Sometimes when playing Civilization II, you will be graced with a second settler. This settler can be quite advantageous, because the settler doesn't require any food support, nor taking your city size down by 1 to start improving your initial city. Saving 40 shields at this stage of the game is nothing to sneeze at either.
I have historically made a point to never build with a free settler (starter or wandering nomads): if I am going to build, I might as well do it with one that costs food somewhere, so that city can get that food back.
But it occurs to me that I might also be well served making an improvement or two and then immediately planting a second city. Is it conceivable to go about making an objective analysis of these two initial strategies and what the long term consequences are of this initial decision?