View Full Version : city specialization guesses


Slinko
Aug 30, 2010, 12:35 PM
Thanks to AriochIV we have almost all of the info about the game. Let's start making some early guesses about what city specialization will be like.

What type of city's will there be: Science, Culture, Wealth, Production, Great People, etc.

What will be some of the characteristics of each of the different types of cities? e.g. will science cities have a huge population and lots of jungle?

Tomice
Aug 30, 2010, 12:54 PM
As I said in the other thread, this topic is extremely interesting, but I don't think we'll be able to figure anything out before we have the game. Also, I doubt that the concepts of SE and CE, of production/GP/science cities and much more were clear until civ4 was out for several months.

The fun about the new game is that we'll be able to try out all kinds of strategies without having optimized guides for everything. Nothing will be "wrong" for some time.




What could become commonplace may be shifting tiles among cities.

We have 3 rings of workable tiles, but since they grow slower than the BFC in civ 4 (which was almost instant), we probably won't leave so much (initially) unused space between our cities.
As a result we could have huge overlaps. I imagine we could give the outer mine and lumbermill tiles of our production cities to science cities during peace, to build universities and markets there. In wartime, we might hand them back to the cities with barracks and shipyards.
Of course this is limited due to population sizes. There might also be something else preventing this I haven't thought about?

What do you think of this? It definitely sounds fun to me! :D

Krikkitone
Aug 30, 2010, 12:57 PM
City Specialization... should mostly be based off of Building limitations.

Since no city NEEDS any particular resource locally (tiles can be bought for low culture cities, and buildings can be bought for low production cities)

We're not sure of the GPerson mechanic so specialization might not be as important for it.

Science cities would have tiles with either Farms or Jungles. They will probably generate a lot of Great people because of the specialists, so Gardens might be useful.

Science cities will need happiness buildings to support them. They will give good trade route income as a bonus.

Culture...a "Culture Focused city" will be small population, just enough population working farms to support the specialists. (unless some Landmarks are built, then they work those).
(small population also helps your culture if you have the mandate of Heaven.. extra happiness->culture)
An alternative Culture focused city is one with high production to build Wonders.

Gold.. normal city working almost entirely trade posts and farms. These will be necessary to support some of the previous specialist cities (which would have low production) in buying/maintaining their buildings.


Production: these cities have 2 subdivisions
Wonders
and
Units

In general they should have a lot of Forests/Hills, with just enough Farms to work the tiles, and possibly some production specialists.

Wonder Production cities would benefit from the Garden and any Culture% booster buildings.. and so could end up being a culture booster (since culture buildings will be good to build with them). They don't need 'unit production booster buildings'. Building production boosters will be good though.

Unit production cities should get any unit production booster/and unit Experience booster.. It will be useful to build them near horses (early game)




And I really like the idea of shifting tiles between cities.

Tomice
Aug 30, 2010, 01:03 PM
What I forgot: If we get empire-wide GP-points, which I hope, dedicated GP farms would be gone. they were never realistic anyway, merely an abuse of the game rules.



Also, going back to the idea of shifting tiles, I increasingly fear the fact that you need a citizen working it, which would often not be available in the receiving city, makes my idea far less practical than I initially thought. Which is a pity, because the citizen lives on the tile, not in the city. The question is just where he delivers his goods... Realistically, the citizen should switch with the tile!

Krikkitone
Aug 30, 2010, 01:07 PM
What I forgot:

If we get empire-wide GP-points, which I hope, dedicated GP farms would be gone. they were never realistic anyway, merely an abuse of the game rules.

You would still have dedicated GP farms... but that would be Plural... those are the places you build the Gardens.. or the National Wonder that boosts GP output.

Tomice
Aug 30, 2010, 01:09 PM
You would still have dedicated GP farms... but that would be Plural... those are the places you build the Gardens.. or the National Wonder that boosts GP output.

Would it matter where those are? well, probably a bit, but less so than in civ 4 I guess.

Slinko
Aug 30, 2010, 01:10 PM
Science cities will need happiness buildings to support them. They will give good trade route income as a bonus.

Culture...a "Culture Focused city" will be small population, just enough population working farms to support the specialists. (unless some Landmarks are built, then they work those).
(small population also helps your culture if you have the mandate of Heaven.. extra happiness->culture)

.

Happiness is empire-wide not city specific.

Slinko
Aug 30, 2010, 01:15 PM
You would still have dedicated GP farms... but that would be Plural... those are the places you build the Gardens.. or the National Wonder that boosts GP output.

I agree. There will probably still be GP farms even though the GPP's are empire-wide. I think it will make GPP's easier to manage. You could have several GP farms and they would pool their points together.

Calouste
Aug 30, 2010, 01:27 PM
Since no city NEEDS any particular resource locally (tiles can be bought for low culture cities, and buildings can be bought for low production cities)


You're wrong there. You can't build certain buildings unless you have certain resources in the area of that city (Stables need Horses for example), and there are other buildings that benefit from resources nearby, like Monasteries get additional culture for Wine and Incense. Local resources are going to have a big influence on what you specialize your city into.

Arkangelus
Aug 30, 2010, 01:37 PM
It'd be beneficial to have your military production cities with Horse in the radius, for example. Plus the Mint gives lots of extra gold to tiles that work gold or silver, so if you can get a city near a few sources of that, and on a river, you could really focus on gold there.

Krikkitone
Aug 30, 2010, 02:41 PM
You're wrong there. You can't build certain buildings unless you have certain resources in the area of that city (Stables need Horses for example), and there are other buildings that benefit from resources nearby, like Monasteries get additional culture for Wine and Incense. Local resources are going to have a big influence on what you specialize your city into.

I was talking about general resources. as in things that get used by a city.

The only locally used resources are
Production...needed to put the buildings in a a city
Culture...needed to get tiles for city use
Food...needed to get the population to work the tiles

Production and Culture can be replaced with Gold a non-local resource.


Now as for "Resources" like Horses/Ivory/Incense etc. then of course those will affect what to make a city.

I was talking about how specialized a city can get.

so a Science city can be Totally specialized in science.... Nothing but Farms and Jungles=good science city.. you need 0 production, just rush it with gold.. you need 0 cultural buildings..just buy tiles with gold.

So a Science city
Ideal Terrain: Large space mostly Flat grassland and Jungles... all non-Jungle/resource tiles Farmed (or with an Academy)
Buildings needed In city: Science+Food boosting buildings only (a Garden might be useful)
Support needed: Lots of Happy, small amount of gold(it will produce a good trade route, so it doesn't need that much)

Culture city
Ideal Terrain: Small space of Flat Grassland with Wine+Incense.. all non-resource tiles Farmed (or with a Landmark)
Buildings needed In city: Culture+Food boosting buildings only (a Garden might be useful)
Support needed: a Some Happy, Some Gold
*can be combined with almost any other

Happy city
Ideal Terrain: tiny space, Horses+Ivory present
Buildings needed In city: Happy Buildings
Support needed: Some Gold
*can be combined with any other (because of no terrain working requirements)

Gold City
Ideal Terrain: Large space Flatland with rivers.. Gold/Silver.. Water tiles OK: Trade Posts on all non-resource tiles (farms as needed to maintain population+specialists)
Buildings needed In city: Gold Buildings, Water working buildings
Support needed: Medium amount of Happy

Wonder Production City
Ideal Terrain: Large space Hills and Forests: Mines+Mills on all non-resource tiles once enough farms for working all terrain and production specialists
Buildings needed In city: General production+Food boosters, Culture+GPP% boosters.. Culture buildings
Support needed: small amount of gold for maintenance, Medium amount of Happy

Military Production City
Ideal Terrain: Large space Hills and Forests, Horses present: Mines+Mills on all non-resource tiles once enough farms for working all terrain and production specialists
Buildings needed In city: Military production+Food boosters, Experience booster buildings
Support needed: small amount of gold for maintenance+tile expansion, Medium amount of Happy

Tomice
Aug 30, 2010, 02:48 PM
I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a city focusing on "generating happiness", but you're right, this might be a viable strategy :(

Krikkitone
Aug 30, 2010, 02:52 PM
I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a city focusing on "generating happiness", but you're right, this might be a viable strategy :(

Well as I mentioned, there are no real requirements for that so it is an addon

So I have 4 cities
Science
Culture
Gold
Military Production

All/any of them could also focus on building Happiness (Production focused cities would tend to be the best at that since they have the production)... but a Science/Culture/Gold city could as well.

And in the worst circumstances, if you have low happiness, and a lot of gold... build a settler, found a city and buy all the happiness buildings you can get... have that city not work any tiles (put the one citizen as a specialist in .. something)

It might not be worth it to get positive happiness for golden ages if the cost of a golden age depends on your size... but if not.. it could be worthwhile.


That would a way I would see ICS working... every tile has a Trading post on it (except for the occasional Mine/Farm) and the cities all consist of not much but Happy+Gold buildings. (maybe culture... or they might rely on City-States for that)

Polobo
Aug 30, 2010, 03:39 PM
I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a city focusing on "generating happiness", but you're right, this might be a viable strategy :(

Think Las Vegas; swallowing a large part of your income but making people happy

Zhahz
Aug 30, 2010, 04:19 PM
I'm hoping GPP are global, then mixing in specialists anywhere is more attractive (to me at least).

With each city having so many tiles available and the likelihood of population rarely using them all, you could easily have cities that can fill several roles, including specialists, and shift as needed, possibly moreso than in the past, especially if number cities is somewhat lower this time around.

Lyoncet
Aug 30, 2010, 06:20 PM
I really don't like over-specialized cities in general, so while I used them in CIV out of necessity at Emperor, I always wished for a slightly more organic feel to my empire. Although there will obviously be some city specialization in CiV, it looks like with the changes to GPP (if they are indeed empire-wide), BFC (which I suppose needs a new acronym – how about Big F***ing Circle? wait…), and happiness that's exactly what we'll get.

The ability to rush-buy from the getgo may also mean that exclusively hammer-based cities may be less important as well, depending on the conversion ratio.

Slinko
Aug 30, 2010, 07:16 PM
Think Las Vegas; swallowing a large part of your income but making people happy

... I was planning on saying that.

I think it is very interesting that happiness cities might be a viable strategy, but like someone said earlier happiness buildings will probably just be bought or built in production cities.

What would really make happiness cities a viable strategy is if there was a building that gave +% happiness to a city.

Polobo
Aug 30, 2010, 07:43 PM
... I was planning on saying that.

I think it is very interesting that happiness cities might be a viable strategy, but like someone said earlier happiness buildings will probably just be bought or built in production cities.

What would really make happiness cities a viable strategy is if there was a building that gave +% happiness to a city.

Building: "Drug" House - increases happy output and maintenance from happy buildings by 50%;

chaotoroboto
Aug 30, 2010, 08:57 PM
Building: "Drug" House - increases happy output and maintenance from happy buildings by 50%;

More likely, there will be buildings that say "Reduces unhappiness from population in this city by 50%."

If Colosseum isn't statted, then that's exactly what I expect it to say.

In general, I think specialist cities are both realistic and gameplayistic. The biggest issue is that as cities get REALLY LARGE, then there's some limit to how much they still specialize.

Cases in point:

New York is a Merchant city. New York would not exist in its modern form if it were not for the financial services industry. There are more people in New York working in banking than in the whole of most states - say Missouri. But the percent of people working in the banking industry in New York is much lower than the percent working in Kansas City. In gameplay terms, New York should have a pop of 25, about 5 of whom are merchants, while Kansas City should have a pop of about 6, 2 of whom are a merchants.

San Jose is a research city - even though most of the research really happens in Palo Alto and Berkeley. The Bay has more people working in IT, IS, and CS fields than Austin has people. But the Bay has a much lower percent working in those fields than Austin does.

Now, when you have your capital at a size 19 or 20, and every 3 turns it's popping a great prophet because everyone is either a farmer or a priest in 1950, that's a little silly.

Krikkitone
Aug 30, 2010, 09:15 PM
If Colosseum isn't statted, then that's exactly what I expect it to say.
It is stated, it says +4 happiness, same with all the happy buildings we have seen so far. (+X happiness) for cicus and theatre.

There may be some buildings with a local effect, but none are known.

Part of the point of "Empire wide happiness" and Golden Ages triggered by happiness is so that 'excess happiness' is not wasted.

In that case what is wrong with a city designed to produce happiness.

DalekDavros
Aug 31, 2010, 02:33 PM
It is stated, it says +4 happiness, same with all the happy buildings we have seen so far. (+X happiness) for cicus and theatre.

There may be some buildings with a local effect, but none are known.

Part of the point of "Empire wide happiness" and Golden Ages triggered by happiness is so that 'excess happiness' is not wasted.

In that case what is wrong with a city designed to produce happiness.

From an economics standpoint, I think that there'd be a problem with cost vs. return. For example:

Circus costs 150 hammer, produces +3 happy, and has an upkeep of 4 gpt.
Colosseum costs 150 hammer, produces +4 happy, and has an upkeep of 3 gpt.

Since happiness is empire-wide, you get a better return on investment if you build a Colosseum in two cities than you do for building both a Colosseum and a Circus in one city. Once you have a Colosseum in every city, it may make sense to further specialize those cities with horses/ivory by adding a Circus there, but until that point there will be better uses for the hammers (e.g., instead of having one culture city and one happy city, it'd usually be more efficient to have two culture/happy cities).

Basically, I think that most specialization will have to do with the unique possibilities of the city (i.e., what things can only they do due to the nearby resources, etc.) rather than being based on some abstract function (like "happy city" or "culture city"). The only exceptions are when buildings provide percentage increases instead of fixed magnitude increases or when having the building in multiple cities provides no advantage over having it in only one city. So, based on what is currently known, this means that it may make sense to have specialized cities for science (University), gold (Market, Stock Exchange), GPP (Garden, National Epic), and military production (Barracks, Stable, maybe Harbor).

Also, the "must have X in every city" wonders will probably mean that every city needs at least a bit of generalization, for the sake of supporting the requirements of more specialized cities.

Krikkitone
Aug 31, 2010, 02:49 PM
From an economics standpoint, I think that there'd be a problem with cost vs. return. For example:

Circus costs 150 hammer, produces +3 happy, and has an upkeep of 4 gpt.
Colosseum costs 150 hammer, produces +4 happy, and has an upkeep of 3 gpt.

Since happiness is empire-wide, you get a better return on investment if you build a Colosseum in two cities than you do for building both a Colosseum and a Circus in one city. Once you have a Colosseum in every city, it may make sense to further specialize those cities with horses/ivory by adding a Circus there, but until that point there will be better uses for the hammers (e.g., instead of having one culture city and one happy city, it'd usually be more efficient to have two culture/happy cities).

Basically, I think that most specialization will have to do with the unique possibilities of the city (i.e., what things can only they do due to the nearby resources, etc.) rather than being based on some abstract function (like "happy city" or "culture city"). The only exceptions are when buildings provide percentage increases instead of fixed magnitude increases or when having the building in multiple cities provides no advantage over having it in only one city. So, based on what is currently known, this means that it may make sense to have specialized cities for science (University), gold (Market, Stock Exchange), GPP (Garden, National Epic), and military production (Barracks, Stable, maybe Harbor).

Also, the "must have X in every city" wonders will probably mean that every city needs at least a bit of generalization, for the sake of supporting the requirements of more specialized cities.

There are other aspects to specialization besides which buildingsto place in a city. Some buildings have bonuses with some types of Terrain improvements, ie Libraries+Farms (for large populations).. or certain terrain.

So a Science City will be as Large as possible with lots of farms, and you will need a lot of happiness to support it.

a Gold city will be 'normal sized' ie never any bigger than~40 pop... if it is bigger, replace Farms with Trading Posts

Happiness and Culture seem the most likely to just be 'spread out'.... however, Great Artists are a type of GPerson so Culture Focused cities are definitely possible (not just the imperial gold supporting building but some local food supported population contributes to culture.)

That Is why I'm not sure there will be a GPP City
1. If Specialists are the primary GPP source, then given that they provide other benefits as well, a GPP city will probably just be a Gold/Science/Culture/Production city with the National Epic (if it does increase GPP)

2. If Wonders are the Primary GPP source, then the GPP city will be the Wonder City. (heavy Production)

as it is Gardens seem like a good thing to add onto any of those type of cities after you have the first 'specialist building' ie Library, Temple, Workshop, Bank

obviously focusing on the type of GP you want.

Gre_Magus
Aug 31, 2010, 03:03 PM
I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a city focusing on "generating happiness", but you're right, this might be a viable strategy :(

Polobo beat me to the punch...but I agree: there definitely examples in the modern world of cities and regions that "specialize" in happiness. The Hawaiian islands would be another.

DalekDavros
Aug 31, 2010, 03:24 PM
I definitely agree that the terrain will be a major factor in specialization (this is what I meant by specialization being based more on available resources than on needing another Specialty-X city). I do think you're overestimating the importance of farms in sci cities however--especially if you have Free Thought as a SP goal, Trading Posts will eventually beat farms and it might be worthwhile to run Trading Posts in science cities in anticipation of the bonus. Also, depending on the unhappiness, the trade-off of (unhappiness from 2 citizens)->(1 extra beaker) may not be high enough to justify trying to maximize population with farms. Rather, I think libraries will be useful mainly for getting an extra benefit out of citizens that you already have producing things other than food.

It's worthwhile to focus on buildings, however, as the upkeep cost system means that a building is really just a way to convert gold to other types of resources. Take a Garden for example: if a city is producing 4 GPP a turn, the garden is going to cost you 2 gold per turn and provide 1 GPP per turn--possibly a net loss even if we leave out the production cost of building the Garden. Unless gold is really cheap in comparison to GPP (I haven't seen data on how many GPP are needed for a GP, so I have no idea if this is the case), I don't see the Garden as a building that gets built in every city that can support it.

Thyrwyn
Aug 31, 2010, 03:32 PM
Polobo beat me to the punch...but I agree: there definitely examples in the modern world of cities and regions that "specialize" in happiness. The Hawaiian islands would be another."I'm goin' to Disneyland!"

Krikkitone
Aug 31, 2010, 03:42 PM
I definitely agree that the terrain will be a major factor in specialization (this is what I meant by specialization being based more on available resources than on needing another Specialty-X city). I do think you're overestimating the importance of farms in sci cities however--especially if you have Free Thought as a SP goal, Trading Posts will eventually beat farms and it might be worthwhile to run Trading Posts in science cities in anticipation of the bonus. Also, depending on the unhappiness, the trade-off of (unhappiness from 2 citizens)->(1 extra beaker) may not be high enough to justify trying to maximize population with farms. Rather, I think libraries will be useful mainly for getting an extra benefit out of citizens that you already have producing things other than food.

1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

so 1 Food+0.5 Happiness->0.75 base beakers (wth a Library)
Now I'm not sure how much food a farm will make v. how much Research will be provided by a Trade post with particular SPs. As well as the other bonuses.

also there are something like 4-5 Science Specialists that a Science city can support

now I'm not sure what the condition is of pop units that
1. Can't work a specialist tile
2. Can't work a terrain tile

If those pop units produce research or not, if they benefit from the 'Freedom' SPs (that cut food/happy costs for 'specialists')or not will depend.


It's worthwhile to focus on buildings, however, as the upkeep cost system means that a building is really just a way to convert gold to other types of resources. Take a Garden for example: if a city is producing 4 GPP a turn, the garden is going to cost you 2 gold per turn and provide 1 GPP per turn--possibly a net loss even if we leave out the production cost of building the Garden. Unless gold is really cheap in comparison to GPP (I haven't seen data on how many GPP are needed for a GP, so I have no idea if this is the case), I don't see the Garden as a building that gets built in every city that can support it.

I imagine it would be produced in every well developed city of the desired Type though. (ie Culture/Science/Gold/Production) based on the presence of the specialists.

DalekDavros
Aug 31, 2010, 04:24 PM
1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the pre-library bonus, which will certainly tip things more in favor of farming. I like it from a realism perspective: after a certain time, more of the population ought to be working in cities as specialists.

Edit: This may change your farm vs. trading post analysis in gold cities too: having merchant specialists supported by farms may be more efficient than having trading posts.


I imagine it would be produced in every well developed city of the desired Type though. (ie Culture/Science/Gold/Production) based on the presence of the specialists.

Possibly. But for comparison, note that the +25% GPP bonus is the same as the Roman Forum in Civ IV. It's not at all exact, since I imagine that GPP will be global now (making it much more useful to have GPP from multiple cities), but that certainly wasn't an every-city build in Civ IV (or, at least not because of the extra GPP).

The value of the Garden ultimately comes down to: 1) how much sooner will you get the GPs and 2) how many more of them will you get?

Taking the Great Scientist's Academy (+5 science tile) as an example, getting it a few turns earlier probably won't recoup the investment in gpt (especially when you consider that you could have two libraries in other cities for the same gpt cost), so I'd say that the Garden will be of limited early-game use (unless you want it for the culture specialist, which may be hard to get otherwise in the early game). Assuming that the GP costs increase each time you get one as in Civ IV, consideration (2) is likely to be the more important one in the long run, as Civs without lots of Gardens may just stop getting GPs altogether after a certain point.

I imagine that it'll boil down to how useful GP are for your strategy in a given game. If you're going for lots of GP, it could definitely change overall specialization goals. E.g., a culture city with a lot of food is probably going to run out of artist specialization slots, so it may have to build some science/gold/etc. infrastructure too and rebrand itself as a "specialist city."

Krikkitone
Aug 31, 2010, 04:47 PM
Interesting. I wasn't aware of the pre-library bonus, which will certainly tip things more in favor of farming. I like it from a realism perspective: after a certain time, more of the population ought to be working in cities as specialists.

Edit: This may change your farm vs. trading post analysis in gold cities too: having merchant specialists supported by farms may be more efficient than having trading posts.

Well that would be my thought.. with the Freedom bonuses at least, Farm->Specialist should probably be the best use of a tile IF there are specialist slots available of the type you want



Possibly. But for comparison, note that the +25% GPP bonus is the same as the Roman Forum in Civ IV. It's not at all exact, since I imagine that GPP will be global now (making it much more useful to have GPP from multiple cities), but that certainly wasn't an every-city build in Civ IV (or, at least not because of the extra GPP).

well if GPP Are global then that Definitely changes the balance

It also means your GPPool can become 'polluted' easy (it looks like each type of GPP are accumulated separately, but if producing one of one type increases the cost of ALL types, then there will be that 'pollution' problem

Gardens will let you 'purify' the GPPool by ensuring that you get extra point towards the type you want.


The value of the Garden ultimately comes down to: 1) how much sooner will you get the GPs and 2) how many more of them will you get?

Taking the Great Scientist's Academy (+5 science tile) as an example, getting it a few turns earlier probably won't recoup the investment in gpt (especially when you consider that you could have two libraries in other cities for the same gpt cost), so I'd say that the Garden will be of limited early-game use (unless you want it for the culture specialist, which may be hard to get otherwise in the early game). Assuming that the GP costs increase each time you get one as in Civ IV, consideration (2) is likely to be the more important one in the long run, as Civs without lots of Gardens may just stop getting GPs altogether after a certain point.

I imagine that it'll boil down to how useful GP are for your strategy in a given game. If you're going for lots of GP, it could definitely change overall specialization goals. E.g., a culture city with a lot of food is probably going to run out of artist specialization slots, so it may have to build some science/gold/etc. infrastructure too and rebrand itself as a "specialist city."

Well I think the Garden will be most useful in enhancing rather than 'becoming a specialist city'.

Marcin388
Aug 31, 2010, 05:08 PM
I hope that there will be war specialized cities.
It was so stupid seeing Spartans complaining about the war and saying that it isn't good for anything, damn!! It supposed to be a war city, I was building all military buildings in it, but they still were complaining.

Lyoncet
Aug 31, 2010, 06:47 PM
It looks unlikely that that scenario will crop up again, since unhappiness is global now. "War-specialized" will, for all intents and purposes, probably just mean "hammer city with military buildings." Adding in an anti-war-weariness factor seems redundant.

SuperSmash5
Aug 31, 2010, 09:01 PM
I see three major types of cities developing:

1. Science/Culture/Specialist Cities
Why science culture and specialists all in one? Because they go together. These would be the core cities of the empire. They would require rivers for the extra food not only to produce science bonuses but to run science and cultural specialists. Jungles aren't bad to have but the best tiles would be floodplains or grasslands on rivers. Capitals would likely develop into these kind of cities and they would make up your "core" cities that form the economic backbone of your empire. Critical buildings would be Libraries, Granaries, Gardens, Temples, Monasteries, Universities, Watermills etc.

2. Production/Military Cities
As you would imagine, these cities would produce military units. They would be best founded near strategic resources and near hills and forests. They would be much smaller than culture cities and would have just enough food to work strategic resource improvements and mines. Of course, these cities would be best placed between your core cities, and other civilizations. Since you'd be working few tiles, you'd be able to keep a large forested area as a solid line of defense. Combined with the affinity for creating units, production cities would be almost impenetrable. Critical Buildings would be Granaries, Windmills, Barracks, Forges, Stables, Walls, Armories, Harbors (if coastal), Windmills, Factories etc.

3. Gold Cities
Gold cities would focus on producing gold. To be honest, I don't really have a very good gauge of just how important gold will be. Anyway, gold cities would be best formed on the COAST. Why? So they don't take away the rivers from the precious culture cities. I believe the latter will be more important. Coastal tiles aren't complete crap since there aren't 8 commerce towns anymore. They have the added benefits of not taking up green tiles from other cities and not needing to be improved. Also, the coast has one more benefit: seafood. Food surplus from seafood would allow the cities to be able to make use of the merchant specialists. Critical buildings would be Lighthouses, Markets, Harbors, Banks, Stock Exchanges, Mint(if gold/silver are present) etc.


Food resources would of course be important for every city. Wine and Incense would obviously make better culture cities. Gold and Silver would make better gold cities. Ideal city specialization would be impossible. There's also the happiness city idea which could be viable but that remains to be seen.


Obviously these are just my thoughts on what I've seen so far. We haven't completely seen how Social Policies would affect improvement yields, or even what most of the buildings actually do. There is also probably a lot of stuff that we already know that I never bothered to properly research.

But screw that, speculation is fun and so are incomplete assumptions and conclusions. :P

yanner39
Sep 17, 2010, 02:55 PM
1 Citizen->1 Beaker without a Library (primary basic source of science), 1.5 beakers With a Library.

so 1 Food+0.5 Happiness->0.75 base beakers (wth a Library)

What do you mean by this? :confused: