up all the +food buildings for grain based towns and all the +production buildings for materials based towns. I love how there are buildings like lumberjack and watermill that provide benefits for being near a forest/river but these are few and far between and for the most part terrain means barely more than what it did in WoM.

I also think the 'strategic' resources on the map need to be buffed since everything else seems to have been increased by 3x or more since WoM except for them. You can quickly get buildings that far surpass what you gain from those resources (a starting tech gets you Merchant which gives you almost as much gildar as a gold mine!) in addition to techs which make your starting grain/material exponentially better. It doesn't help that you need to acquire techs in order to use most of those resources anyways. I think part of the issue might be fixed by just buffing the strategic resources but due to the randomness of starting resources it may be too unfair. Perhaps if strategic resources could have upgrades they would be more worthwhile while still not overpowered early game.

Mana shards are probably fine as they are right now though. Some spells such as Firestorm which does 15dmg to army on strategic map (+15 per fire shard) become godlike with just one shard

If it is only using the center square it is a bug. I would guess that it is using all of them and the city details screen is just not displaying this. 

If you are only building grain improvements then you are a weak farmer king and I will have nothing to do with you. I focus on all war buildings and training lots of soldiers. For every garden you build I get a mounted archer. How powerful would you say your army is by the midgame?

My only problem so far is that I am playing on normal and there just isn't enough stuff to kill right now. I am having to send my armies very far out just to find new cities to raze. I didn't even bother with the mills or granaries until I had a full fighting force. I notice that cities that have lots of 4's and 5's for grain don't even need to waste time with that kind of construction. 

Ya, I'm not liking cities atm. I think the way cities work needs to be redesigned. I do like that when you're city levels up you can chose a number of improvements to unlock. The problem is that it makes specializing a city impracticable because you don't really know what kind of stuff you will be able to build in the future...and you only get 5 unlocks at the highest level of city. I would consider something like letting players chose a "specialty" when they found a city that would work similar to heroes "path" selection. This specialty would obviously increase the chances for improvements of that type to be available come city level up time. Just an idea. I do think that it needs to be reworked so that the surrounding tiles get used...that would make outposts useful because right now the only time to build an outpost is if there are absolutely no tiles with grain output next to a resource you want.

It takes the stuff from the surrounding 8 tiles and pools it into the center tile display. So when you hover over settle, you see all the options where you can settle, and you also see what you will get from settling on those particular tiles. You don't need to do any maths in your head. If a tile says 4 grain 5 materials, you'll get 4 grain 5 materials in your city. And those are TECHNICALLY gathered from that tile and the 8 around it.

Taking these yields from 9 tiles instead of 1 just means there's a much greater variety in locations you can settle. Imagine if every forest was the same. Every swamp tile was exactly the same in yield. That'd be bloody boring.

Prestige penalty it still there. I quote Frogboy: "It is better to have a few mega cities than a bunch of crappy ones (each time you found a city, your faction prestige is spread further out which slows growth in all cities). It also lets you claim land."

yes, this is how it works...  I would think of it as two different things, each tile has an individual yield that if based on the terrain (or resource) in that tile. In addition the tile has an aggregate yield that is the sum of the individual yields from the 8 tiles surrounding it. This aggregate yield (the sum of the tiles around the one you found on) is what is displayed and dictates your city yields.

You shouldn't need to worry about the actual individual yields of any particular tile as the aggregate number displayed is what will matter from your city, however, know that it is the data of all the tiles around it that is causing it to have the numbers it has. It saves the player from having to do a bunch of math in their heads but still allows for more variation in yields based on that 'perfect' city location. 

Lemme know if you need/want further explanation.

The big thing to keep in mind while thinking about it if you want to understand the minutiae of it is that the yields you are seeing are what you would get if you put a city there. Not that tile's individual yields. Thus you can run into situations where a tile will not have a visible yield but still be contributing to that of a nearby tile.  A great example of this are tiles that you cannot build a city on legally (say it's too close to another city). It will still contribute to other yields but because you cant build a city there you wont see aggregate yields on it.

So you mean to say that I was calculating the yields, as hardcore gamers prefer to do, and settling on the spot that would give me the best overall yield; only to find out that the computer had already done the calculations? Well I'll be a sonofabitch. That explains alot. I guess I would be choosing the same plot of land either way, but it's nice to know I only need look at one tile. 

I really don't see how this can be the case unless the "aggregate yields" are like small fractions. Or perhaps it's not working as intended right now.

That doesn't work either. Tiles would have to have a min yield of 2/2 which could then be increased by like 0.25 based on the terrain around it, IE +0.25 materials for forest tiles, +0.25 grain for plains, but then there would be a smoother transition in yields from one terrain type to the next instead of sharp jumps. Like 4/2 along a river then one tile out it's 2/2 or 2/3.

I would hazard a guess that many tiles give nothing while others give some and rives and hills produce alot more. If have a 2/3 next to a 4/2 that is adjacent to a river, it means that the 2/3 must be getting almost no grain from most of its tiles, whereas the 4/3 is getting a whole bunch from the 3 river tiles.