Cromagnus
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,272
So, it's clear that rapid expansion is much harder than it used to be, and it seems to me that the policies in Order just come too late to be of use.
I've done some faith-based ICS with Dido on Archipelago, because the free harbor is valuable even before Idealogy. Yes, it got ridiculous at the end, but I honestly felt like it was a sub-optimal approach. I feel like I would have been better off building 1-4 cities and turtling, or going all-out conquest, rather than trying to build cities. And on Pangaea, good luck!
Case in point: Resettlement (Cities start with 3 extra population) is a 2nd tier order policy that is *only* useful when building new cities, and chances are you'll need to grab some of the happiness policies first before that would be of use. And heck, realistically, you'll want Five-Year Plan, Party Leadership and Worker's Faculties first to benefit your existing cities, which are all 2nd-tier policies.
It just seems to me that by the time you're in Order, especially 5+ policies into order, you're approaching the endgame. There shouldn't be anywhere left to place a city unless you're placing a garbage city to prep a bombing run on those hard-to-reach capitals. Normally I would just cap an undefended small city nearby (to minimize unhappiness) but it would certainly be less unhappiness to plant one, but that means lugging a settler all the way out there. I just don't buy it.
About the only use I can think of for the per-city policies of Order is for capturing every city along your way during conquest, and really, it feels like there are more efficient ways to go about conquest. Even if you stay relatively small until Order and then go on a rampage, capping cities, those cities are in revolt for 5-10 turns, so you still want to only keep the captured cities you absolutely need. Again, if you're being efficient, you don't have time to tend for these cities, you need to move on before they tech destroyers/etc.!
I could see using this as Austria or Venice... if you waited until Order and then started buying all the city-states, then sure. Otherwise, Order actually seems to be Freedom pt 2... it benefits small empires as much as large, because the tourism, science, happiness and conquest policies all being more useful than the "per-city" ones.
I just played an Archipelago game with Polynesia where I basically stayed really small, focusing on tech, until frigates, and then I went on a rampage, and the happiness from Freedom was more than sufficient. I didn't need my captured cities to be productive, I basically just ignored them after capture. I only needed enough happiness to keep capitals.
Conclusion: If you have the tech and culture to be this far into Order, you don't need more cities! So, why not focus on the policies that directly aid victory conditions... +tourism, +science, Worker's Faculties, etc.
Anyone disagree? Has anyone found an approach that makes it worth going wide post-Order? (And not just juicy capitals!)
I've done some faith-based ICS with Dido on Archipelago, because the free harbor is valuable even before Idealogy. Yes, it got ridiculous at the end, but I honestly felt like it was a sub-optimal approach. I feel like I would have been better off building 1-4 cities and turtling, or going all-out conquest, rather than trying to build cities. And on Pangaea, good luck!
Case in point: Resettlement (Cities start with 3 extra population) is a 2nd tier order policy that is *only* useful when building new cities, and chances are you'll need to grab some of the happiness policies first before that would be of use. And heck, realistically, you'll want Five-Year Plan, Party Leadership and Worker's Faculties first to benefit your existing cities, which are all 2nd-tier policies.
It just seems to me that by the time you're in Order, especially 5+ policies into order, you're approaching the endgame. There shouldn't be anywhere left to place a city unless you're placing a garbage city to prep a bombing run on those hard-to-reach capitals. Normally I would just cap an undefended small city nearby (to minimize unhappiness) but it would certainly be less unhappiness to plant one, but that means lugging a settler all the way out there. I just don't buy it.
About the only use I can think of for the per-city policies of Order is for capturing every city along your way during conquest, and really, it feels like there are more efficient ways to go about conquest. Even if you stay relatively small until Order and then go on a rampage, capping cities, those cities are in revolt for 5-10 turns, so you still want to only keep the captured cities you absolutely need. Again, if you're being efficient, you don't have time to tend for these cities, you need to move on before they tech destroyers/etc.!
I could see using this as Austria or Venice... if you waited until Order and then started buying all the city-states, then sure. Otherwise, Order actually seems to be Freedom pt 2... it benefits small empires as much as large, because the tourism, science, happiness and conquest policies all being more useful than the "per-city" ones.
I just played an Archipelago game with Polynesia where I basically stayed really small, focusing on tech, until frigates, and then I went on a rampage, and the happiness from Freedom was more than sufficient. I didn't need my captured cities to be productive, I basically just ignored them after capture. I only needed enough happiness to keep capitals.
Conclusion: If you have the tech and culture to be this far into Order, you don't need more cities! So, why not focus on the policies that directly aid victory conditions... +tourism, +science, Worker's Faculties, etc.
Anyone disagree? Has anyone found an approach that makes it worth going wide post-Order? (And not just juicy capitals!)
