What is "wide" and what is "tall" exactly?
The dichotomy of wide and tall comes from what i consider a misunderstanding on how Tradition in CiV(5) should work. Tradition gave you the tools to grow your cities faster and thus stay competitive with fewer cities. Players understood this as if Tradition was
meant to be played with few cities. By contrast, Liberty helps you get more cities faster so players understood that to play Liberty you have to plant many cities. In the first versions of CiV you could only choose one and this separation caused the dichotomy : Tradition = Few big cities vs. Liberty = Many small cities. Even after you could get both, the dichotomy stayed partially because delaying Tradition was arguably a questionable strategy but also because the CiV paradigm was that you couldn't take both. But when did an empire stop being tall and became wide? If you grow more than 4 cities (because the traditional tradition game is 4 cities)? Well, 5-6 cities tradition was very powerful if you could get it. Was it a "wide" game?
OK, enough CiV rants. This is Civ VI but i think it's good to remember that even in CiV, the tall vs wide dichotomy was quite arbitrary and artificial.
Tall vs Wide vs ICS
Civ VI doesn't have many penalties for more cities, so obviously having more good cities is always desirable but then again even in CiV more good cities was better (a good city would produce more
and
then the increase in cost it would cause). The difference is : in CiV poor cities hurted your economy in Civ VI a poor city simply don't help you much.
For me, there will be several consideration though before spamming settlers and going ICS :
- Space being limited, if i put all my cities tightly packed together, i won't have space to put districts and farms to grow my population for more districts. Does plenty of small cities with hardly any district beat fewer cities with districts and a good population? Not sure, i don't have the game yet.
- The cost of districts will go up fast with many cities. This means if i try to make many good cities it will take longer and longer.
- Similarly the cost of settlers will increase and they will become more a drain, especially if you consider the opportunity cost of building them instead of something that directly helps your city.
- Amenities, while local are limited globally when considering luxuries. More cities means you need to acquire more luxuries. Obviously settling another city near some luxuries will be good, but you won't find new luxuries everywhere.
With the above in mind, and considering the opposition is up to the task (no Prince AI silliness) let's theorycraft (we still don't have the game) the 3 main expansion styles for Civ VI.
- Tall. I would consider tall in Civ VI as prioritizing city growth and infrastructure over rapid expansion. Of course you don't want to stop expanding early but you want quality first quantity later (if possible). You try to space your cities (probably 4-5 tiles apart) to let them grow, add districts and wonders. Once a city have grown and building a settler won't take forever it's time to get a new city if there are good spots left (because yes, an additional good city is better) expansion comes naturally. Your cities can and must have a lot of districts to cover all your needs with a limited number of cities.
- Pros :
- Powerful cities early in the different economic aspects
- Good production to crank military units in order to defend/invade. Strong cities to defend.
- You might be able to get some early wonders (depending on how crazy the AI is about wonders on higher levels)
- Early districts will allow you to acquire great people points for many different GP that don't conflict with each other
- Powerful economy will allow your new cities to become powerful early with trade routes to big hubs and/or tiles and buildings purchases.
- Cons :
- With limited lands, you might see good spots taken by another civ and you might be forced to go to war to conquer some lands
- You'll have a limited window of opportunity to benefit from your early strength and if you fail, a "wider" empire will probably become more powerful
- Might be difficult to really benefit from the +50% to settler production card if you don't have a dedicated expansion phase
- Wide. Priority to expansion early. You want to grab all the good land around you before anyone can do it. Growth will come later (because bigger cities are better no matter how many you have). You probably enter a lengthy expansion phase as soon as you reach Early Empires for the +50% to settler production card. You probably want your cities somewhat close together (3-4 tiles) meaning they probably can't grow very big nor have all districts. Since you want settlers fast, your best cities will probably build them and new cities will try to get some basic infrastructure.
- Pros :
- You will get many cities early, hopefully before an opponent can steal "your" lands
- If you specialize your cities with a particular district in every city, you'll be very strong at that
- Late game, you'll be a powerhouse once all your cities have grown
- Cons :
- You need to survive the early game with a weak military and angry neighbors
- Your cities will be small in the early game
- You'll miss early great people and wonders
- Pure ICS. You never stop expanding, always adding cities. You want as many as possible so they are all 3 tiles apart. You last city will build the next settler so your previous ones can build other stuff.
- Pros :
- You might get more cities and total population than any other strategy (it's still unclear to me how beneficial they will be)
- Your fist cities don't have to spend time building settlers, the smaller ones will
- Regional effects of districts will be very good
- Cons :
- With cities so tightly packed together, it will be hard to build districts and improvements
- Small cities will require a long time to build settlers with increasing cost, so by the time you get them the place where you wanted to settle might be gone
- You risk draining your amenities a lot with that many cities (at least until you have regional entertainment)
- Tons of cities to defend, possibly some without walls (at least early)
But i think it doesn't stop there. There are probably be more strategies by mixing those basics
- REx into Tall : Start as if going wide but space your cities slightly more then pause and grow. You take all the best spots and can grow big with an early game risk.
- Tall with border ICS : You grow your core for a tall game but border cities go into ICS mode to catch as many lands as possible.
Well, after such a lengthy post you probably expect i'll tell you what i think will be THE optimal strategy. I won't cause i don't know. I think and hope it will depend on map, surrounding civs, ultimate goal... In the end going "tall" or "wide" you'll be better if you have more bigger cities then the opponents but that seems pretty obvious and isn't new.