The Timeline of Unit/Building Competitive Choices as I see it:

Do I need it now?  A rich empire uses Money FIMS, so that it can be spent in a pinch.

Do I need it soon?  An efficient empire at production uses Industry FIMS.

Can it wait?  A growing empire uses Food FIMS.

Do I need the Upgraded version of it?  A smart empire uses Science FIMS.

A thought (question) is: what is the 1st choice (unit or building) in the game?

And then, what series of choices comes after that?

Can a Scout or Warriors unit wait?  Can a Granary building wait?  What about other better things within an Era?

What does good planning look like, as we go after and collect FAME?

MaiFlow wrote:
A starting city needs to grow pops, since pops lead to basically every yield.

MaiFlow wrote:
As for an opener, my experience with the last OpenDev is that you should try to employ at least one scientist POP as fast as possible.

In an opener, How much initially do you want to grow (for better yields) before its better to employ scientists, so that you can eventually choose from the buildings/units you want to build?  Is it to a particular city size, or to a specific turn number?  I also like the notions you express in your list numbered 1-6, when its better to secure a resource, because its needed at that point.

MaiFlow wrote:
farmers only give 6 food without upgrades

So, there are 2 kinds of Growth situiations in my guess, or guesstimation.  Please make it more accurate, if you can - this is probably either an oversimplification on my part, or expressed too simply.  Growing with less than 6 food, or growing with more than 6 food.  Growing at less than 6 food, it might make more sense to build units (to store pop or to use as military)/buildings (for yields), I think, using Industry or Money FIMS.  Growing at more than 6 food - this is because of stuff like Farmers Quarters and Granaries, it might make more sense to disband cheap or obsolete units for extra FIMS, applied to Scientists, so that an under 6 growth situation can be achieved.

To be clear, you will almost always want a higher food yield than 6 per turn - I am just pointing out that early farmer pops give a bad return. They do still add some value of course, in that they compensate for most of their cost, allowing the next pop to come earlier. The thing is however that you want to run scientists early since it gives you a very high increase over your base science rate, something like a 200% increase.

As I mentioned earlier, most of your yields will come from tiles until you get more tech and infrastructure. Pops will become a larger and larger portion of that over time as you unlock techs, culture traits and infrastructures that boost their yields in each job type. Until you reach that point, cities should have a decent Industry and Food base from tile exploitations. Money and Science will mostly come independently of the terrain outside of special features or cultures.

Past the first 30 turns or so I would say the points you added in the OP can be pretty good as a guideline. At that point, you don't tend to micro pops that much unless you are trying to shave a turn off a building or a popgrowth.

MaiFlow wrote:
To be clear, you will almost always want a higher food yield than 6 per turn - I am just pointing out that early farmer pops give a bad return. They do still add some value of course, in that they compensate for most of their cost, allowing the next pop to come earlier.

So, farmers are a bad deal for a food surplus alone, as 4 farmers maintains 3 people (bad deal), which means growing population just for having population sake isn't worth it, but depending on how pop growth is figured - it does allow the next pop to come sooner.  The thought is then if farmers should be considered at all on a temporary basis to boost population size, where after taken off its not going cause anyone to go hungry, having more science FIMS at a higher city size, and more total science, because of delaying instant gratification of science?  Can science wait for a small amount of growth, before going all-in with science?  I feel the answer to this is no, based on your input already, as the immediate science is needed ASAP.

MaiFlow wrote:
Past the first 30 turns or so I would say the points you added in the OP can be pretty good as a guideline. At that point, you don't tend to micro pops that much unless you are trying to shave a turn off a building or a popgrowth.

So, past the 1st 30 turns it may be about a more macro policy concerning FIMS, being less about the micro.  What policy would you reccommend past the 1st 30 turns?  It probably depends on whats happening on the game board.  And, I have an interest in knowing what situations call for which policies, being mostly clueless, except for your 1st post saying when its needed to be secured.  Figuring a safe macro policy is - can't go wrong with Balanced?

Progress wrote:

So, farmers are a bad deal for a food surplus alone, as 4 farmers maintains 3 people (bad deal), which means growing population just for having population sake isn't worth it, but depending on how pop growth is figured - it does allow the next pop to come sooner.  The thought is then if farmers should be considered at all on a temporary basis to boost population size, where after taken off its not going cause anyone to go hungry, having more science FIMS at a higher city size, and more total science, because of delaying instant gratification of science?  Can science wait for a small amount of growth, before going all-in with science?  I feel the answer to this is no, based on your input already, as the immediate science is needed ASAP.

Correct, pops for the sake of pops is not that good, but all else being equal, more food is always better than less food. Pops lose a lot of value if you have filled all your jobs, so either make more units or spend them to rush production (units are usually the superior choice). That is not to say that farmers have no value, but initially, when they cannot even feed themselves they give a bad return compared to the other options. Once you get the +Food per farmer upgrades going they are much better. If your initial settle is bad in food, you may have to employ farmers to feed even the first pop, so there are situations where you need them even starting out. Also, setting your initial few pops into Industry may be worth it if you lack good sources of Industry from tile exploitation and can survive a bit with a low tech output.

It is fine to delay science a bit on your first city if you don't think you will be benefitting from the techs. However, most of the time you are going to want to improve a luxury or unlock the basic buildings so you can start increasing your yields. The first few techs have a very large impact on your outputs in all areas, so getting science up fast is important in order to get those boosts going as early as you can. The snowballing effect of getting more food/industry just a single turn earlier will compound far into the game.

Addendum here, but do not understimate luxuries - their bonus applies to every city you own and stacks with multiple copies, so in aggregate they are surprisingly powerful. The best ones early are probably the ones that just give straight yields: Salt and Sage for food; Ebony and Dyes for Industry.

Progress wrote:

So, past the 1st 30 turns it may be about a more macro policy concerning FIMS, being less about the micro.  What policy would you reccommend past the 1st 30 turns?  It probably depends on whats happening on the game board.  And, I have an interest in knowing what situations call for which policies, being mostly clueless, except for your 1st post saying when its needed to be secured.  Figuring a safe macro policy is - can't go wrong with Balanced?

Once you got some basic infrastructure rolling and your cities get a bit more advanced you really just have to keep your objectives in mind. Unless you have something short term in mind, my recommended setup is Food->Science->Industry->Money. Switching Food and Industry may also be useful in cities with stronger food yields, such as as a large river you have improved with the infrastructure to boost them. If you really want growth, put Food and Industry first, then Science and Money in whatever order you prefer.

Balanced is in my opinion the worst option, as it delays growth for small returns. It works if you just want to leave the city alone for and not worry about it much, but it is better to be good at one thing and bad at the rest than "meh" on everything. Fresh cities especially have a lot of things to build and pop to grow before they become productive, so prioritizing those is a good idea.

MaiFlow wrote:
Pops lose a lot of value if you have filled all your jobs, so either make more units or spend them to rush production (units are usually the superior choice).

Units = a storehouse of population.  That storehouse of population for a scout unit is worth 90 money.  That storehouse is worthwhile to create because in creating it, it increases pop growth in the city it was created from.  Assuming using pop to rush production is also worth 90 money.  That money spent produces better yields.  Which makes more sense better pop growth, putting 90 money in a unit bank acct, or better yields - using pop to rush some building?  Pop growth is a yield in itself.  However, the benefit of that yield never goes up after the 1st unit.  Which is better: Produce 5 scout units worth 450 money, or rushing a building that produces yield worth 450 money?  At some point: a better yield from a building is worth more than a pop growth yield.  I don't know the equilivancy though (if it was strictly economics, and not for military use).  Realistically though, military use matters!

Progress wrote:
Units = a storehouse of population.  That storehouse of population for a scout unit is worth 90 money.  That storehouse is worthwhile to create because in creating it, it increases pop growth in the city it was created from.

Note:  "Buying" a storehouse of population to later disband and sacrifice is resource inefficient by the cost of the unit.  Its not a free transfer of pop to unit and back again to pop, costing the value of the unit.  But, only +2 food growth is gained from consuming 8 food less at the price of a FIMS.  So, If +2 food growth (benefit) > 90 money and 1 pop unit (cost), then I agree with my own comment.  The nice thing about this is it sees city size as a negative, because food consumption at 8 is greater than a FIMS can produce being less than 8, but a pop that grows faster means more future sacrifice when there's something worthwhile to grab.  To have a Military surplus of units means being at a Scientific loss of choice buildings to build, based on unit sacrifices for those buildings.  Maybe, early game even, spamming out scouts to a point where technology can gobble up half of them or some number by giving them good buildings to sacrifice for would be a good start?  And, then eventually sacrificing the rest of the scouts for FIMS, when FIMS are a good deal - above 8?  When I think about this, I know, not all FIMS are created equal due to scarcity.  Science FIMS seem to be worth more because they are scarse.  And, I think when spamming out Scout units, either Farmer FIMS or Industry FIMS should be used because city growth rate should just beat unit production rate by a hair.  In an inefficient production case like this one, its hard to believe this is better than a Money FIMS?  Are Money FIMS really pretty worthless?

I think at this point you are getting to the point where we won't really know until we have time to play for a while. I don't have any experience with the release version, so my numbers may be off or they could have added new mechanics/buildings that makes my suggested strategy obsolete.

Better wait for the game to come out so we all get to play around with it a bit and figure out what works and what does not. That, or let some of the experts that DID get to play early come and give their input.