How and why go for wide empires?

Hey everyone,

I'm relatively new to figuring out how Civ works on a more detailed level, though I have been playing it very casually every now and then for a while.

Something I just recently came into contact with, was the idea of tall vs wide empires. I personally always like having a few well developed cities a lot better than a lot of less developed ones (which seems ot be the case, whenever I try to get a bigger number of cities going, but maybe that's not how it should be idk).

I can't really figure out what the advantages are of having a lot of cities, except for being able to produce a lot of military units. Could someone explain that to me (or link me to some article or something?)

The reasons I say that are the following.

1) It seems science (at least around the midgame (turn 90-150 on quick is what I mean here)) seems to be even, if we take the 5% penalty into account, but tall have mroe GS generation thus get ahead there.

2) Culture seems to be a lot better for tall, as they can put 2 specialists in guilds thus generating +6 culture in a city (plus great works, or free culture points from writers), where wide empires seem to have a more difficult time allocating specialists due to all cities nto having that huge a population. (Or if they do get the culutre specialists, then they lack others).

3) GP generation overall is easier on tall it seems, as you have mroe pop to put into specialists slots, plus you can concnentrate the +% for GP buildings in one or two cities

4) Money seems to be on the wide side, as (I assume) one probably doesn't boost the cities with food or build a lot of buildings that need maintenance, so all the caravans can be used for trade routes with other empires or CS, so I assume you have more money than a tall empire.

5) Faith I can imagine would also be on the wide side, if one chooses to get shrines in each new city (unless as tall you find a wonder, plus get the appropraite pantheon trait, or get stonehenge). Though Religion in general is not something I have managed to hugely incorporate into my strategies so far (just got G+K and BNW about three weeks back) though I do tend to get it, if the circumstances allow for it, like natural wonders or luxuries/desserts I can milk with the appropriate pantheon belief.

6) Late game it would seem as wide empires you run into additional difficulties of people banning luxuries or allying CS away that you need for luxuries, as I imagine as wide you need a lot more overall happiness production than as tall.




Another thing I can't figure out if, how to actually play wide. I usually play on small maps and the per city unhappiness is 3, which makes founding new cities quite the pain in regards to being in the negative with happiness quite quickly. Also getting a lot of early settlers means neglecting buildings workers and such, so I never quite understand at what point one would get them either.
Also, even if I can get more than 2 cities going because I got lucky in terms of having 4 or 5 luxuries quickly in my area I find after citiy number 4 there's often very little space to settle another city (or there's no good location anymore).

Maybe part of the problems I experience come from me playing almost exlusively small maps, but since I don't even understand the theoretical concept behind it, I have a feeling it might be more than that

So if anyone could help me understand the principles of wide empires a bit better, I'd very much appreciate that, thanks

Tall is generally better and easier for first part of the game. Later on, when you can actually solve happiness problem, being wide becomes better. If you expand fast then most of the game you will (at least you should on higher levels) try to grow and catch up with AIs. You are big and weak. Thats one way to play it.

Another one is to go tall with 3-4 cities first, grow grow and tech up. Then build some army and you are small but strong, so then go conquer few cities and become wide. BnW seems easier to play this way.

Anyway, being wide AND tall is the goal at the end.

More cities = more production = more units = faster killing.

simple equation ... Just try building 8 cities with liberty till turn 50, and then switch to units only in all cities and be amased how fast u can spit units and kill guys ...

tommynt said:

simple equation ... Just try building 8 cities with liberty till turn 50, and then switch to units only in all cities and be amased how fast u can spit units and kill guys ...

Click to expand...

8 cities by turn 50 on any game speed sounds like something Hiawatha might just manage but I struggle to see how the player could? Also sounds like a recipe for extreme unhappiness if you do manage it?

TheRobin said:

1) It seems science (at least around the midgame (turn 90-150 on quick is what I mean here)) seems to be even, if we take the 5% penalty into account, but tall have mroe GS generation thus get ahead there.

Click to expand...

I only play quick time in MP and I'm assuming you are talking about SP so I relate it to that; You won't have more Great Scientists in a Tall Civ than you would in an 7-8 City Civ. The tooltip in game isn't correct more cities does not increase you GP cost. In a wide Civ you'll be able to work more Science Specialists than in a Tall Civ

TheRobin said:

2) Culture seems to be a lot better for tall, as they can put 2 specialists in guilds thus generating +6 culture in a city (plus great works, or free culture points from writers), where wide empires seem to have a more difficult time allocating specialists due to all cities nto having that huge a population. (Or if they do get the culutre specialists, then they lack others).

Click to expand...

Usually you'll have one city that has high food relative to production and you can run all of your guilds out of that civ. Also more Cities give you more Museums and other culture buildings to house great works

TheRobin said:

3) GP generation overall is easier on tall it seems, as you have mroe pop to put into specialists slots, plus you can concnentrate the +% for GP buildings in one or two cities

Click to expand...

Your cities will have smaller population but that doesn't mean you can't work specialists, just not all of them. I usually just work my science and guild specialists in wide empires

TheRobin said:

4) Money seems to be on the wide side, as (I assume) one probably doesn't boost the cities with food or build a lot of buildings that need maintenance, so all the caravans can be used for trade routes with other empires or CS, so I assume you have more money than a tall empire.

Click to expand...

You'll have the same number of trade routes outgoing and maybe have a few more coming in due to more locations. Where you get more gold from more cities is where they are working merchant specialists. (Puppets do this)

TheRobin said:

5) Faith I can imagine would also be on the wide side, if one chooses to get shrines in each new city (unless as tall you find a wonder, plus get the appropraite pantheon trait, or get stonehenge). Though Religion in general is not something I have managed to hugely incorporate into my strategies so far (just got G+K and BNW about three weeks back) though I do tend to get it, if the circumstances allow for it, like natural wonders or luxuries/desserts I can milk with the appropriate pantheon belief.

Click to expand...

Wide empires can build certain wonders too; the liberty finisher guarantees a world wonder. Although think about it with Piety you are churning the same amount of faith with a Shrine/Temple in one city +5 as Stonehenge. Stonehenge is good for founding a fast religion but doesn't provide a lot of sustainable faith.

TheRobin said:

6) Late game it would seem as wide empires you run into additional difficulties of people banning luxuries or allying CS away that you need for luxuries, as I imagine as wide you need a lot more overall happiness production than as tall.

Click to expand...

If a tall civ has 100 population (25 pop in 4 cities) and a wide civ has 100 population (12.5 pop in 8 cities) how much more unhappiness does the wide civ have the tall civ will have 12 less unhappiness from monarchy and liberty will have (7 Cities connected+5 from percent of population) less unhappiness from liberty policies in addition to the +3 unhappiness from additional cities. 12 unhappiness (21 from new cities in wide minus 9 from the tall empire) would be the additional unhappiness which can be offset by Colosseums/Circuses Plus you are going to have more territory and a greater chance at having more luxuries etc.

TheRobin said:

Another thing I can't figure out if, how to actually play wide. I usually play on small maps and the per city unhappiness is 3, which makes founding new cities quite the pain in regards to being in the negative with happiness quite quickly. Also getting a lot of early settlers means neglecting buildings workers and such, so I never quite understand at what point one would get them either.

Click to expand...

You'll have more hammers in a wide empire to get them out. I prefer to start building settlers after National College you'll see that as NC on the forums.

TheRobin said:

Also, even if I can get more than 2 cities going because I got lucky in terms of having 4 or 5 luxuries quickly in my area I find after citiy number 4 there's often very little space to settle another city (or there's no good location anymore).

Click to expand...

That's the rump; the reason why going tall is easier is territory is limited. On Deity and to a lesser extent Immortal the AI will settle on top of you.

Walter R said:

8 cities by turn 50 on any game speed sounds like something Hiawatha might just manage but I struggle to see how the player could? Also sounds like a recipe for extreme unhappiness if you do manage it?

Click to expand...

If you have the tech you can settle on top of a luxury to get its benefit.

Early on happiness can be an issue. Each new city will need to generate 4 happiness just to break even at pop 1. I think of these cities as outposts, I will build walls and a monument but try to keep their growth low until I have ways of generating both happiness and gold to support them. There main purpose are to gain strategic territory.

Because gold is now trade route based, cities by themselves generate either little or no gold, so they must pay their way until you get more trade routes and gold making buildings. I tend to play with a small group of cities as a rule, but I am playing a game with the Iroquois currently and so went Liberty and wide early on. Gold and happiness were big problems, not helped by having only 1 city state and 1 AI (non-capital) city in range. I had to keep these satellite cities quite small (pop 2) at first. But as the game has progressed I have managed to come back into it.

I do feel I could have handled the early game a lot better though.

You could consider that somewhere in the middle is better than both. Forcing wide in the early game is designed to be risky/crippling, yet a 8 city empire will out-perform a 3 city empire come late game.

_invy_ is correct, go tall then go wide when happiness allows. Wouldn't sacrifice growth in your first couple of cities to do so though.

The one answer I do have though is if you want to "save space" so you don't need to fight over it later, you can expand to 6-7 cities by T100ish and still play well.

I don't get your science description, but more cities=more general pop and libraries=more science.
Also, more cities gives extra gold and the chance for more specialists and great people, and you can compensate a bit for the policy hit by making monuments and temples everywhere.
I start scout, warrior, worker, then settler. Then I get a mounument in my second city, and a worker+granary. I build a library in my capital, a lumber mill if I'm next to a river, then spam units, and buy a settler. Monument+worker+granary in my new city. I use my workers to build lux resources in the meantime. Then wonders, buildings and units while still slowly increasing the number of cities to about 6-7. That's how I play

Two cities with each 8 pop + libraries = 8 science.
One city with 16 pop + library = 8 science.
So yeah, it really doesn't matter science/beaker wise, but obtaining GSes is definately for tall.
I personally try to combine tall and wide, and start out with 3-4 cities, but in the Renaissance I try to aim for at least 5-7 cities.

Depending on the strategy I am going for, I almost always prefer to go wide over tall but both have their own advantages. Better developed cities tend to be more productive in all forms and that is always important at any point in the game. Having a lot of territory is important too since it means you can control more land and possibly more resources. All of it adds up in the end and as long as you have the happiness to expand, there is no reason not to plop down a dozen or so cities.

Typically I start out trying to found at least four cities (esp. if opening with tradition) before the classical era and to have at least six or so before breaking into the renaissance. Ultimately, having 10-15 cities by the late game is my goal, whether through expansion or conquest. The latter is typically how I go about things, since my opponents tend to build things that I covet and they tend to be settled in strategically sound locations that I couldn't get to first. I only really stay small if I don't want to step on anyone's toes and prefer to cruise to a late-game VC without much trouble.

The key to going wide is to settle aggressively and to keep a strong military presence so you may protect yourself from your envious or outright insane neighbors. This means your city production may be stifled for a while since you're going to be pumping out units regularly but you will not have to fear much in the face of a defensive war. A favored plan of mine has been to gradually push everyone who hates me off of the continent I started on and reduce their civ to an island nation on a one-tile desert or in some god-forsaken snow tile near the caps. I typically will gift them that sort of settlement before usurping their cities to prevent the genocide diplomacy penalty. This settlement usually has some derogatory name and the offenders are made to bask in my everlasting glory.

One word of warning about this is that the unhappiness will rack up quickly. When going wide, emphasize happiness wherever you can so you can stay on top of things. Pumping food and production into developing cities via trade routes is also extremely effective and I'd suggest you get trade routes up and running ASAP if you're doing this. If you have enough money to spare, buy some essential buildings in most of your new settlements and they should shape up nicely on their own.

First of all, thank you for your replies, especially Resipsa and Ximixanga for taking the time to respond in greater detail.

I still don't quite understand how one can say, that in wide empires you can work equal or more specialists. I mean, if your cities are around 6-9 pop during the late-early and midgame, then how can you put any of that into a specialist slot without severly sacrifcing either growth or production?
Or is the idea to stifle growth a bit, as to not end up with a big happiness problem and then grow the city again later, when you have new happiness buildings/allies/wonders?

Also, I still don't quite understand how one can keep up in science. Maybe someone can give me a benchmark of one of his games (?)

I just played a game a s Babylon yesterday (not sure how much that distorts things in regards to science, since they probably have 2 acadamies more the whole time, but anyway)
at Turn 132 I had 3 cities (19,16,13) = a total of 48 pop 4th RA finished and they gave a total of 245 science. Now if you have a 7 city empire at that point you'd need 289.5-ish science to be even (5% penalty per city) and I don't quite understand how one could get that.
Especially since you still only have one NC in one city and the rest if basically population + library +university (if you can get those buildings in all your cities by then that is).
Assuming a non-babylon empire, I'd assume I'd need to subtract two RA's, so it would be around 215-ish (16 from the RA and the 83% from the universtiy plus NC in the capital), which would mean a 7 city empire would need 254 science to be even.

Also since you found the city a lot earlier than you have the population and buildings to get the same boost, it would seem that a wide empire would be playing catchup in science during most of the game, wouldn't it?

Btw how good of a benchmark is the AI in those terms? I know the AI cheats in some regards, but not sure how exactly. In said game as Babylon I lost terribly to Korea who also went for science, also had only 4 cities but had about 1.5x-2x the science output somehow. Is that a realistic benchmark to compare myself to, or is that just possible when you're the AI (immortal difficulty setting btw)?